Education for All or Education for the Affluent?

Rajkumari Sharma Tankha

When the government opened the doors to private participation in education, first at the school level and later in higher education, the move was hailed as a progressive step. The idea was simple and seemingly noble: increase access, expand infrastructure, encourage competition, and democratise education. Private investment was expected to bridge the gaps left by an overstretched public education system.

To a large extent, the policy succeeded in expanding the number of educational institutions. Today, India boasts thousands of private schools, engineering colleges, medical colleges, management institutes, and universities offering a wide range of courses. Students have more choices than ever before.

But there is one uncomfortable question that policymakers can no longer ignore: Has education really become more accessible?

The answer, unfortunately, is no.

The rapid growth of private educational institutions has created a parallel system that is increasingly unaffordable for the average Indian family. While government schools and colleges charge nominal fees, their private counterparts often demand fees that run into lakhs of rupees annually. The difference is staggering.

Consider a typical government school where annual fees may range from a few hundred to a few thousand rupees. Compare that with private schools in metropolitan cities where yearly fees can exceed ₹1 lakh or even ₹5 lakh. The gap becomes even wider in higher education. A government engineering college may charge less than ₹50,000 a year, while a private institution can charge several lakhs. Medical education presents an even bleaker picture, with some private colleges demanding tens of lakhs annually, putting professional education completely beyond the reach of middle-class and lower-income families.

This situation raises a fundamental question: Can we truly claim to have democratised education when only the wealthy can afford quality education?

Supporters of privatisation argue that private institutions provide better infrastructure, modern facilities, and superior learning environments. While this may be true in many cases, education cannot be treated purely as a commercial commodity. It is a public good and a constitutional aspiration. A nation’s future depends on the quality of education available to all its citizens, not just to those who can afford premium fees.

Two-Tier Education System

The result of unchecked privatisation is the emergence of a two-tier system. One tier serves the affluent, offering world-class facilities and opportunities. The other caters to everyone else, often with limited resources and fewer opportunities. Such a divide deepens social inequality rather than reducing it.

The government cannot wash its hands of responsibility by merely allowing private players to enter the sector. Regulation must accompany liberalisation. If education is to remain a vehicle for social mobility, affordability must become a central concern.

One possible solution is to introduce reasonable fee regulations. Just as governments regulate prices in essential sectors to protect consumers, they must establish transparent mechanisms to monitor and cap educational fees. This does not mean stifling private enterprise or discouraging investment. Rather, it means ensuring that education remains accessible to a broader section of society.

Scholarships, fee transparency, income-linked tuition structures, and stronger oversight of annual fee hikes can also help strike a balance between institutional sustainability and public interest.

Education is not merely a service; it is an investment in the nation’s future. A system that excludes ordinary citizens from quality education ultimately undermines economic growth, social mobility, and national development.

Privatisation may have expanded the supply of educational institutions, but it has not fulfilled the promise of democratising education. Until affordability becomes a priority, education will remain a privilege for the few rather than a right enjoyed by all.

The true measure of success is not how many schools and colleges exist. But, how many citizens can realistically afford to learn in them.