💥Mains Ready By December. Smash Mains & Smash PYQ Admissions Open

Subject: Education

  • Literacy for All: India’s Journey Towards Viksit Bharat

    Literacy for All: India’s Journey Towards Viksit Bharat

    Why in the News?

    The PIB highlighted India’s progress towards universal literacy, including recent literacy data and government initiatives such as ULLAS and NIPUN Bharat.

    Key Highlights

    • India’s literacy rate increased from 18.32% in 1951 to 74.04% in 2011.
    • Female literacy increased from 8.86% in 1951 to 65.46% in 2011.
    • As per PLFS 2025, overall literacy rate was 81.1%.
    • Urban literacy among population aged 7+ years: 89%.
    • Rural literacy among population aged 7+ years: 77.4%.
    • The Department of School Education and Literacy considers 95% literacy in a State/UT equivalent to full literacy.
    • According to UDISE+ 2025-26, over 24.72 crore students were enrolled in schools.
    • Higher education enrolment increased from 3.42 crore in 2014-15 to 4.50 crore in 2023-24.
    • Higher education GER increased from 23.7% to 30% during the same period.

    ULLAS

    • ULLAS stands for Understanding of Lifelong Learning for All in Society.
    • Also known as New India Literacy Programme (NILP).
    • Centrally sponsored scheme aligned with NEP 2020.
    • Targets adults aged 15 years and above who missed formal schooling.
    • Covers:
      • Functional literacy
      • Numeracy
      • Critical life skills
      • Lifelong learning
    • Uses volunteerism and Janbhagidari for universal literacy.
    • ULLAS App provides learning material in 27 languages.
    • Learners eventually appear for the Foundational Literacy and Numeracy Assessment Test (FLNAT).
    • Target: 5 crore learners during 2022-27.
    • Financial outlay: ₹1,037.90 crore.
    • Around 4.03 crore registered learners and over 52.20 lakh volunteers.
    • More than 3.3 crore learners have participated in FLNAT.
    • 10 States/UTs declared themselves fully literate between 2024 and 2026.

    NIPUN Bharat

    • NIPUN: National Initiative for Proficiency in Reading with Understanding and Numeracy.
    • Launched in July 2021 under Samagra Shiksha.
    • Target: universal foundational literacy and numeracy by 2026-27.
    • Focuses on children in the Foundational Stage, ages 3-8 years.
    • Aims to ensure foundational skills by Grade 2.

    Other Education Initiatives

    • Samagra Shiksha: Promotes equitable and quality school education; subsumed SSA, RMSA and Teacher Education schemes.
    • PM SHRI: Aims to strengthen more than 14,500 exemplar schools.
    • PM e-VIDYA: Provides digital, online and on-air education; expected to benefit nearly 25 crore school-going children.
    • PM POSHAN: Provides one hot cooked meal to 11.20 crore students in Bal Vatikas and Classes I-VIII across 10.36 lakh schools.

    Prelims Quick Revision

    • 95% literacy in a State/UT is considered equivalent to full literacy.
    • India’s literacy rate: 74.04% in 2011.
    • Overall literacy as per PLFS 2025: 81.1%.
    • ULLAS: Adult literacy, 15+ years.
    • NIPUN Bharat: Foundational literacy and numeracy, ages 3-8 years.
    • ULLAS target: 5 crore learners during 2022-27.
    • NIPUN Bharat target: foundational literacy and numeracy by 2026-27.
    • SDG 4 focuses on inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning.

    UPSC Prelims Trap

    • ULLAS vs NIPUN Bharat: ULLAS focuses on adult learners aged 15+, while NIPUN Bharat focuses on foundational learning among children aged 3-8 years.
    • 95% literacy is the benchmark for declaring a State/UT fully literate in the given framework, not 100%.
    • ULLAS is centrally sponsored, not a standalone Central Sector scheme.
    • NIPUN Bharat was launched in July 2021 under Samagra Shiksha.
  • Resisting invaders to swords of goddesses: NCERT revises book on medieval history for Class 9

    Why in the News

    The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT)‘s new Class 9 social science textbook recasts 1000 to 1700 AD as a period of “Resistance and Resilience”, with resistance in place of cooperation or a composite culture. Part 2 of the book mentions “both conflict and cooperation” but focuses on resistance, which reopens the debate on how schools should teach medieval India.

    What is the new Class 9 textbook?

    1. What it is: “Understanding Society: India and Beyond” is NCERT’s new social science textbook for Class 9, part of the Secondary Stage of schooling. Part 1 came out in June, covering history, political science, geography and economics.
    2. Stated aim: The foreword by the NCERT Director says the subject should build critical inquiry, intercultural understanding and confident participation in civic life.
    3. Books replaced: The new books replace four older textbooks, including “Democratic Politics-1” and “India and the Contemporary World”, which taught the French and Russian Revolutions, Socialism in Europe and the Rise of Nazism.
    4. The takeaway: The national textbook now tells medieval history as a story of defence against outsiders, so it shapes how Class 9 students understand the whole period.

    How does the book retell 1000 to 1700 AD?

    1. Central claim: The book says the subcontinent faced repeated invasions with religious discrimination and social distress. Resistance took both military and cultural forms, and society “preserved its traditions”.
    2. Who resisted: Rajputs, the Ahom, Vijayanagara, the Marathas, Sikhs and Jats are shown resisting the Turks, the Mughals and European forces.
    3. Mewar and the Ahom: One section covers Maharana Pratap’s resistance to Akbar. Another says the Ahom kingdom of Assam stayed independent for almost six centuries, with Lachit Borphukan defeating a Mughal fleet at Saraighat.
    4. Beyond the north: The Vijayanagara section says resistance to foreign invasion “was not confined to northern India”.
    5. Swarajya: The Maratha idea is explained as “an independent, self-governing territory free from external control”.

    How does the book treat religion and culture?

    1. Sikhs and Jats: The book cites the martyrdom of the Sikh Gurus and Mughal “discriminatory practices”. It links Jat resistance to economic hardship and Aurangzeb’s religious policies.
    2. Temples: The book records temples destroyed and mosques built on their sites. Eg. Todarmal and Man Singh rebuilt Kashi Vishwanath, Aurangzeb destroyed it, and Ahilyabai Holkar reconstructed it.
    3. Bhakti: The book credits Bhakti, personal devotion to God, with sustaining worship when temple building was restricted. Eg. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu led public sankirtan (group devotional singing) in Bengal against a Qazi’s (Islamic judge’s) curbs.
    4. Sufism: Sufism is described as a comparatively liberal strand of Islam that also helped Islam spread.
    5. Swords of goddesses: A box says kings have invoked Kali, Durga and Bhavani as protectors since the seventh century. Eg. Shivaji received his sword from Tulja Bhavani, and Annamaraja of Bastar his from Danteshvari.

    How does this depart from earlier history teaching?

    1. Old consensus: For over 50 years, Indian historiography stressed cooperation and composite culture, meaning the shared art, language and belief that grew from mixing traditions.
    2. Thin Sultanate coverage: The Delhi Sultanate gets one page, mostly on local kings who resisted it. The Mughal period is longer but also centres on resistance.
    3. Kachwaha alliance: The Kachwahas of Amber and their “cooperative relationships” with the Mughals get only a brief mention.

