China’s sweeping ban on commercial tutoring in 2021 was a response to mounting concerns about student burnout, parental anxiety, and widening social gaps. The government argued that the shadow education industry had become a breeding ground for inequity, where only affluent families could afford to buy their children a competitive edge.

India, though culturally and economically different, faces a strikingly similar challenge. Our coaching hubs — from Kota to Hyderabad — have grown into multi-billion-rupee ecosystems promising a ticket to the IITs, AIIMS, and other top institutions. Yet, behind the glossy billboards lies a grim reality.

A Silent Crisis of Student Well-Being

The pressure to “crack” exams has become synonymous with academic success. Reports of student suicides, especially in centres like Kota, have grown alarmingly frequent. These tragedies reflect not just personal despair, but a system that equates self-worth with a rank or score.

Much of the coaching culture is about drilling formulas, shortcuts, and test strategies. Students are often pushed to prioritise speed over depth, memorisation over understanding — producing test-takers rather than thoughtful learners.

Social Inequality Widening the Gap

Coaching has also deepened educational inequality. Quality classes are expensive; even middle-class families stretch their finances, moving cities and spending lakhs to keep pace. For poorer households, the barrier is almost insurmountable.

While a few students land coveted seats, millions are left with debt, disappointment, or degrees from lesser-known institutions that offer little return. Ordinary parents cannot afford to wait two or three years while their children prepare for elite entrance exams — they need quicker, affordable pathways to opportunity.

Are Placements Reflecting a Quality Problem?

Recent news about falling placement numbers at premier IITs — including Mumbai — raises a crucial question: are we admitting the right candidates, or has the intense coaching race diluted the quality of entrants? When selection is mainly about who can endure the longest grind, creativity and collaboration — vital for innovation and employability — risk being sidelined.

Finding the Right Balance

Standardised tests are essential for fairness, but when they dominate completely, they distort learning. Other countries mix exams with school records, essays, or interviews (e.g., SAT plus holistic review in the US, A-levels with statements or interviews in the UK). India could adopt a lighter version of these practices — keeping the rigour of JEE/NEET but giving weight to school work, projects, or structured interviews — so merit isn’t reduced to coaching stamina alone.

Towards a Healthier Future

The coaching-centre model has helped some achieve their dreams, but at a staggering social cost. Unless we rethink how we define merit and prepare students, we risk perpetuating a cycle where learning is sacrificed to test-taking, and only the privileged can afford to compete.

China’s ban may not be an exact fit for India, but it signals the urgency of rebalancing our priorities. Education should expand minds, not narrow them to a scorecard.

How can India balance rigorous testing with a fairer, more holistic admissions process? Share your thoughts in the comments or connect to continue the dialogue.