The government, however, maintains that these reforms are part of a broader structural transformation.

It is often said that the best investment in the world is investment in education. This applies not only to individuals and families but also to nations. More than 45 million students are currently pursuing higher education in India. Children attend schools and colleges with the hope of securing a brighter future, finding meaningful employment, and building successful careers. But how many of these dreams actually come true?

The answer varies depending on whom you ask unemployed students, education experts, or policymakers. The recent protests led by Generation Z and Generation Alpha, from New Delhi's Jantar Mantar to several other parts of the country, have highlighted serious shortcomings within India's education system. These demonstrations have sent a clear message to those in power that the existing system requires urgent and meaningful reforms.

The students' hunger strike and nationwide protests created enough political pressure that Dharmendra Pradhan resigned as Union Education Minister. The responsibility of reforming India's education system has now been handed to Pralhad Joshi. However, the central question remains unchanged: Will replacing the Education Minister alone solve the deep-rooted problems facing India's education sector?

Why has the post of Education Minister become one of the most controversial portfolios in the Modi government? Why has the ministry witnessed repeated leadership changes? Will paper leaks now come to an end? Will the quality of education in government schools improve? Will parents no longer feel compelled to send their children to private schools? Why are government schools shutting down across the country? In some places there are schools without teachers, while in others teachers exist but educational infrastructure is inadequate. Why is the condition of public higher education steadily deteriorating? Why are many colleges increasingly being viewed as institutions that produce unemployed graduates instead of skilled professionals?

How much is the government actually spending on education every year? Has investment in education genuinely increased compared to previous governments? Are more private colleges being established than government institutions? How much progress has been made in improving India's education system from the tenure of former Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh to that of Prime Minister Narendra Modi? These are some of the critical questions this report seeks to examine.

About a year ago, Prime Minister Narendra Modi described the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 as India's 'intellectual renaissance.' Around the same time, Congress leader Sonia Gandhi wrote an opinion article in which she alleged that the new education policy was advancing what she called the government's '3C agenda'-Centralization, Commercialization, and Communalism.

Although her article did not receive widespread attention at the time, similar concerns have continued to surface. Critics argue that BJP-led governments are reshaping India's education system to align with the ideological vision of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Supporters, on the other hand, argue that Indian history had long been presented from a left-leaning perspective and required correction. As a result, school textbooks have undergone revisions, with some historical chapters removed or rewritten.

As discussions around educational reform intensify, another important question emerges: Can merely repainting school buildings in saffron change the way students think? While the past decade has witnessed attempts to rewrite or reduce portions of history textbooks, critics ask whether equally strong, evidence-based new material has been added to replace what was removed.

Many observers believe that this ongoing debate over ideology versus educational reform is one of the reasons the Education Ministry has remained under constant political scrutiny during the Modi government's tenure.

Over the past 12 years, the Ministry of Education has seen multiple leadership changes. Smriti Irani, Prakash Javadekar, Ramesh Pokhriyal 'Nishank', Dharmendra Pradhan, and now Pralhad Joshi have all held the portfolio. It is also the first time during the Modi era that sustained student protests have resulted in the resignation of a Cabinet Minister.

This raises another fundamental question: Why has the Education Ministry remained at the centre of so many controversies under the NDA government?

Under the NDA government, the Ministry of Education has often been viewed as an important instrument of India's soft power. Even during the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, the ministry was headed by senior BJP leader Murli Manohar Joshi. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has long maintained that India's education system should move away from what it describes as a left-leaning interpretation of history.

According to the RSS's ideological position, many historians and intellectuals associated with left-wing thought have presented Indian history through a distorted lens. The organisation believes that events such as the Mughal period, India's freedom struggle, Partition, and post-Independence nation-building should be interpreted differently. As a result, efforts have reportedly been made behind the scenes to introduce ideological changes into the education system.

Many political observers believe that over the past twelve years, greater emphasis has been placed on ideological reforms than on strengthening educational infrastructure and learning outcomes. The government, however, has consistently maintained that these initiatives are part of a larger structural reform process designed to modernise Indian education.

Supporters of the reforms argue that revising textbooks and correcting historical narratives is necessary to present a more balanced understanding of India's past. Critics counter that changing the colour of school buildings or removing selected chapters from history books alone cannot transform the education system or reshape historical understanding unless those changes are backed by rigorous academic research and credible evidence.

From Smriti Irani to Pralhad Joshi: A Ministry Marked by Frequent Leadership Changes

When Narendra Modi became Prime Minister in 2014, Smriti Irani, who had defeated Rahul Gandhi in Amethi, was appointed Union Education Minister. Her tenure was overshadowed by controversy over her educational qualifications and by major political flashpoints such as the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) controversy and the suicide of research scholar Rohith Vemula.

Following these controversies, Irani was shifted to the Textiles Ministry, and Prakash Javadekar took charge of the Education Ministry. Compared to his predecessor, Javadekar maintained a relatively low public profile. After the 2019 general election, however, he gradually faded from active political prominence.

