The stark reality of educational costs in India

The Hindu

I. AUTHOR’S CENTRAL ARGUMENT

The article argues that the rising cost of education in India—especially private schooling and associated expenses such as tuition—has become a major driver of inequality, undermining the constitutional promise of universal and equitable education. Despite the Right to Education (RTE) framework, access to quality education is increasingly determined by household income, location, and social background.

The core thesis is that education in India is becoming progressively commodified, pushing disadvantaged households toward inferior public systems or financially unsustainable private options, thereby reproducing intergenerational inequality.

II. KEY ARGUMENTS PRESENTED

1. Education Costs Are Rising Sharply
   – Schooling costs, particularly in private institutions, have increased significantly across primary, secondary, and higher secondary levels.
   – Hidden costs—tuition, transport, uniforms, digital tools—compound the burden.
2. Privatisation of Schooling Is Accelerating
   – Enrolment in private schools has increased across rural and urban India.
   – Families perceive private schools as delivering better quality despite higher costs.
3. Tuition Has Become a Parallel Education System
   – A substantial proportion of students depend on paid private tuition.
   – Tuition costs often exceed school fees, particularly at secondary and higher secondary levels.
4. Public School Quality Remains Uneven
   – Poor infrastructure, teacher shortages, and weak learning outcomes push families toward private alternatives.
   – Government schools struggle to retain middle-class enrolment.
5. Rural–Urban and Income-Based Inequality
   – Urban households spend significantly more on education than rural households.
   – Higher income groups disproportionately access private schools and coaching.
6. Educational Spending Is Closely Linked to Outcomes
   – Higher household spending correlates with better academic support, exam performance, and future opportunities.
7. Risk of Intergenerational Inequality
   – Children from poorer households face compounded disadvantages in access, quality, and outcomes.

III. AUTHOR’S STANCE AND POSSIBLE BIASES

1. Equity-Centric Perspective
   The article adopts a strong social justice lens, viewing rising costs primarily as a failure of public provisioning.
2. Critical of Privatisation
   Private schooling and tuition are portrayed largely as distortions rather than responses to systemic public sector weaknesses.
3. Limited Recognition of Demand-Side Aspirations
   Parental preferences, competition, and perceived value of private education receive limited attention.
4. Underplays Governance Failures
   While public school weaknesses are acknowledged, deeper issues of accountability, teacher deployment, and administrative reform are not fully analysed.

IV. PROS OF THE ARTICLE (Strengths)

1. Strong Empirical Foundation
– Uses NSS data effectively to demonstrate cost trends and enrolment shifts.

2. Highlights Hidden Costs of Education
– Goes beyond tuition fees to capture the true financial burden on households.

3. Connects Education Costs to Inequality
– Clearly links rising expenditure with exclusion and social stratification.

4. Timely Policy Relevance
– Addresses a critical issue as India debates learning outcomes, NEP implementation, and human capital development.

5. Focus on Intergenerational Effects
– Shows how educational inequality perpetuates income and opportunity gaps.

V. CONS OF THE ARTICLE (Critical Gaps & Limitations)

1. Limited Analysis of Learning Outcomes
– Cost escalation is highlighted, but the relationship between spending and actual learning gains is not deeply explored.

2. Oversimplified View of Private Schools
– Private institutions vary widely in quality; the article treats them as a homogeneous category.

3. Inadequate Discussion of NEP 2020
– Reforms aimed at foundational literacy, teacher training, and school consolidation are not evaluated.

4. Neglect of Digital Divide Dynamics
– Post-pandemic costs related to devices, internet access, and ed-tech are not sufficiently analysed.

5. Weak Focus on Higher Education Transition
– School costs are discussed, but implications for access to higher education and skilling are underdeveloped.

VI. POLICY IMPLICATIONS (UPSC GS-II & GS-I Relevance)

1. Right to Education and State Capacity (GS-II)
   – Rising costs challenge the spirit of Article 21A and demand stronger public investment.
2. Public School Strengthening
   – Improved infrastructure, teacher availability, and accountability mechanisms are essential.
3. Regulation of Private Schools and Coaching
   – Transparent fee structures and oversight are required to prevent exploitative practices.
4. Equity-Focused Financing
   – Targeted scholarships, transport support, and digital access for disadvantaged groups.
5. Rural–Urban Balance
   – Address spatial disparities in school quality and access.
6. Human Capital Formation (GS-III)
   – Education costs directly affect workforce quality, productivity, and long-term growth.

VII. REAL-WORLD IMPACT ASSESSMENT

1. Household Financial Stress
   – Education spending crowds out health, nutrition, and savings for poorer families.
2. Social Stratification
   – Education increasingly reinforces class divisions rather than enabling mobility.
3. Decline in Public School Trust
   – Middle-class exit weakens public pressure for systemic reform.
4. Expansion of Shadow Education
   – Tuition culture creates unequal competition and exam-centric learning.
5. Regional and Gendered Effects
   – Girls and rural students are more vulnerable to cost-driven exclusion.

VIII. BALANCED CONCLUSION

The article presents a compelling and data-driven critique of how rising educational costs are reshaping access and equity in India. It correctly identifies privatisation, tuition dependence, and weak public provisioning as central challenges undermining the constitutional promise of equal opportunity.

However, the analysis would benefit from deeper engagement with governance reforms, learning outcomes, parental choice dynamics, and recent policy initiatives. Educational inequality in India is not only a fiscal issue but also one of institutional capacity, trust, and accountability.

A sustainable solution lies in revitalising public education while regulating private participation, ensuring that cost does not determine a child’s future.

IX. FUTURE PERSPECTIVES (UPSC Mains-Ready Insights)

1. Increase public spending on school education, especially at the foundational level.
2. Strengthen government schools to restore middle-class confidence.
3. Regulate private school fees and coaching centres transparently.
4. Expand scholarships, transport, and digital access for disadvantaged students.
5. Integrate learning outcome measurement with financing reforms.
6. Align NEP implementation with equity-focused governance.
7. Address rural–urban disparities through targeted interventions.
8. Treat education as a public good, not a market commodity.

India’s demographic dividend can only be realised if education remains affordable, accessible, and equitable, rather than a privilege purchased at rising cost.