    Challenges

    1. Partial picture: Stressing only resistance hides the alliances and shared institutions that also shaped the period. Eg. Rajputs as Mughal mansabdars (ranked nobles).
    2. Belief read as history: Goddess-given swords are traditions, and students may not separate legend from evidence.
    3. Lost world history: Dropping the French and Russian Revolutions weakens understanding of democracy and ideology.
    4. Frequent revision: Repeated rewrites unsettle teachers and students. Eg. Mughal court chapter dropped from Class 12 in 2023.

    Way Forward

    1. Source-based chapters: NCERT should add primary sources and more than one interpretation for each theme.
    2. Expert review: Drafts should go to historians and public consultation before release.
    3. Clear labels: Textbooks should mark legend, tradition and evidence separately.
    4. Teacher training: State education departments should train teachers on the new chapters.

    Conclusion

    The new book moves school history away from synthesis towards a story of resistance, and that choice is now the version most students will learn. What to watch is whether later volumes restore cooperation and world history, and how teachers handle belief and evidence in class.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2026, GS2, 15 marks] Should education be treated primarily as a welfare obligation of the state or as a strategic investment for building a globally competitive, knowledge-driven nation? Critically evaluate.”

  • Indian academia’s drift from reason to ritual

    Why in the News

    At the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi convocation in August 2026, students were reportedly told how far to bow while receiving medals from the Prime Minister and asked to stand during Vedic chants. The episode has revived a debate on whether ritual and deference are eroding academic freedom in a secular, democratic republic.

    Why do convocation rituals clash with the purpose of a university?

    1. Purpose of a university: A university seeks truth through observation, experimentation and peer review. The scientific method rests on falsifiability, meaning every claim must be open to disproof.
    2. Knowledge by challenge: Science advances by challenging the past, not revering it. Eg. Galileo, Darwin and Einstein each overturned once-sacred truths.
    3. Message of obedience: Bowing to a political figure teaches students to obey authority, not question it. A prayer at a science convocation suggests the supernatural belongs in empirical inquiry.
    4. Courtly hierarchy: The bowing protocol revives a pre-modern feudal hierarchy in which graduates submit instead of thinking independently. The Constitution’s spirit favours democratic equality over submission.
    5. The takeaway: Universities must stay spaces of scepticism, dissent and fearless inquiry, or they lose the purpose that justifies them.

    Is ritual a cultural tribute or enforced deference?

    1. Defenders’ view: Supporters call these practices “cultural flourishes”, harmless tributes to India’s ancient past that teach respect.
    2. Guru-shishya objection: The guru-shishya (teacher and disciple) model demanded unquestioning obedience. Modern teaching rests on Socratic dialectic, meaning learning through open argument and respectful dissent.
    3. Mixed message: The Prime Minister used the same address to urge students to question conventional wisdom, contradicting the ritual of reverence.
    4. Culture as shield: Wrapping practices in ancient culture deflects scrutiny. Critics get branded “westernised”, “anti-national” or “Dimagi Naxal” (intellectual extremist).
    5. Tagorean ideal: Rabindranath Tagore‘s poem “Where the Mind is Without Fear”, written under British rule, calls for courageous thought and is a tradition worth defending.

    What does the ‘Free to Think 2026’ report find?

    1. The report: Scholars at Risk (SAR), an international network that monitors education communities, published “Free to Think 2026”, covering the year to June 2026.
    2. Severely restricted: It rates academic freedom in India “severely restricted”. India’s Academic Freedom Index, where a higher score means more freedom, fell to 0.14 in 2025.
    3. Earlier score: The index stood at 0.38 in 2022, so the latest score is less than half of it.
    4. Causes cited: The report blames government interference in university governance, suppression of dissent and a pervasive climate of fear.
    5. Self-censorship: Academics and students self-censor for fear of being branded traitors, and most researchers avoid questioning government overreach.

    How has regulation narrowed university autonomy?

    1. UGC as lever: The report says the central government has expanded control over higher education through the University Grants Commission (UGC), which funds universities and sets their standards.
    2. Vice-Chancellor norms: The UGC relaxed academic qualification criteria for Vice-Chancellors, the executive heads of universities.
    3. Contract faculty: It removed the 10 per cent cap on contract faculty set by the 2018 regulations. This speeds up casualisation, meaning insecure contract jobs replace permanent posts.
    4. Interference and repression: Influence over administration, curricula and management undermines institutional autonomy. The report also cites police violence against student protests.

    Challenges

    1. Politicised research: Research agendas risk being steered by political piety rather than public need.
    2. Ideological funding: Grants risk flowing by ideological alignment, rewarding sycophants over scientific merit.
    3. Insecure faculty: Contract teachers without job security are less able to dissent or pursue long-term research.
    4. Chancellor disputes: Vice-Chancellor appointments have become contests between State governments and Governors. Eg. Kerala and Tamil Nadu.

    Way Forward

    1. Secular ceremony code: Institute governing boards should adopt convocation protocols free of religious ritual and bowing.
    2. Merit-based selection: Search committees should apply published criteria when selecting Vice-Chancellors.
    3. Contract faculty ceiling: The UGC should restore a cap on contract faculty and fill sanctioned permanent posts.
    4. Academic freedom statutes: Universities should protect faculty and student speech from disciplinary action in their statutes.

    Conclusion

    Rituals of deference at a scientific institution signal a wider loss of university autonomy in India. Whether regulators restore faculty security and merit-based leadership will show if campuses can remain places of dissent.

    Higher Education in India

    1. Scale: With over 4.6 crore students, India runs the world’s second-largest higher education system.
    2. Other regulators: The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) regulates technical education, and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) regulates teacher training.
    3. Faculty shortage: Chronic vacancies in permanent faculty at State and central universities hamper teaching and research.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2026, GS2, 15 marks] Should education be treated primarily as a welfare obligation of the state or as a strategic investment for building a globally competitive, knowledge-driven nation? Critically evaluate.”

  • In IIT, student death and a reckoning

    Why in the News

    A second-year BTech student at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay took his life hours after he was allegedly found adopting unfair means in an examination. Following student agitation, the institute has suspended the dean who reported him. Faculty members have rallied behind their colleague. The death comes a month after the death by suicide of an MSc student at IIT-Delhi, which set off weeks of protest and questions about the responsibilities of an institution towards those in its care. The family of the IIT-Bombay student has alleged caste discrimination. The contested point is whether a campus can hold academic integrity and a duty of care at the same time.

    Why is individual resilience the wrong frame for these deaths?

    1. Endurance already demonstrated: Students who clear these competitive entrance examinations have proved a formidable capacity for endurance, so a want of resilience does not explain the outcome.
    2. Scale of the pattern: Between 2006 and 2026 there have reportedly been over 170 student deaths across various IIT campuses, which makes this a recurring institutional outcome rather than a set of individual failures.
    3. The actual question: What is at issue is the old imagination of authority in premier campuses, which have become more socially and culturally diverse than ever before.

    How has the social composition of premier campuses outrun their institutional culture?

    1. What diversity brings in: A more diverse intake carries different experiences of class, caste, language, aspiration and vulnerability into the same classroom and hostel.
    2. New forms of exclusion: Diversity without a corresponding shift in institutional culture creates fresh exclusions rather than removing old ones.
    3. Design of the institution: These campuses were built principally around teaching, testing, rigour and discipline, and that design has no place to receive what a changed student body reports.

