Shadow Classrooms: Grip of Private Tuitions on Indian Education

Private tuitions/coaching have become a defining feature of Indian schooling. What began as supplementary help for struggling students has evolved into a parallel system that cuts across income groups, school types, and regions. Large class sizes, uneven teaching quality, exam-driven learning, and rising parental aspirations for better academic outcomes have all contributed to this reliance on private tutoring/coaching. The Comprehensive Modular Survey on Education (CMS-E), conducted by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) as part of the 80th Round of the National Sample Survey (April–June 2025), provides a nationally representative snapshot of how households navigate this dual system. Drawing on data from the CMS-E, the article examines how students are distributed across school types,  the prevalence of private tuition and coaching alongside formal education, household spending on education, and how these costs change across different levels of enrolment.

Government schools dominate rural enrolment; private schools lead in urban areas

CMS-E classifies schools into four types based on their management and funding structure. Government schools are run by or on behalf of the central, state, or local governments and are fully funded by them. Government-aided schools are privately managed but receive government support for staff salaries and maintenance. Private unaided (recognised) schools are managed independently without government funding but are officially recognised under state or central regulations. In contrast, unrecognised schools lack formal approval and often fail to meet the minimum infrastructure and quality norms set by the Right to Education (RTE) Act, which was enacted to ensure all children have access to safe and standardised schooling.

Figure 1 shows government schools form the core of rural education, while private schools account for the majority of enrolment in urban areas. In rural areas, two out of three students (66.1 percent) study in government schools, a share more than double that in urban areas (30.1 percent).  In contrast, private schools in urban areas enrol one in two students (51.4 percent), twice the share seen in rural areas (24.3 percent).

Seven in ten rural students taking tuition attend government schools

Figure 2 shows the share of students taking private tuitions/coaching in each sector, highlighting which school types contribute most to tuition in rural and urban areas. In rural areas, seven out of ten tuition-taking students (67.3 percent) come from government schools, which is over five times the number from government-aided schools (12.8 percent) and more than three times the number from private schools (19.4 percent). In urban areas, nearly half of students enrolled in private tuition/coaching (47 percent) come from private schools, about 1.5 times more than those from government schools (32.5 percent) and over twice the number from government-aided schools (19.8 percent).

Private tuition/coaching consume nearly three-quarters of rural and half of urban schooling costs

Figure 3 shows that rural households spend around ₹9,500 on boys’ schooling and ₹8,000 on girls’, with nearly three-quarters of this amount spent additionally on private tuition/coaching: ₹7,300 for boys and ₹7,000 for girls. Urban households spend roughly three times more on schooling, around ₹25,000 for boys and ₹22,500 for girls, and roughly half of this amount is the average cost of private tuition/coaching (₹13,600 for boys and ₹12,500 for girls).

Gender differences in schooling expenditure exist but are relatively modest compared with broader sectoral patterns. Figure 3 shows that rural boys’ school expenses exceed girls’ by around 1.2 times ( ₹9469 versus ₹8081, respectively), while urban boys’ schooling costs are about 1.1 times higher than girls’ (₹25160 versus ₹22,452, respectively).  However, private tuition/coaching expenditure is almost equal across genders in each sector. 

Tuition costs rise to match school fees from grade 9 onwards

The levels of enrolment in school are categorized as: Pre-primary for children below grade 1, Primary for grades 1–5, Middle for grades 6–8, Secondary for grades 9–10, and Senior Secondary for grades 11–12. The composition of education expenditure shifts across schooling stages, revealing how households balance formal schooling costs with private tuition/coaching as academic demands evolve.  Figure 4 shows as children progress through the education system, private tuition/coaching claims an almost equal share of schooling costs, reflecting its growing centrality in academic preparation.

Figure 4 shows that at the pre-primary level, roughly seven out of ten rupees (72.1 percent) are spent on school fees, with just under three out of ten (27.9 percent) allocated to private tuition/coaching. By primary school, the latter claims about one-third of total education expenses, rising to nearly 37 percent in middle school, reflecting growing parental reliance on extra support as academic pressures mount. By the time Indian students reach the secondary and senior secondary level , Figure 4 illustrates, total spending on private tuition/coaching (43 percent and 46.6 percent, respectively) nearly equals the cost of formal schooling. 

Private tuition/coaching have been a central part of the educational landscape in India, yet they coexist with formal education in a way that places strain on household resources, eroding decades of progress toward accessible schooling and widening existing inequalities. Even with these expenditures, the quality of tutoring is not guaranteed. Students from households with greater financial and social means can avail themselves of longer hours, higher-quality tutors, and targeted exam preparation,  whereas others are constrained by cost, location, or availability. These disparities affect not only access but also learning outcomes and long-term academic trajectories, underscoring the critical challenge of ensuring that additional educational support serves as an inclusive opportunity rather than a mechanism that reinforces existing inequities.