Education is often celebrated as the great equaliser of society, yet in reality it frequently mirrors the very inequalities it is meant to erase. This truth struck me profoundly during the Board Viva examinations for Class 11th at GGHSS, where I stood not merely as an examiner but as a silent observer of social contrast. What unfolded before me was not just an academic assessment but a reflection of two parallel worlds existing within the same classroom. A large gathering of students appeared for the viva, and as the process continued, a visible pattern began to emerge. Students from upper middle class backgrounds walked into the examination room with confidence etched into their posture. They were articulate, relaxed, and unafraid to express themselves. Their body language suggested familiarity with structured questioning and evaluative environments. It was evident that such academic encounters were not new to them. Out of curiosity and concern, I asked these students about their preparation. The answers were revealing. Many confidently named reputed coaching institutes such as Aakash and Allen. Their responses carried an undertone of assurance, not just in their preparation but in their social security. These students had strong family backing, financial stability, and a support system that allowed them to focus solely on learning. They studied in environments free from worries about household income, domestic stress, or resource limitations. Even their appearance spoke volumes. Branded clothes, quality shoes, and a general sense of grooming subtly highlighted their socio economic status. While these may appear superficial details, they play a powerful role in shaping self perception. Confidence, in this context, was not merely an individual achievement. It was cultivated through privilege, stability, and sustained exposure to opportunities. On the other side of the spectrum were students from lower middle class families. Their experience was markedly different. Many entered the viva room with hesitation, eyes lowered, voices trembling. Their answers, though sometimes conceptually sound, were delivered with uncertainty. Fear of making mistakes overshadowed their knowledge. It was not a lack of intelligence but a lack of confidence that held them back. When asked about coaching or external preparation, their responses were deeply human and painfully honest. Some said they studied only in school. Others mentioned relying on online resources, often irregularly. A few openly spoke about family issues, financial stress, and responsibilities beyond their age. These students were not just preparing for exams; they were negotiating survival, expectations, and emotional pressure simultaneously. The contrast between the two groups was stark. Upper middle class families can comfortably invest two lakh rupees or more in coaching fees, while many lower middle class families hesitate to spend on a monthly internet recharge. For some households, even owning a smartphone is a struggle. This disparity directly influences academic exposure, communication skills, and self belief.

What is most concerning is that over time, this gap becomes internalised. Students begin to associate confidence with class and silence with limitation. Those from privileged backgrounds speak freely, even when unsure. Those from constrained backgrounds hesitate, even when capable. Education, instead of levelling the field, risks reinforcing social hierarchies if this reality is not consciously addressed. As educators in government institutions, we carry a moral and professional responsibility to minimise this gap by every possible means. Our role extends far beyond completing syllabi and conducting examinations. We must actively work to create classrooms where confidence is taught, not inherited. Encouragement, sensitivity, and inclusive teaching practices are essential tools in this mission. Teachers must consciously engage quieter students, provide them with platforms to speak, and reassure them that mistakes are part of learning, not a measure of worth. Mentorship becomes crucial. Sometimes a single word of validation from a teacher can counter years of social conditioning. Government schools must become spaces where economic background does not dictate intellectual visibility.
The coaching industry also has a responsibility to reflect on its social role. Coaching centres are not merely commercial enterprises; they influence the educational ecosystem of the nation. As responsible citizens, those working in the coaching field must acknowledge that talent exists beyond affordability. Fair opportunities, need based scholarships, and inclusive programs should not be marketing tools but moral commitments. When coaching becomes accessible only to the affluent, it deepens educational inequality. The goal of education should be empowerment, not exclusion. A system where confidence can be purchased while potential remains unheard is fundamentally flawed.
The government, too, must step in with thoughtful and practical policy frameworks. Strengthening government schools, providing free or subsidised digital access, ensuring trained counsellors in schools, and introducing structured support systems for first generation learners are no longer optional. They are necessities.
Family pressure is another invisible force shaping student performance. Many lower middle class students carry the weight of expectations, financial anxiety, and future uncertainty. This pressure often pushes them onto the back foot even before they begin. Policies addressing student mental health, parental awareness programs, and academic counselling can play a transformative role.
Education policy must move beyond infrastructure and examination results. It must address emotional equity. A confident student is not born; a confident student is nurtured. When systems recognise this, classrooms can become spaces of genuine social mobility.
The experience at the viva was a reminder that inequality does not always shout. Sometimes it whispers through hesitation, silence, and lowered eyes. If educators, coaching institutions, and policymakers work together with empathy and responsibility, this whisper can be transformed into a voice.
Only then can education truly serve its purpose, not as a mirror of society’s divisions, but as a bridge that connects potential with possibility.

Email:-----------------------------umairulumar77@gmail.com