    Why can a counsellor’s office not address the change on campus?

    1. A structural change met with an addition: A system organised around examination and discipline cannot absorb a change in who its students are through the addition of a counsellor’s office alone.
    2. What students are reporting: Many students are away from home for the first time and are describing isolation, stigma and fear, which are conditions of the campus rather than clinical complaints.
    3. Where the listening has to happen: Professors and administrators are the people placed to hear this, so the response has to sit inside the academic relationship and not only beside it.

    Where does the faculty sit between accountability and compassion?

    1. The disciplinary act and its consequence: The dean who reported an examination irregularity was suspended after student agitation, while faculty members rallied behind him, so the same act was read as duty by one side and as cause by the other.
    2. Crises they were not trained for: Faculty work inside a system of administrative protocol and are expected to anticipate crises for which they received no training.
    3. The clarity they lack: Faculty have no settled statement of what is expected of them when a student is in distress.
    4. The assurance they lack: A decision taken in a student’s best interest and in line with guidelines carries the risk of being used to scapegoat the person who took it.

    Challenges to anchoring academic excellence in student wellbeing

    1. Caste and hierarchy inside the department: Counselling and grievance machinery does not reach the hierarchy that operates between a student and the people who grade him. Eg. The deceased student’s family has alleged caste discrimination.
      The Fix: Conduct a frank institutional reckoning with caste and hierarchy as a standing exercise, separate from the grievance process.
    2. Response confined to the aftermath: Institutional change is attempted in the sound and fury that follows a death and not before one. Eg. The IIT-Delhi death produced weeks of protest before the question of institutional responsibility was asked.
      The Fix: Make meaningful student representation ordinary institutional practice, so distress reaches the administration without a tragedy to carry it.
    3. Integrity procedure without a care protocol: Reporting examination misconduct and responding to a student in distress are handled by the same staff under a single disciplinary rulebook. Eg. A report of unfair means was made and the institution had no parallel process for what followed it.
      The Fix: Write guidelines that preserve academic integrity alongside strong counselling and grievance mechanisms, so one report triggers both tracks.
    4. Purpose narrowed to high performers: An institution of excellence measures itself by what its best students achieve, which leaves failure unaccommodated. Eg. Both deaths involved students at the point of academic or disciplinary difficulty rather than at the point of selection.
      The Fix: Define the mentoring mandate to cover the student who fails, so that failure is survivable inside the institution.

    Conclusion

    Two institutions are being asked to hold accountability and compassion in the same set of rules, and they currently have a language for only one of them. The suspension of one office holder settles nothing, because the difficulty is that a disciplinary system and a duty of care are running on the same staff with no protocol connecting them. What remains unresolved is who is answerable when a procedure correctly followed ends in a death. The measure to watch is whether the IITs issue a distress response protocol that sits beside their integrity rules rather than beneath them.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2014, GS2, 12.5 marks] Should the premier institutes like IITs/IIMs be allowed to retain premier status, allowed more academic independence in designing courses and also decide mode/criteria of selection of students. Discuss in light of the growing challenges.”

  • For student well-being, rethink the campus, not just the student

    Why in the News

    Recent deaths of students at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi and IIT Bombay have reopened the question of what an educational institution owes students beyond teaching and evaluation. IIT Delhi has constituted an external inquiry committee. The IIT Bombay director has said a committee would examine the death and students’ concerns about representation and support services. Campus well being is treated as a clinical matter outsourced to counsellors and therapists, while the rules, hierarchies, evaluation systems and grievance procedures that shape daily campus life stay unexamined. The World Health Organization (WHO) places mental health inside social, economic and physical environments, and the 2026 interim report of India’s National Task Force on Student Mental Health and Suicide Prevention ties student well being to academic pressure, discrimination, financial hardship, institutional culture, distrust and faculty preparedness. What is contested is whether universities are willing to examine the conditions they themselves create.

    Why does a counselling first and skills first model fall short?

    1. Limits of the medical analogy: A medicine acts on a biological process while the surrounding social situation stays unchanged, so the analogy cannot carry a complete theory of well being.
    2. Distress relocated inside the student: Once professional services become the institution’s primary measure of well being, the university presents itself as a neutral background to the student’s private difficulty.
    3. Counselling cannot remove the pressure: Students negotiate academic overload, discrimination, poor hostel infrastructure, career anxiety and unresponsive administration, and counselling helps a student respond to these rather than removing them.
    4. Well being reframed as a personal skill: Time management, emotion regulation, sleep, exercise and resilience are presented as capacities students must acquire on their own.
    5. Where the skills stop working: Time management cannot solve an impossible workload, mindfulness cannot make an opaque grading system transparent, and positive thinking cannot make a compromised grievance process trustworthy.

    What institutional conditions actually shape student well-being?

    1. The ordinary machinery of the campus: Rules, hierarchies, classrooms, hostels, evaluation systems, grievance procedures and the everyday exercise of authority determine how people live on a campus.
    2. Discipline as the organising idea: Educational experience remains shaped by discipline and steep hierarchies rather than by freedom, equity, trust and empathy.
    3. Dissent read as misconduct: A student who dissents is liable to be labelled as indiscipline, political activism or disrespect.
    4. The decisions that settle the question: Whether a student can question a grade, disagree with a supervisor, express dissent, protest, or take part in decision making is what an institution’s well being claim rests on.
    5. Faculty and administrators hold the lever: Ensuring student well being is a shared responsibility of faculty and administrators, and it is routinely overlooked in practice.

    How do authoritative frameworks locate the causes of student distress?

    1. WHO framing: Mental health sits within social, economic and physical environments, and prevention must address individual, social and structural determinants together.
    2. National Task Force finding: The 2026 interim report connects student well being with academic pressure, discrimination, financial hardship, institutional culture, distrust and faculty preparedness.
    3. Convergence of the two: Both place the causes outside the individual student, which is the opposite of where campus practice places them.
    4. Existing guidance is already sufficient: Indian higher education carries enough guidelines to know that student well being cannot be separated from academic pressure and institutional culture.

    Where does the university’s model of authority contradict itself?

    1. Adults for obligation, children for voice: Students are treated as adults when fees, performance and responsibility are demanded, and as children when autonomy, voice or due process become inconvenient.
    2. Care language over paternal authority: The deeper problem appears where universities speak the language of care while retaining a paternal model of authority.
    3. Harshness defended as formation: Harshness is justified as character building, and obedience is conflated with respect.
    4. Asymmetric reciprocity: The vocabulary of the guru shishya relationship is misused once reciprocity disappears, so respect moves upward while correction and anger move downward.
    5. Forms the distress takes: Public shaming, arbitrary penalties, exclusion from opportunities, hostile communication and the use of evaluation to settle interpersonal conflict make the educational experience itself distressing.

    What would a well-being test for the classroom look like?

    1. Teaching is not outside the policy: Administrators and faculty commonly assume well being policy begins outside the classroom, as though teaching and evaluation do not bear on it.
    2. The operative test: A classroom passes where students are empowered to ask for reasons, admit uncertainty, make a mistake and disagree with a teacher.
    3. Protection after speaking: The same test requires that students can criticise or protest the administration and report unfair treatment without expecting retaliation.
    4. Scope of the claim: Universities cannot eliminate every source of suffering, students are not always right, and academic standards are not abandoned whenever conflict appears.

