Mon, Apr 20, 2026
The Union Budget 2026-27 is approaching, and as always, there will be competing demands from various sectors. With limited government resources, prioritization becomes a crucial challenge. While pressing issues such as subsidies and welfare measures require immediate attention, areas like education yield results only over the long term. Consequently, governments have often favored short-term needs at the expense of long-term investments like education. Although sufficient budgetary allocation is essential for education, several deeper, non-fiscal challenges continue to hinder progress in the sector.
When I assumed the role of Secretary, School Education and Literacy, Government of India, in 2016 — after addressing significant challenges as Secretary, Coal, I anticipated leaving behind the darkness of coal mines for the optimism of school education. However, I was dismayed to discover that the entrenched interests in school education were even more insidious than those in the coal sector. To compound matters, I found that budgetary allocations for school education had been declining year after year since 2014, even in nominal terms. Despite personal risk, I advocated for increased funding and achieved some success in 2017, but allocations have largely stagnated since then. The National Education Policy recommends allocating 6% of GDP to education, but given current fiscal realities, this target seems unattainable. Expecting a substantial increase in education funding appears unrealistic. The pertinent question, then, is: what can the government do within these constraints?
Teachers are central to the success of school education, and the NEP offers targeted recommendations at every level. As I note in my book, No More a Civil Servant, the most pervasive problems are found in and around B.Ed. and D.El.Ed. colleges, many of which exist only on paper while still awarding degrees. It is imperative to implement NEP recommendations concerning these institutions in both letter and spirit, to root out fraudulent colleges and eliminate malpractice.
In some states, the recruitment process for government teachers has become deeply problematic and requires urgent reform. The NEP again provides practical recommendations that can be implemented promptly and without significant financial outlay.
Teacher training and capacity building must be elevated to the highest priority. The NEP offers valuable guidance in this area as well. Investing in robust teacher training programmes—including ongoing professional development—is essential for adopting modern pedagogical practices, particularly in STEM, digital literacy, languages, and soft skills. Such investments are crucial for realizing the long-term objectives of educational reform.
Fostering public-private partnerships (PPPs) and collaborations with NGOs and private entities can significantly enhance teaching quality by bringing in specialised instructors for subjects such as laboratory sciences, vocational skills, and digital learning.
Bridging the digital divide and integrating technology into classrooms is now imperative. This requires ensuring that every government school, including those in rural and semi-urban areas, has reliable broadband, computers, and supporting digital infrastructure. Such steps will enable online learning, hybrid models, and greater access to educational resources. Expanding initiatives like Atal Tinkering Labs (ATLs)—which provide students with hands-on experience in science, technology, engineering, and innovation—is equally important. To promote inclusivity, digital and AI-based learning tools, e-libraries, and multilingual digital content must be prioritised, especially for remote and under-resourced areas.
Expanding vocational and skilling infrastructure is essential, and efforts must make skilling both aspirational and accessible. Establishing dedicated, high-quality institutions—such as National Centres of Excellence for Skilling (NCE-Skilling)—will align training with industry requirements for both technical and soft skills. Upgrading Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs), introducing diverse courses, and forging strong connections with employers for internships and apprenticeships will help mainstream vocational training, making it a respected alternative to traditional academics. Encouraging close linkages between training institutions and industries—including the private sector, MSMEs, and startups—will ensure that skills training leads to real employment, and thus, reduce the skill-job mismatch. Promoting innovation and future-ready skills—such as AI, digital literacy, language proficiency, and soft skills—requires integrating these topics into school and higher education curricula. Recent initiatives, including funding for AI in education and digital textbooks in Indian languages, aim to bridge critical divides. Additionally, establishing specialised labs and innovation hubs at the school or vocational level will foster scientific temperament, creativity, and problem-solving skills.
A sharp focus on equity, inclusion, and access is essential—especially for rural, marginalised, and economically disadvantaged populations. Education and skilling programmes must reach rural regions, socially and economically disadvantaged groups (including SC/ST/OBC and low-income families), girls, and persons with disabilities. Providing subsidised or low-interest educational and skill-training loans or grants is crucial to removing financial barriers to higher education and vocational training. Strengthening pipelines from school to skill development—including exposure to vocational training, internships, apprenticeships, and employment support—will help level the playing field for underprivileged students.
Encouraging public-private partnerships (PPPs) and industry-academia collaboration is vital. This means engaging private industry, MSMEs, startups, NGOs, and ed-tech providers in designing curricula, training modules, apprenticeships, and placement pathways. Leveraging CSR funds to support skilling, internships, and training—particularly in sectors facing manpower shortages like manufacturing, technology, services, and green energy—will make these programs scalable and demand-driven. Previous programs with similar frameworks have proven the viability of this approach.
While increased budgetary allocation is necessary, it appears unlikely in the near future. Nevertheless, much can and should be accomplished outside the budgetary sphere. Strengthening and reinventing existing institutional structures, creating new ones, streamlining processes, and prioritising capacity building do not require significant financial resources and should be undertaken without delay.
(The writer is a retired IAS officer. Views are personal.)