As a Career Advisor with over three decades of experience in the fields of education, career guidance, and student admissions, I find it imperative to address a significant concern regarding the reported practice of allowing private coaching organizations to administer assessments or examinations within government schools. This issue extends beyond the mere execution of an examination; it fundamentally questions the autonomy, institutional integrity, accountability, and the core mission of our government education system.
Government schools are established to deliver accessible, equitable, and high-quality education to all children. Their facilities, infrastructure, and institutional resources are public assets, primarily intended to serve the educational interests of their enrolled students. These assets should not, without compelling justification and appropriate safeguards, be utilized as platforms for private coaching organizations, commercial endeavors, or admission-centric activities.
The initial inquiry that arises is: What necessitated this action?
Prior to authorizing any private organization access to the government school system, the most fundamental question requiring an answer is: What was the underlying need? Who authorized this decision? What educational assessment informed this choice? Which specific deficiency within the government system was intended to be addressed? What measurable benefits will accrue to government school students? Furthermore, why could the same objective not have been achieved through the existing government educational framework? These are not unreasonable inquiries; they represent legitimate questions of public accountability.
Parents, educators, and the broader community are entitled to understand the rationale behind decisions impacting government educational institutions. Transparency becomes particularly crucial when private organizations are granted access to public infrastructure and students.
Do we not trust our own teachers and institutions?
Having dedicated over three decades to engaging with students, parents, teachers, and educational institutions, I am acutely aware of the talent and intellectual capacity that resides within our government schools. We possess qualified teachers, experienced educators, and subject specialists who have committed years to nurturing our children. Should there be any shortcomings in capacity, assessment systems, or specialized expertise, the appropriate response should be to fortify the existing system through comprehensive training, professional development, enhanced resources, technological integration, and, where necessary, the recruitment of additional expertise. Outsourcing should not be the primary solution for every institutional challenge.
If the Government genuinely believes that its own educators and institutions are incapable of performing even fundamental academic functions, then we must address a more profound question: Why has the Government failed to enhance the capacity of the system for which it is responsible? The solution cannot simply involve introducing private entities into this domain. There must be accountability for institutional decisions.
As a professional with over three decades of experience observing the education and admissions landscape, I contend that administrative decisions impacting education must be informed by educational expertise and on-the-ground realities, rather than solely by administrative convenience. Clarity is required regarding who proposed such an arrangement, who approved it, what due diligence was conducted, and what safeguards were implemented to protect student interests and the neutrality of Government institutions. Where a decision proves to be poorly conceived or inadequately justified, institutional accountability is paramount. Authority and responsibility must be intrinsically linked. Ultimately, someone must be answerable for decisions that affect the credibility and operation of public education. This is not about targeting any individual or organization; it is about ensuring that public institutions are governed in the public interest.
Private expertise has a role, but so does institutional responsibility. This argument should not be misconstrued as opposition to private educational organizations. Private institutions play a significant role in India's expanding education ecosystem and can contribute expertise, innovation, and additional learning opportunities. However, a clear distinction must be maintained between collaboration in the public interest and the gradual commercialization of public educational spaces. If a private organization is permitted to operate within Government schools, there should be clearly defined objectives, transparent terms, academic justification, institutional safeguards, and demonstrable benefits for students. Furthermore, there should be no ambiguity regarding commercial or admission-related interests. Government schools must never become captive audiences or convenient recruitment grounds for private coaching and admission-driven enterprises.
The Kashmir context cannot be overlooked. In Kashmir, educational decisions must be considered in light of the realities faced by our students, parents, and teachers. We understand the aspirations of our youth, the pressures on families, and the challenges confronting our educational institutions. Therefore, policy decisions affecting Government schools cannot be evaluated purely from an administrative perspective. They necessitate an educational, social, institutional, and public-interest assessment. The voices of experienced teachers, educationists, career professionals, and parents should be heard before decisions of this nature are implemented.
Strengthen the system instead of outsourcing its responsibilities.
Should our educational institutions require enhanced evaluation methodologies, it is imperative to develop superior assessment frameworks.
If our educators necessitate further training, the provision of high-quality professional development is essential.
In instances where our institutions require technological advancements and resources, strategic investment in these areas is warranted.
Should supplementary expertise be deemed necessary, the engagement of qualified professionals must be conducted with transparency.
Furthermore, if systemic deficiencies are identified, these must be addressed through comprehensive reform and accountability measures.
However, it is crucial to exercise caution to avoid a scenario where the government progressively divests itself of functions that its own institutions are inherently capable of executing.
Having dedicated over three decades to the fields of education and career counseling, I articulate this with a profound sense of responsibility: I am deeply concerned that a relatively fundamental educational function would necessitate the involvement of a private coaching entity within public educational institutions.
This situation ought to provoke internal systemic introspection, rather than being celebrated as an outsourcing success.
Our public educational institutions merit a higher standard.
Public schools are not merely physical structures where instructional activities occur; they are foundational institutions of public trust. They embody the State's unwavering commitment to furnishing educational opportunities to every child, irrespective of their socioeconomic standing.
Consequently, their credibility must be rigorously safeguarded.
We should endeavor to fortify public schools as epicenters of excellence, learning, and opportunity, simultaneously empowering their teaching staff and reinstating public confidence in the system.
The overarching objective should never be to cultivate an environment wherein public educational institutions gradually transform into extensions of private coaching organizations or corporate-driven admission frameworks.
Our children are entitled to a public education system that demonstrates faith in its own educators, strategically invests in its own infrastructure, and assumes full accountability for its outcomes.
"The responsibility for strengthening public educational institutions should not be outsourced; instead, we must reinforce these institutions, empower their educators, and hold decision-makers accountable."

Email:----------------zehgeer@gmail.com