    What institutional redesign is proposed?

    1. Students as rights bearing adults: Students should be active participants in institutional governance rather than being confined to ornamental roles.
    2. Governance membership: Alumni and students should be part of the governance framework through board membership.
    3. Role specific training: Faculty and student affairs teams need training to recognise distress, protect confidentiality, respond without humiliating, understand bias and follow crisis protocols, and to accept that differences of opinion are students’ rights.
    4. Disciplinary process redesigned: A high stress disciplinary encounter should open with a humane conversation setting out the institutional support available, followed by further conversations rather than a single performative step.
    5. An annual well being audit: Universities must be willing to undergo an annual student well being audit, and a few principles matter more than a long list of initiatives.

    Challenges to institutional reform on student well-being

    1. Professional capacity is missing: An institutional model still needs trained counsellors at the point of crisis, and the national supply is far below requirement. Eg. India has about 0.75 psychiatrists per 100,000 people against the WHO norm of 3 per 100,000.
      The Fix: Tie a fixed counsellor to student ratio and an in house student wellness team to accreditation, so capacity is a condition of approval rather than a discretionary spend.
    2. Grievance machinery exists without trust: A redress body that students do not believe in produces silence rather than complaints, and silence is read by the institution as the absence of a problem. Eg. The University Grants Commission (Redressal of Grievances of Students) Regulations, 2023 require every higher educational institution to appoint an ombudsperson.
      The Fix: Publish anonymised annual data on grievances filed, timelines and outcomes, so disposal is visible rather than asserted.
    3. Discrimination is embedded in supervision and hostel life: Bias in supervision, allocation and everyday campus life falls on specific groups and shows up as dropout rather than as a complaint. Eg. High dropout at postgraduate and doctoral levels has been attributed to institutional bias, as argued after the Rohith Vemula case at the University of Hyderabad.
      The Fix: Give equal opportunity cells a reporting line to the governing board rather than to the administration they are meant to examine.
    4. Evaluation doubles as an instrument of authority: Discretionary grading and supervisory control over a thesis timeline give a single individual decisive power over a student’s future. Eg. Doctoral progression in most Indian universities rests on a single supervisor’s recommendation with no standing appeal route.
      The Fix: Mandate published grading rubrics and a second examiner appeal route for both coursework and doctoral progress reviews.
    5. Well being carries no measurable accountability: Nothing currently attaches an institutional consequence to a campus that produces distress, so reform stays voluntary. Eg. The Supreme Court in the Sukdeb Saha case recognised mental health as part of the right to life under Article 21.
      The Fix: Fold the annual well being audit score into National Assessment and Accreditation Council grading, so the audit carries a funding and reputational consequence.

    Conclusion

    Indian higher education has never lacked the diagnosis. What it lacks is any willingness to accept that the conditions producing student distress are its own design choices about authority, evaluation and voice. Treating counselling as the answer keeps those choices out of scrutiny at the exact point they are most visible. The marker to watch is whether the National Task Force’s final report converts its findings into audited institutional obligations rather than another set of advisory guidelines.

    Student mental health in India

    1. Scale of the system: India runs the world’s second largest higher education system, with total enrolment estimated at 4.65 crore in 2026 against 3.42 crore in 2014-15.
    2. Suicide burden: India accounts for nearly one third of global suicides, and suicide is the leading cause of death in the 15 to 29 age group.
    3. Treatment gap: The treatment gap for common mental disorders runs between 70 and 90 per cent, and under 1.5 per cent of the health budget goes to mental health.
    4. Statutory footing: The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 replaced the 1987 law, created a right to mental healthcare and decriminalised attempted suicide.

    Government Initiatives on student and youth mental health

    1. Manodarpan: A Ministry of Education initiative carrying advisory guidelines for students, teachers and faculty, a national database of counsellors, a toll free helpline and a handbook on psychosocial support.
    2. Tele MANAS and Kiran: Tele MANAS provides a round the clock tele mental health service through State cells, and Kiran is a toll free helpline for people in psychological distress.
    3. National Suicide Prevention Strategy, 2022: The first national strategy of its kind, targeting a 10 per cent reduction in suicide mortality by 2030.
    4. District Mental Health Programme: Operating under the National Mental Health Programme, it delivers counselling, outpatient care, suicide prevention and ten bedded inpatient facilities at the district level.

    Back2Basics: National Task Force on Student Mental Health and Suicide Prevention

    1. Origin: It was constituted by the Supreme Court in 2025 to examine the causes of student suicides in higher educational institutions.
    2. Composition: It is chaired by a former judge of the Supreme Court and includes mental health professionals and academic administrators.
    3. Mandate: It is required to identify gaps in the mental health support available on campuses and recommend preventive and remedial measures.
    4. Status: It released an interim report in 2026, and its recommendations are to inform binding directions to higher educational institutions.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2014, GS2, 12.5 marks] Should the premier institutes like IITs/IIMs be allowed to retain premier status, allowed more academic independence in designing courses and also decide mode/criteria of selection of students. Discuss in light of the growing challenges.”

  • NEET-SS qualifying percentile will be reduced to 30: govt.

    Why in the News

    The Centre has agreed to reduce the qualifying percentile for National Eligibility cum Entrance Test Super Speciality (NEET-SS) seats from the existing 50th percentile to the 30th percentile for a proposed Special Stray Vacancy Round. It has also agreed to return 40 vacant in service seats pertaining to Tamil Nadu to the State government. The position was recorded before a Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice P.S. Narasimha, and follows the Centre’s own statement that 1,857 super speciality seats remain vacant after the second round of counselling. The contest is over how far the bar should fall. The petitioner association sought a zero cut off percentile, as had been done in the previous two years, while the Centre has stopped at 30.

    What is NEET-SS?

    1. Purpose: It is the single national entrance examination for admission to super speciality medical courses, meaning the DM and MCh programmes taken after a postgraduate degree.
    2. Qualifying percentile: Eligibility is fixed by a percentile cut off rather than a fixed mark, so the bar moves with the performance of the candidate pool in that year.
    3. Counselling structure: Admission runs through successive counselling rounds, with seats left unfilled after the regular rounds handled through stray vacancy rounds.

    What has the Centre agreed to change?

    1. The percentile cut: The qualifying percentile for NEET-SS is to fall from the 50th percentile to the 30th percentile, limited to the purpose of the proposed Special Stray Vacancy Round.
    2. The stated reason: The change is intended to ensure that available super speciality seats do not remain vacant and that available training capacity is optimally utilised.
    3. Who becomes eligible: Candidates securing the 30th percentile and above in NEET-SS become eligible to take part in the special stray vacancy round.
    4. How the position was reached: The Centre recorded that the matter had been reconsidered in consultation with the concerned stakeholders before the decision was taken.

    Why are super speciality seats going vacant?

    1. The vacancy count: 1,857 super speciality seats were lying vacant after the completion of the second round of NEET-SS counselling.
    2. Training capacity is the cost: A vacant super speciality seat is idle teaching capacity in a discipline with very few trained practitioners, which is the ground the Centre itself cites for lowering the bar.
    3. The demand for a zero cut off: The petitioner, the Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association, sought a zero cut off percentile, pointing to the same relaxation having been granted in the past two years.

