When the Bell Rings Off-Clock: Why Nearly One-in-Three School Students in India Use Private Coaching

What the Numbers Say: Coaching’s Growing Shadow in Indian Classrooms

1. According to the recent Comprehensive Modular Survey (CMS) on Education 2025 (80th round of NSS, done April-June 2025), 27% of school students in India are taking private coaching or tuition in the current academic year.
2. Breakdown of urban vs rural: ~30.7% in urban areas, ~25.5% in rural areas.
3. Household spending on coaching:
4. • In urban areas: ~₹3,988/year per student
5. • In rural areas: ~₹1,793/year per student
6. At higher secondary level (Classes 11–12), the gap widens: urban families spend around ₹9,950/year, whereas rural families spend about ₹4,548/year for coaching.
7. Coaching cost per student grows with educational level. For example:
8. • Pre-primary: ~₹525
9. • Primary: ~₹1,313
10. • Middle school: ~₹2,189
11. • Secondary: ~₹4,183
12. • Higher secondary: ~₹6,384 nationally (averaging rural + urban)
13. Funding source: ~95% of households report that other family members are the main contributors for children’s school + coaching expenses. Scholarships or government aid are minimal in comparison.
14. In some states/UTs, the coaching uptake is much higher. For example, in Delhi, about 39.1% of students now take coaching, well above the national average.

These numbers show that private coaching is no longer a fringe phenomenon—it’s a major part of how Indian students prepare for school and exams.

Understanding the Gaps: Urban‐Rural, Level, and Economic Differences

1. Urban vs Rural: Students in cities are likelier to take coaching. Probably because of more availability of coaching centres, perceived higher competition, and higher expectations. Rural areas lag but are catching up slowly.
2. Education level: Coaching increases sharply as students move to higher secondary levels. Younger students (primary or pre-primary) have lower rates of coaching, but participation is non-negligible.
3. Cost burden: Coaching adds to the financial load of households. Urban families pay much more—due to higher fees, possibly more specialized tuition, travel, materials. For rural families, although rates are lower, the cost is still significant relative to income.
4. School type: Students in private schools tend to be more likely to take coaching (but the survey also shows many government school students do). The perceived quality, competition, peer expectations differ by school type.

Societal Context: Why Coaching Has Become So Normal

1. Competition & Exams Culture: Academic exams, boards, and entrance tests are seen as decisive in life. Even school marks are deeply valued for college admissions. This puts a lot of pressure on students and parents to seek even small edges.
2. Perceived Gaps in School Education: Many parents believe that regular school teaching doesn’t cover enough depth, or doesn’t prepare students for exams fully. Thus, coaching is seen as supplementing school learning.
3. Parental Aspirations & Social Status: Education is often seen as a major route for social mobility. Parents feel that investing in coaching is investing in the child’s future—sometimes more so than in many other expenditures.
4. Peer Effects and Social Proof: If many students in your class, or among friends, take coaching, then the rest feel they should too. It becomes a norm, almost an expectation.
5. Urban Lifestyle & Resources: In cities, access to coaching centers, commuting, exposure to competitive peers, better internet, etc. make coaching more feasible.
6. Policy & School System Factors: Sometimes the school examination systems, curriculum loads, and evaluation criteria push students towards supplemental coaching. Also, in areas where teacher shortage or school quality is low, private tuition fills the gap.

The Human Mind & Choice: Do Students Really Want Coaching?

This is complex. Several psychological, cultural, and social pressures are involved. Some key angles:

1. Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation: Some students genuinely feel they need help, love learning, or want to prepare well—so they willingly opt for coaching. Others might do it because of external pressure: parents, peers, fear of failure.
2. Autonomy & Choice: Many students don’t feel they have real choice. If siblings, schoolmates are taking coaching, or if parents believe coaching is essential, the student might go along even if it's not their preference.
3. Stress & Performance Anxiety: Coaching sometimes also adds stress. When the mind is always focused on “keeping up,” “not falling behind,” or “getting top marks,” it may cause anxiety. Some students might prefer balanced learning but feel forced into coaching to avoid regret.
4. Opportunity Cost: Coaching can consume time, energy, and money. Some students lose out on hobbies, relaxation, or non‐academic interests. Whether coaching is chosen or imposed, these trade-offs matter.
5. Cognitive Biases & Perceived Value: Often people believe “more hours → better results,” even if that is not always true. The visibility of toppers, advertisements, success stories amplify that belief.

Data From Indian Society: Real Stories & Examples

1. In Gujarat, about 20.8% of students from pre-primary to Class 12 take private coaching—significantly below the national average (~27%) but rising with class level. For example, higher secondary students in Gujarat: ~35.5%.
2. In Delhi, around 39% of students are taking private coaching—much higher than national average. Also, spending in Delhi is often double national averages.
3. Many rural families struggle to afford coaching, yet still stretch budgets to do so because of the perceived long-term benefit.

Philosophical View & Role of Parents: Guiding vs Pushing

1. On the Mind of the Student: The mind wants agency. When a student feels they are choosing coaching themselves—because they want to improve, enjoy a subject, or perform better—they are more likely to do well. But when it’s external pressure, the motivation tends to be weaker or mixed with anxiety.
2. Parental Role: Parents often act from love, desire for their child’s success, fear of failure. But sometimes good intentions may lead to overemphasis on grades or external validation at cost of personal growth, creativity, or happiness.
3. Balance & Wellbeing: Philosophers and psychologists suggest that education should nurture critical thinking, curiosity, resilience—not just exam scores. Coaching can aid in exam prep, but it should not replace holistic development.
4. Questioning Purpose: What is coaching for? Is it for building deeper understanding, or just getting marks? Students and parents both benefit from clarity here: if the goal is only to clear an exam, then coaching might be fine; but if the goal is learning, understanding, life skills, then other ways (school, mentors, self study, project work) matter more.

What This Means for the Future

1. Policy Implications: Surveys like this may lead governments to look at regulating coaching costs, ensuring quality, or improving school education so coaching becomes less necessary.
2. Educational Reform: NEP 2020 emphasizes reducing rote learning and improving school quality. If implemented well, some demand for coaching might reduce.
3. Digital Options & Hybrid Models: As costs and time become constraints, online/hybrid coaching might be preferred, especially for rural areas or for students who can’t travel.
4. Parental Awareness & Student Agency: More awareness about mental health, student stress, and promoting student choice may shift how much coaching is seen as “must.”

What are the thoughts?

1. Private coaching has become deeply embedded in Indian education—nearly one in three students is using it.
2. While numbers and spending are rising, so are costs, and inequalities (urban vs rural, wealthy vs economically weaker) are becoming more visible.
3. Students often are not fully “choosing” coaching; many are influenced strongly by parents, peers, norms, fear of falling behind.
4. Coaching can be beneficial—but only if balanced, if students have voice in decision, and if their mental health & broader development are not compromised.