During Modi 2.0, Ramesh Pokhriyal 'Nishank' became Education Minister. His tenure ended during the 2021 Cabinet reshuffle, when Dharmendra Pradhan assumed charge of the ministry. Pradhan continued in the role during Modi 3.0 until widespread student protests over examination irregularities eventually led to his resignation, making him the first Cabinet minister in the Modi government to step down following sustained public demonstrations.

National Education Policy 2020: Reform or Political Flashpoint?

During Dharmendra Pradhan's tenure, the government aggressively promoted the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, describing it as a blend of India's ancient Gurukul tradition and modern educational practices. The policy also placed significant emphasis on teaching in the mother tongue and promoting multilingual education.

However, the policy soon became politically contentious. The proposed three-language formula sparked disagreements between the Centre and several state governments, reigniting debates over federalism and linguistic autonomy.

Political analysts argue that Pradhan quietly advanced many of the ideological priorities associated with the RSS within educational institutions. According to critics, individuals sympathetic to the organisation increasingly occupied influential positions in colleges and universities. They also claim that several historical chapters were removed or reduced in school textbooks.

Supporters of these changes argue that the revisions correct historical inaccuracies. Critics, however, ask an important question: What substantial, evidence-based material has been added to replace the content that was removed? That question, they argue, remains largely unanswered.

Rewriting History or Reinterpreting It?

The article argues that a new approach to historical interpretation has emerged in recent years-one that frequently draws upon ancient Indian scriptures and mythology to highlight India's scientific and civilisational achievements thousands of years ago.

Supporters believe this approach restores pride in India's cultural heritage. Critics contend that history should be rewritten only on the basis of verified academic evidence rather than ideological preference. They question whether some contemporary interpretations are driven more by political objectives than by rigorous historical scholarship.

The debate has intensified with the growing presence of commentators and self-styled historians who interpret India's past through regional, religious, or ideological lenses. According to critics, many individuals now occupying influential educational positions possess limited academic credentials, raising further concerns about the direction of educational reform.

Against this backdrop, an important question emerges: Have the changes introduced over the past twelve years strengthened India's public education system or weakened it?

The discussion then shifts from ideology to measurable outcomes, examining government data on schools, teachers, enrolment, and educational infrastructure to evaluate whether reforms have translated into tangible improvements on the ground.

The debate over ideology ultimately leads to a more practical question: Has India's public education system actually become stronger? Government data presents a mixed picture.

Responding to a question in the Lok Sabha, Minister of State for Education Jayant Chaudhary revealed that India had 1,022,386 government schools during the 2021-22 academic year. By 2025-26, that number had declined to 1,005,245, meaning 17,141 government schools had disappeared within five years.

This naturally raises a critical question: Why is the number of government schools steadily declining in a country that aims to become a developed nation by 2047?

One Teacher for an Entire School

Government statistics reveal another alarming reality. Across India, 100,843 schools have only one teacher.

Such figures underline the severe shortage of teachers in government schools. When a single teacher is expected to educate children across multiple grades and subjects, the quality of education inevitably suffers.

Government Schools vs Private Schools

Most children attending government schools come from economically weaker families, many of whom depend on the government's monthly free food grain programme for survival.

At the same time, families with relatively better financial conditions increasingly prefer private schools for their children. As a result, India now has more than 325,000 private schools, educating roughly 30-35 percent of all school-going children.

According to one study, the number of private schools has risen significantly over the past decade.

• 2014-15: 288,164 private schools
• 2023-24: 331,108 private schools

This means 42,944 new private schools were established within ten years-an increase of nearly 15 percent.

Meanwhile, the number of government schools has continued to decline.

Critics argue that while school buildings may have received cosmetic upgrades, teachers are increasingly burdened with administrative duties unrelated to teaching. Consequently, many parents view private schools as a better alternative despite the significantly higher fees.

Higher Education: Quantity Without Quality?

The article argues that although institutions offering higher and professional education are expanding, an equally important question remains unanswered:

How many graduates actually secure jobs that match their qualifications?

One study estimates that nearly 1.5 million engineering graduates enter India's job market every year. However, only 150,000 to 250,000 reportedly obtain satisfactory employment related to their field of study.

Many government engineering colleges struggle to fill their seats because students increasingly believe these institutions offer limited placement opportunities. Even when graduates find jobs, salaries are often modest.

Private professional institutions have rapidly filled this gap by focusing on industry-oriented education and employability. While India does have several world-class public institutions, many government colleges are increasingly perceived as producing degrees with limited value in today's competitive job market.

As a result, students are willing to pay significantly higher fees to study at private institutions if they believe it improves their career prospects.

Private Colleges Expand While Government Institutions Grow Slowly

Another study cited in the article shows a striking contrast.

• Government colleges
  • 2014: 7,885
  • 2024: 7,994
  • Growth over 10 years: around 1 percent
• Private colleges
  • 2014: 21,750
  • 2024: 32,513
  • Growth over 10 years: about 49 percent

The rapid expansion of private colleges reflects growing demand for institutions that promise better infrastructure, stronger industry links, and improved placement opportunities.