    What does the return of the Tamil Nadu in service seats settle?

    1. The reversion: 40 vacant in service seats pertaining to Tamil Nadu are to be reverted to the State government, a decision the Centre said was taken in compliance with Supreme Court orders.
    2. A bounded window: The reversion is for the limited purpose of enabling the State to conduct and complete its own stray vacancy round, over a period of one week.
    3. Upgradation permitted: The court additionally allowed Tamil Nadu to permit candidate upgradation during that one week special stray vacancy round.

    Challenges to filling seats by lowering the percentile

    1. A recurring relaxation becomes the norm: Reducing the bar every year turns an emergency measure into the standing eligibility threshold, so the percentile stops signalling anything about preparedness. Eg. A zero cut off percentile was applied in the two years before this one, and a zero cut off is what the petitioner sought again.
      The Fix: Fix the relaxation to the specific stray vacancy round by notification each year, with the regular rounds held at the standard percentile.
    2. Vacancy is concentrated, not general: Seats go unfilled in specific disciplines and specific institutions rather than across the board, so a uniform percentile cut does not target the shortage. Eg. Super speciality vacancies cluster in less preferred branches and in institutions away from metropolitan centres.
      The Fix: Publish discipline wise and institution wise vacancy data before each round so relaxation can be targeted at the branches actually going empty.
    3. In service and open quota seats move on different clocks: State in service seats and the all India pool are counselled separately, so a seat surrendered late in one stream cannot be recovered in the other. Eg. The 40 Tamil Nadu in service seats needed a court directed reversion and a separate one week State round to be usable at all.
      The Fix: Synchronise the State in service and all India counselling calendars so surrendered seats return to a common pool within the same round.
    4. Bond and service conditions deter takers: Compulsory service bonds and penalty clauses attached to super speciality seats reduce willingness to take a seat even when eligibility is not the barrier. Eg. Several States attach multi year rural or government service obligations with financial penalties to postgraduate and super speciality admissions.
      The Fix: Standardise bond duration and penalty ceilings across States so a candidate can compare obligations before choosing a seat.

    Conclusion

    The dispute is not about the merit bar as a principle but about whether the annual relaxation has become the real eligibility rule. The Centre has taken the percentile to 30 for a single stray round and returned the Tamil Nadu in service seats for a one week State round, while the petitioner’s demand for a zero cut off remains unaccepted. Whether the training capacity argument continues to justify a fresh cut each admission cycle is what the next counselling season will show.

    Back2Basics: The in service quota in medical admissions

    1. What it is: A reservation of postgraduate and super speciality seats for doctors already serving in State government health services.
    2. Purpose: It is designed to retain doctors in public service by linking higher specialisation to time served in government posts.
    3. Legal position: The Supreme Court in Tamil Nadu Medical Officers Association v. Union of India (2020) upheld the competence of States to provide in service reservation in postgraduate medical courses.
    4. Administration: In service seats are counselled by the State government, separately from the all India quota seats counselled centrally.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2014, GS2, 12] Should the premier institutes like IITs/IIMs be allowed to retain premier status, allowed more academic independence in designing courses and also decide mode/criteria of selection of students. Discuss in light of the growing challenges.”

  • Govt. not in favour of treating English as ‘native’ language

    Why in the News

    The Union government has told the Supreme Court that it “has an issue” with treating English as an indigenous language. It has assured the court that it will move quickly on consultations to grant the current Class 6 batch a one-time reprieve from the mandatory third-language paper in the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Class 10 examination. The court had earlier asked the CBSE to consider that relief. The petitioners want English moved out of the indigenous category into the “non-native” or foreign language category, and the Centre has reserved its submissions on that question. The court has also issued notice on petitions filed by minority schools on the three-language scheme. The dispute is about classification rather than count, because what counts as an indigenous language decides how many Indian languages a student must carry.

    What is the three-language formula under the National Education Policy, 2020?

    1. What it requires: The National Education Policy, 2020 continues the three-language formula in school education. At least two of the three languages taught must be native to India.
    2. Why classification decides the burden: A language treated as indigenous can fill one of the two mandatory Indian-language slots. English placed outside that category cannot, so a student carries an additional Indian language alongside it.
    3. Choice rests with States and students: The policy states that no language will be imposed on any State. The three languages are chosen by States, regions and students themselves.

    What has the Centre now told the Supreme Court?

    1. The petitioners’ ask: Counsel for the petitioners sought an order shifting English into the “non-native” or foreign language category.
    2. The Centre’s objection: The Centre said it “has an issue” with that, and asked to make its submissions before any order is passed.
    3. The assurance on the reprieve: The Centre told a Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India that a meeting with the officials concerned would be arranged within a day or two to decide on the one-time reprieve for Class 6 students.

    Why does the current Class 6 batch sit at the centre of the case?

    1. One batch faces full implementation: Under the CBSE guidelines, students in Classes 7 to 9 were exempted from the third-language requirement. The current Class 6 batch was slated for full implementation of the scheme.
    2. The examination date: Full implementation carries a mandatory Class 10 Board examination in the third language by 2031.
    3. The court’s earlier direction: At an earlier hearing the court asked the CBSE to consider relieving Class 6 students of writing the third-language examination in Class 10.
    4. The Bench on sequencing: A judge on the Bench said time is needed for students and for infrastructure to reach parity across education boards. Starting with the mother tongue, then an indigenous language, then another indigenous or foreign language works only where it begins in a lower class.

    What else is now before the court?

    1. The minority schools’ challenge: The court issued notice to the government on petitions filed by minority schools on the implementation of the three-language scheme.
    2. The English question is undecided: No order was passed on shifting English out of the indigenous category, because the Centre asked to be heard on it first.
    3. Timeline pressure from the petitioners: Counsel for the petitioners said parents were anxious and urged the court against further adjournments. The hearing stands adjourned to 17 September.

    Challenges to the three-language formula

    1. Political resistance where the formula reads as imposition: A centrally set language requirement collides with State language policy. Eg. Tamil Nadu has followed a two-language policy of Tamil and English since 1968, after the anti-Hindi agitations of 1965, and has refused the three-language formula since.
      The Fix: Make the third language a State-notified choice, and tie central funding to teacher recruitment for whichever language a State selects rather than to adoption of the formula itself.
    2. Teacher availability limits real choice: A school cannot offer a language for which no trained teacher is posted. Eg. UDISE+ returns record over one lakh single-teacher schools in the country.
      The Fix: Sanction language-specific posts and permit a shared language teacher across a cluster of schools before the subject becomes examinable.
    3. Foundational reading is the prior constraint: A third language added at the middle stage assumes reading fluency that many students do not have. Eg. The ASER 2024 survey found under half of Class 5 students in rural India able to read a Class 2 level text.
      The Fix: Sequence the third language behind a measured foundational literacy benchmark in the mother tongue, rather than behind a fixed grade.
    4. Minority institutions’ autonomy is engaged: Article 30(1) gives minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice, and a prescribed set of languages touches that right. Eg. In T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002), an eleven-judge Constitution Bench held that regulation of such institutions is permissible for standards and not for control of administration.
      The Fix: Frame the language requirement as an attainment standard rather than as a prescribed language set, so minority institutions retain the choice of which languages meet it.

