International benchmarks like the OECD's *Education at a Glance* offer lessons for India's school reforms under NEP 2020. Critically analyse.

The OECD's annual Education at a Glance (EAG) compares class sizes, spending and teacher supply across countries. India's own data shows an overall pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) of 24:1, already inside the NEP 2020 norm of 30:1 [5]. EAG can help India read that figure correctly. It works best as a diagnostic tool, not as a template to copy.

Lessons India can draw

• Measure class size, not only PTR: EAG reports France's primary class size as 21.6 and lower-secondary as about 26 [1][2]. India's secondary PTR of 21:1 [5] counts every teacher, including those doing office work. It therefore understates how crowded real classrooms are.
• Target, don't average: France's primary class-size cut of nearly 10% (2015–23) was aimed at disadvantaged communities [3]. India still has 1,00,843 single-teacher schools despite a healthy national ratio [5]. This points to redeploying teachers before hiring to meet average norms.
• Spend on the early years: France spends about one-third more than the OECD average per upper-secondary student but about 9% less per primary student, and the OECD advises shifting money to primary [4]. This supports NEP's focus on foundational literacy and numeracy (NIPUN Bharat).
• Teacher quality as a bottleneck: 9.1% of French secondary teachers are not fully qualified [1]. Expanding schools without trained teachers dilutes any gains.

Limits of benchmarking

• Inputs do not guarantee outcomes: The OECD itself calls the evidence linking class size to learning "mixed" [4].
• Money does not ensure equity: France spends 5.4% of GDP on education against an OECD average of 4.7% [1]. Yet the link between family background and results remains especially strong there [4].
• Context mismatch: OECD averages reflect rich, ageing societies. India's scale, federal diversity and fiscal limits make NEP's goal of 6% of GDP for education a long-term target.
• Comparability gaps: PTR and class size measure different things, and India is not an OECD member. Direct comparisons can mislead.

Benchmarks like EAG show India what to measure and where to target. They cannot tell India how much to copy. UDISE+ should publish stage-wise class sizes, and states should rationalise teacher deployment. Pairing these with early-years investment would turn global comparisons into local reform, in line with SDG 4's call for equitable, quality education.