The Real Anger Behind Student Protests

According to the article, the NEET paper leak may have triggered nationwide demonstrations, but it was not the root cause of student anger.

The larger frustration stems from deeper structural issues within India's education system.

For millions of young people, the biggest concern is straightforward:

Why does earning a college degree still not guarantee employment?

Students argue that education should prepare them for meaningful careers rather than simply awarding certificates. Unless institutions align their courses with evolving industry requirements, they fear India's growing youth population will continue facing unemployment despite obtaining higher education.

overnment vs Private Colleges: Enrolment Trends

The widening gap between government and private educational institutions is also reflected in student enrolment.

According to the article:

• Government institutions
  • 2013-14: 13.4 million students
  • 2023-24: 16.3 million students
  • Growth: Approximately 21%
• Private institutions
  • 2013-14: 18.2 million students
  • 2023-24: 35.7 million students
  • Growth: Nearly double over the decade.

The article argues that despite charging significantly higher tuition fees, private colleges continue to attract more students because they generally provide better infrastructure, stronger industry linkages, improved campus placements, and courses aligned with current job-market requirements.

Many well-known private professional institutions focus on making students job-ready even before graduation. Government colleges, the article suggests, need to strengthen faculty recruitment, improve infrastructure, modernise curricula, and place greater emphasis on practical learning rather than theory.

Although the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 seeks to promote multidisciplinary learning, flexibility, and skill-based education, the article contends that many government institutions still struggle due to shortages of qualified faculty and inadequate resources.

Medical Education: Rising Demand, Limited Government Seats

India currently has 1,422 universities and more than 52,000 colleges.

Medical education, however, remains one of the country's most competitive sectors.

For the 2026-27 academic session, India had:

• 823 medical colleges
• 136,939 MBBS seats

Of these:

• Government medical colleges: 63,296 seats
• Private medical colleges: 73,643 seats

Although private colleges now account for a larger share of MBBS seats, competition remains extremely intense for government institutions because of their substantially lower fees.

Nearly 2 million candidates reportedly appeared for the NEET examination following the paper leak controversy, meaning each MBBS seat had approximately 14-15 aspirants competing for admission.

The article also notes that most newly added MBBS seats have gone to private colleges.

Out of 9,911 new MBBS seats introduced for the 2026-27 session:

• 7,800 were added in private medical colleges.
• 2,111 were added in government institutions.

State-Wise Distribution of MBBS Seats

The article highlights the growing dominance of private medical education in several states.

Karnataka

• Total MBBS seats: 15,395
• Government: 4,400
• Private: 10,995

Uttar Pradesh

• Total: 14,000
• Government: 5,700
• Private: 8,300

Tamil Nadu

• Total: 13,999
• Government: 5,349
• Private: 8,650

Maharashtra

• Total: 13,099
• Government: 6,000
• Private: 7,099

According to the article, studying MBBS at some prestigious private medical colleges can cost ₹1 crore to ₹1.5 crore, making medical education unaffordable for many middle-class families.

Education Budget: UPA vs NDA

The article compares education spending under successive governments.

Between 2004-05 and 2013-14, during the UPA government:

• Education Budget increased from ₹13,098 crore to ₹71,059 crore.
• Several new IITs, IIMs, Central Universities, and educational institutions were established.
• The Right to Education Act was introduced to expand access to schooling.

During the NDA government:

• The total education budget increased from ₹68,874 crore in 2014-15 to approximately ₹1.29 lakh crore by 2025-26.
• The higher education budget increased from around ₹20,000 crore to over ₹50,000 crore.

However, the article argues that despite this increase in absolute spending, the Education Ministry's share of the Union Budget declined:

• 2013-14 (UPA): 4.6%
• 2025-26 (NDA): 2.5%

The article questions whether this level of investment is sufficient for a country aspiring to become a developed nation by 2047.

Expansion of Premier Institutions

The article credits both governments with expanding India's higher education network.

During the UPA years:

• IITs increased from 7 to 16.
• New IIMs were established across multiple states.
• Central Universities expanded nationwide.

During the Modi government:

• Additional IITs, IIMs, and AIIMS were approved.
• AIIMS institutions increased from 7 to 23, with several more under development.

However, the article argues that expansion alone is insufficient if institutions continue facing shortages of professors, inadequate infrastructure, and declining academic quality.

The Challenges Ahead

The article concludes that replacing an Education Minister cannot by itself resolve the structural problems affecting India's education system.

Instead, it argues that long-term reforms should focus on:

• Increasing public investment in education to around 6% of GDP.
• Strengthening government schools through better infrastructure and qualified teachers.
• Filling vacant faculty positions in universities and colleges.
• Updating academic curricula to match industry requirements.
• Expanding practical and skill-based education.
• Making professional education more affordable.
• Regulating fees charged by private educational institutions, particularly medical colleges.
• Treating education as a long-term national investment rather than a political issue.

Unless both the Union and state governments commit to sustained investment and meaningful reforms, changing ministers alone will not solve the deep-rooted challenges facing India's education system. The real goal should be to build an education system capable of preparing India for its ambition of becoming a developed nation by 2047.