    Conclusion

    The case turns on a classification question rather than on the number of languages taught. Whether English is treated as indigenous decides whether a student carries two Indian languages or three. The Centre has reserved its position on that and has offered relief only to one batch of students. What remains unresolved is what happens to every batch that follows it.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2020, GS2, 15.0 marks] National Education Policy 2020 is in conformity with the Sustainable Development Goal-4 (2030). It intends to restructure and reorient education system in India. Critically examine the statement.”

  • Reclaiming universities through trust, student voice

    Why in the News

    The Supreme Court has stayed the Bar Council of India (BCI)’s order against the graduating batch of the National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR), Hyderabad. The same intervention quashed all first information reports (FIRs) against the protesting students. It declared that the BCI has no disciplinary control over students. It also reduced the three year practice condition for writing the judicial services examination to one year. The order follows a protest by law students seeking a say in their own convocation, widely attributed to an oral remark by the Chief Justice of India that was quickly clarified. The contest is over whether campus unrest is a failure of student discipline or a failure of a governance model that leaves students out of the decisions binding them.

    What is academic freedom?

    1. The freedom to teach, research and question: Academic freedom is the entitlement of those engaged in scholarly teaching and research to decide what to study, what to teach and what to challenge, without direction from the government or the university administration.
    2. No express Indian guarantee: The Constitution of India does not mention academic freedom. Article 5(3) of the German Basic Law guarantees scientific freedom (Wissenschaftsfreiheit) as a right of everyone engaged in scholarly teaching and research.
    3. A recognised right elsewhere: The Constitutions of Japan, South Africa, Portugal and Spain contain a comparable freedom. Article 137 of the Basic Law of Hong Kong provides that educational institutions may retain autonomy and enjoy academic freedom.
    4. Its limit is conduct, not speech: The freedom carries no right to defame or to engage in anti-national activity. Where an academic activity involves conduct rather than speech, the state is entitled to regulate that conduct.

    Why is curriculum the sharp edge of the dispute?

    1. Curriculum is set without the people it binds: University curriculum should be decided by the stakeholders, including students. Eg. Delhi University dropped a paper on the Delhi Sultanate along with some other papers.
    2. Students read such changes as political: Curriculum changes of this kind are seen as having ideological reasons rather than academic ones, which turns an academic decision into a governance grievance.
    3. The direction of restraint runs both ways: Government is not to dictate to universities what to teach, how to teach and what not to teach. Universities owe the same freedom to their departments and faculties.
    4. The campus exists for the contested question: Universities are meant to be a special place for reflection, inquiry and discussion, which is the function a closed curriculum process removes.

    What do experiences abroad show about academic freedom under pressure?

    1. The United States has used funding as leverage: Federal funding has been weaponised to reshape campus culture. Diversity programmes have been dismantled and research funding in areas such as climate change has been reduced.
    2. Permitting protest has itself invited pressure: Universities have faced pressure for allowing student protests, including those over Gaza.
    3. Neither ideological side is exempt: Right wing and left wing regimes have both, at times, sought to control universities.
    4. The pattern is old: Arnold Toynbee resigned from King’s College London in 1924 over his writings on the Greek army’s atrocities. Professors were persecuted during the McCarthy era.
    5. Funders now shape the research agenda: Declining public funding has left research agendas increasingly influenced by funders, corporations and pharmaceutical companies.

    What is the control model of university governance?

    1. Authority sits in one office: Most universities remain Vice-Chancellor centric. Students, who are the reason universities exist, have little say in their governance.
    2. Grievances have no route upward: Vice-Chancellors rarely hold open houses and are often inaccessible to ordinary students. Unaddressed grievances leave students feeling ignored, and some then take extreme steps.
    3. Control substitutes for dialogue: Administrations adopted the control model as governments increasingly sought to control universities. A community of highly educated faculty and young people requires dialogue, trust and openness rather than surveillance.
    4. Knowledge creation needs the opposite conditions: Universities exist to innovate and create knowledge, which requires the freedom to question everything and challenge existing ideas.

    How does under-investment compound the control problem?

    1. The policy target has not been met: The National Education Policy 2020 promises public investment of 6 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in education. Public investment has steadily declined and hovers around 4 to 4.1 per cent.
    2. Higher education gets the smallest share: Within that spending, higher education receives the smallest allocation, so the system is over-regulated and grossly underfunded at the same time.
    3. Autonomy is not alien to the system: The ancient Gurukul system was entirely autonomous, and the present arrangement regulates far more and funds far less.
    4. The shortfall is visible on campus: Public university infrastructure has deteriorated and hostels are in acute shortage, which produced the recent deaths in New Delhi. Faculty positions remain vacant and guest faculty are poorly paid.
    5. Teaching and examinations both fail the student: Poor teaching frustrates students. Repeated examination paper leaks add to their stress.

    What do Vice-Chancellor appointments reveal?

    1. Natural justice is overlooked: In one case a Vice-Chancellor changed the composition of the selection committee, chaired it and voted in the selection of his wife. She was appointed as Vice-Chancellor.
    2. The courts did not correct it: The judiciary declined to follow its own precedents of quashing such appointments.
    3. An adverse record is not a bar: Individuals with questionable records and adverse Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) reports have been appointed, and some State universities face allegations of bribery.
    4. Recruitment rewards leaning over merit: Faculty recruitment over-emphasises ideological leanings rather than merit. Ideological governments may prefer candidates with particular leanings, and merit should not be completely undermined on that account.
    5. Examination integrity follows appointment integrity: No examination system can be foolproof where paper setters, moderators or testing officials are appointed for reasons other than absolute merit and integrity.

    Who actually absorbs the blame for campus unrest?

    1. The anger travels past the administration: Student frustration erupts against the government rather than against university administrations. The government received the criticism for the actions of the Vice-Chancellor in the appointment case.
    2. Much of it is avoidable on campus: The backlash could largely be avoided where administrations engage students in meaningful dialogue and provide timely relief.
    3. The government is not a bystander either: Administrations adopted the control model because governments sought control of universities, so the incentive that produced the model is a governmental one.

    What does the liberty model change?

    1. Trust is the operative mechanism: The liberty model of governance was implemented across three universities over 16 years. Students who are trusted act more responsibly in turn.
    2. Access without gatekeeping: Students met the Vice-Chancellor without appointments and raised personal concerns and difficulties. That access made frank conversations possible when difficult or unpopular decisions had to be taken.
    3. Unpopular ideas are protected: The model treats the university as a space where even the most unpopular ideas can be freely debated, which is the opposite of the top-down model.
    4. Students sit inside the decisions: Students are given a meaningful role in academic, administrative and financial decisions, including faculty appointments, procurement, curriculum design and the drafting of university regulations.
    5. A statutory precedent already exists: Students at Aligarh Muslim University have a statutory role in selecting the Vice-Chancellor.

    Challenges to the liberty model of university governance

    1. Participation rights can be captured by party politics: Campus unions aligned to national parties can convert a participation right into a channel for external political control. Eg. Delhi University Students’ Union elections are contested by the student wings of national parties.
      The Fix: Tie student participation to reserved seats on academic and finance bodies with fixed terms, so it runs through statutory channels rather than street mobilisation.
    2. A Vice-Chancellor cannot devolve powers that are not his: Faculty appointments and university finances are governed by University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations and State legislation, so student participation in them rests on the incumbent’s discretion. Eg. The Vice-Chancellor is himself selected by the Chancellor or Visitor from a search committee panel.
      The Fix: Amend university statutes to create student membership on selection and finance committees, so participation has a legal basis rather than a personal one.
    3. The model lapses with the person who ran it: A governance style adopted by one Vice-Chancellor ends when that office changes hands, since nothing in the statute compels a successor to continue it. Eg. Open house access is an administrative practice and not a rule.
      The Fix: Write grievance redressal timelines and open house frequency into university ordinances so the practice survives a change of office.
    4. Trust cannot supply what money supplies: Dialogue does not create hostel seats, permanent faculty or laboratory funding, which are the material grounds of much campus unrest. Eg. Sanctioned faculty posts in central and State universities stay vacant regardless of the governance style adopted.
      The Fix: Link central grants to filled sanctioned posts and audited hostel capacity, so funding follows the deficits that generate protest.

    Conclusion

    The Supreme Court’s order settles who may discipline a law student. It does not settle who governs a campus. Curriculum decisions, convocation arrangements and appointments all turn on whether students hold any formal seat in university decision making, and at present they hold almost none. The measure worth watching is whether university statutes are amended to give students standing on academic and selection bodies, since a governance practice resting on the person in office leaves with that person.

    Higher Education in India

    1. Second largest system in the world: Total enrolment is estimated at 4.65 crore in 2026, up from 3.42 crore in 2014-15.
    2. Institutional spread: India hosts over 1,168 universities and 45,473 colleges, against 760 universities in 2014-15.
    3. Participation is short of the target: The Gross Enrolment Ratio in higher education, meaning enrolment at that stage as a share of the population in the corresponding age group, stands at 28.4 per cent against the National Education Policy 2020 target of 50 per cent by 2035.
    4. Women now enrol marginally more than men: The Gender Parity Index stands at 1.01, indicating slightly higher female than male participation for the first time.

    Constitutional Framework Governing Higher Education

    1. Entry 25, List III: Education, including technical and medical education and universities, is a Concurrent List subject after the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976.
    2. Entry 66, List I: Coordination and determination of standards in institutions of higher education and research is reserved to the Union.
    3. Entry 63, List I: Banaras Hindu University, Aligarh Muslim University and Delhi University are institutions of national importance under Union competence, along with any other so declared by Parliament.
    4. Article 30(1): Religious and linguistic minorities have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
    5. Article 19(1)(a): Free speech on campus is protected, subject only to the restrictions Article 19(2) itself permits.

    Laws and Rules Governing Higher Education

    1. University Grants Commission Act, 1956: Establishes the UGC to coordinate and determine standards in university education and to disburse grants to universities and colleges.
    2. All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987: Creates the statutory regulator for technical education, covering planning, norms and approval of technical institutions.
    3. National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993: Creates the regulator for teacher education programmes and the institutions that run them.
    4. Anusandhan National Research Foundation Act, 2023: Establishes the National Research Foundation to seed and fund research across higher educational institutions, including State universities.

    Government Initiatives for Higher Education

    1. National Education Policy 2020: Replaces the National Policy on Education, 1986, and is built on access, equity, quality, affordability and accountability.
    2. Academic Bank of Credits: A digital repository holding course credits, which enables multiple entry and exit within a degree programme.
    3. Automated Permanent Academic Account Registry (APAAR): A single student identifier linking academic records, skills and transfers in one portal.
    4. Prime Minister’s Research Fellowship: Doctoral fellowships for research scholars, expanded to award 10,000 new fellowships.

    Challenges in Higher Education Governance

    1. Fragmented regulatory structure: Multiple bodies issue overlapping and sometimes conflicting guidelines to the same institution, which delays academic decisions. Eg. A technical department inside a university answers to the All India Council for Technical Education and the UGC at the same time.
      The Fix: Consolidate approvals under a single higher education regulator with separate verticals for funding, standard setting and accreditation.
    2. Quality is unmeasured across much of the system: Over 30 per cent of Indian higher educational institutions remain unaccredited as of early 2026. Eg. Accreditation by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council is not a precondition for most colleges to award degrees.
      The Fix: Make one completed accreditation cycle a condition for degree granting status and for central grants.
    3. Research spending is stagnant: Research and development expenditure stands at 0.64 per cent of GDP, against about 2.4 per cent in China and 3.4 per cent in the United States. Eg. India contributes under 5 per cent of global research publications.
      The Fix: Route National Research Foundation funding towards State universities, which carry most enrolment and almost none of the research grant.
    4. Employability does not follow the degree: Curricula are not aligned to hiring requirements, so enrolment growth does not convert into work. Eg. Only about 4 per cent of higher education carries formal skill training.
      The Fix: Embed apprenticeship credits inside degree programmes under the National Credit Framework.

    Back2Basics: Bar Council of India

    1. A statutory body under the Advocates Act, 1961: It regulates the legal profession and legal education in India.
    2. Standard setting: It lays down standards of professional conduct and etiquette for advocates, and prescribes the conditions on which a law degree is recognised for enrolment.
    3. Composition: Its members are elected by the State Bar Councils, with the Attorney General of India and the Solicitor General of India as ex officio members.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2014, GS2, 12.5 marks] Should the premier institutes like IITs/IIMs be allowed to retain premier status, allowed more academic independence in designing courses and also decide mode/criteria of selection of students. Discuss in light of the growing challenges.”

  • Missing: boundary walls, bathrooms, blackboards

    Why in the News

    Government schools across Bihar, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh are running without boundary walls, functional wash rooms, sufficient classrooms or electricity. Children in several of them sit on verandas, under trees, or in a single room shared with storage almirahs and meal utensils. A citizen audit campaign called ‘School thik karo’, run by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) since 15 August, asks residents to download a checklist, audit their local school and post the findings, covering drinking water, boundary walls, wash rooms and midday meals. These schools have sanctioned buildings, sanctioned teaching posts and an annual maintenance head in the budget. What is absent is the capacity to convert those into a room a child can sit in. State attention has meanwhile moved to a small tier of flagship institutions.

    What did the four State ground reports find?

    1. Bihar, schools operating without a facility of any kind: Three schools in Muzaffarpur and Vaishali districts run without a boundary wall, a wash room or storage for midday meal supplies.
    2. A primary school of 119 students, established in 1982, has plaster falling from the corridor its two classrooms open onto. Its six teachers use neighbours’ bathrooms and the children go in the open.
    3. A middle school of 283 students has two rooms, so Class 8 sits on the veranda and Classes 1 and 2 sit under a tree behind the kitchen.
    4. A primary school in Vaishali has no building of its own. It runs 91 students across Classes 1 to 5 in a single room of a community centre, alongside department almirahs and meal utensils.
    5. Rajasthan, the approach to the school is itself the barrier: In Unchki village of Deeg district there is no public road to the school, so students walk through a graveyard and a muddy path to reach it.
    6. Corridors serve as classrooms in three schools of the district, and one teacher takes Classes 4 and 5 together for want of rooms or electricity.
    7. None of the three has functional wash rooms, so children walk home in the middle of the school day and return.
    8. The district falls within the National Capital Region and lies 165 km from Delhi.
    9. Uttar Pradesh, the cost of a dirty wash room: A cab driver in Lucknow is moving his 11 year old daughter out of a government primary school after a prolonged urinary tract infection that the family attributes to the school’s wash room.
    10. The transfer costs an additional Rs 4,000 a month, which the household is meeting by cutting other spending.
    11. Drinking water at the school arrives intermittently and the wash room’s water supply is often dysfunctional, so students fetch water from nearby houses.
    12. Madhya Pradesh, buildings condemned and services withdrawn: A middle school in Hirapur village of Sehore district runs eight classes in three rooms, after the primary block on the same premises was abandoned six months ago.
    13. Its 22 students sit on mats without benches, in rooms with dim lighting, broken almirahs, fans that do not work and rainwater seeping through the roof.
    14. One of the two student wash rooms is functional, so girls and boys use the same toilet.
    15. The self help group contracted to cook the midday meal stopped three months ago, and the school in charge is buying ration himself while awaiting reimbursement.
    16. A second school 20 km away, of 104 students, has had its electricity connection cut because water leaking through the ceiling was reaching the wiring.

    Where does the teaching itself break down?

    1. Attendance runs at roughly half the roll: Teachers at the three Rajasthan schools say 50 to 60 percent of enrolled students come on a given day, and they attribute part of that absence to the infrastructure.
    2. Posted teachers are absent or shared: At one Rajasthan school neither of the two teachers came on the day of the visit, and a teacher posted elsewhere visits only after finishing his own school day.
    3. Senior classes go unstaffed: At the Madhya Pradesh school of 104 students, all three teachers for Classes 6 to 8 were on leave and the principal was away at a training exercise, leaving two primary teachers in charge.
    4. The commute eats the school day: One headmaster travels 15 km each way and a teacher 40 km daily by motorcycle to reach schools in rural Bihar.
    5. Staff are under orders not to speak: Teachers in the Rajasthan schools said their supervisors had instructed them not to speak to the media, so their complaints surface only anonymously.

    Why do repairs not happen even when schools ask for them?

    1. The annual grant cannot fund a repair: One Madhya Pradesh school receives Rs 25,000 a year for miscellaneous works, which is spent on hiring a worker once a month to clean the wash rooms.
    2. Proposals go unanswered for years: That school has sent annual repair proposals for five years without a response, over the same period its building has been in poor condition.
    3. The panchayat fills the gap the department leaves: Its floor, boundary wall and gate were built by the village panchayat after a school alumnus became its head.
    4. Budget is the stated reason given to schools: Rajasthan teachers say district authorities answer requests for more classrooms by citing the absence of budget, while the District Magistrate’s position is that complaints are acted on quickly and vacancies filled regularly.
    5. Attention has moved to a flagship tier: A State School Education Department official says the focus in Madhya Pradesh has been on Sandipani Schools, earlier called CM Rise, and Excellence schools, so small rural schools have struggled for basic infrastructure.

    Who stays in these schools, and who leaves?

    1. The exit has a price: A private school near the Rajasthan cluster costs about Rs 18,000 a year, which a grandparent says rules out sending all his grandchildren to one.
    2. Enrolment collapses where an alternative exists: The Madhya Pradesh middle school runs eight classes for fewer children than a single functioning class would hold, and the school in charge says dominant communities in the village send their children to private schools.
    3. Those who remain are the poorest: Most of the students left at that school are from marginalised communities, and its neglect tracks who is left in it.
    4. Residents read the neglect as targeted: Locals around the Rajasthan schools allege that their requests are ignored because they live in predominantly Muslim areas.
    5. The reason parents give is not academic: The Lucknow parent cites a peaceful atmosphere in which a child can concentrate, not examination results, as what the private school offers.

    Conclusion

    A school counts as functioning in the record when it has a building, a sanctioned staff strength and a maintenance head in the budget. None of those three states whether a child can sit in a lit room, use a toilet, or eat a cooked meal that day. The forward move is to make the release of school funds conditional on periodic physical verification of those conditions, rather than on the return the school files about itself. Until that link exists, the audit is being done by residents with a downloaded checklist while departmental records show nothing wrong.

    Back2Basics: Sandipani Schools, earlier CM Rise Schools

    1. What they are: A Madhya Pradesh government programme creating a tier of well resourced composite schools, running from the pre primary stage to Class 12 on a single campus.
    2. What they provide: Selected schools receive upgraded buildings, laboratories, libraries, digital classrooms and transport for students drawn from surrounding villages.
    3. How they differ from an ordinary school: They are a small, high investment tier rather than a universal upgrade, so a district holds a handful of them alongside its regular government schools.
    4. Why the name changed: The schools were launched as CM Rise Schools and were later renamed Sandipani Vidyalaya.

    [2022, GS2, 15 marks] The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 remains inadequate in promoting incentive-based system for children’s education without generating awareness about the importance of schooling. Analyse.”

  • India’s Higher Education Sector

    Why in the News

    PIB published a Backgrounder on India’s Higher Education Sector. It sets out the sector’s scale, access gains and quality goals.

    Core facts

    1. Scale of expansion: Universities rose from 17 in 1947 to about 1,168 in 2021-22. Colleges rose from 636 to about 45,473 in the same period.
    2. Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER): GER rose from 0.4 in 1950-51 to 28.4 in 2021-22. GER measures enrolment in higher education as a share of the 18 to 23 year age group.
    3. Gender parity: The Gender Parity Index reached 1.01 in 2021-22. A value of 1 means equal female and male enrolment.
    4. State universities carry the load: State Public Universities account for about 81 percent of total enrolment.
    5. Research output: India’s share of global research publications rose from 3.5 percent in 2017 to 5.2 percent in 2024.
    6. Public spending: Tertiary education received about 1.57 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2021.
    7. Data caveat: These are PIB higher education factsheet figures. The current Backgrounder may carry updated data that could not be independently fetched.

    Static Context

    1. National Education Policy 2020: The National Education Policy (NEP), 2020 targets a 50 percent GER by 2035. It is the third national education policy after those of 1968 and 1986.
    2. University Grants Commission: The University Grants Commission (UGC) was set up under the University Grants Commission Act, 1956. It funds and sets standards for universities.
    3. All India Council for Technical Education: The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) regulates technical education. It gained statutory status under the AICTE Act, 1987.
    4. Data and ranking bodies: The All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) is the enrolment data source. The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) ranks institutions.

    Prelims angle

    1. GER hook: The GER definition and the 50 percent by 2035 NEP target are testable facts.
    2. Regulator hook: UGC enactment year 1956 and AICTE statutory year 1987.
    3. Data hook: AISHE is the official higher education statistics survey.
    4. Parity hook: A Gender Parity Index at or above 1 signals equal or higher female enrolment.

    Mains angle

    GS2 (development of the education social sector). A question can ask how India can lift higher education quality and research to internationally competitive levels while raising GER.

    Matching Previous Year Question

    “[2015, GS2, 12.5 marks] The quality of higher education in India requires major improvements to make it internationally competitive. Do you think that the entry of foreign educational institutions would help improve the quality of higher and technical education in the country? Discuss.”