The recent circular by the Jammu and Kashmir government banning government school teachers from conducting private tuitions is not just an ill-conceived policy but also raises troubling questions about its intent and beneficiaries. While the government claims to uphold the integrity of the public education system, this move seems to pave the way for private coaching centers to monopolize and exploit the education sector, burdening parents with exorbitant fees.
Winter vacations in the Kashmir Valley stretch for over two months due to the harsh climate, leaving schools closed during this period. Instead of allowing teachers to utilize this downtime productively, providing much-needed academic support to students, the government has chosen to issue a blanket ban. This not only denies students access to affordable, quality tuitions but also compels them to turn to private coaching centers that charge excessive fees, turning education into a luxury that many families can barely afford.
One fails to understand the rationale behind such a draconian measure. Are government school teachers expected to sit idle during their long vacations? Should students preparing for board exams or competitive tests be left to fend for themselves? The circular lacks any semblance of foresight or planning. No alternative mechanisms have been proposed to ensure students receive the academic help they require, especially during a critical time in their educational journey.
What makes this ban even more problematic is its clear bias in favor of private coaching centers. While government school teachers are being barred from conducting private tuitions, these centers, operating unchecked and unregulated, continue to charge exorbitant fees, often with subpar teaching quality. Instead of cracking down on these profit-driven institutions, the government has chosen to penalize educators who were offering affordable solutions to students. This raises a serious question: is the ban truly about improving education, or is it about protecting the business interests of private coaching centers?
The directive also ignores the financial realities of government teachers. With modest salaries and rising living costs, many teachers rely on private tuitions as a supplementary source of income. The ban not only deprives them of this opportunity but also risks demoralizing a workforce already grappling with inadequate resources and systemic challenges in public schools.
Instead of imposing arbitrary bans, the government should focus on addressing the root causes of why private tuitions have become a necessity in the first place. Poor infrastructure, outdated curricula, and inadequate teacher-student ratios in government schools have forced parents to seek external academic support for their children. A meaningful solution would involve strengthening the public education system, investing in teacher training, and ensuring accountability during regular school hours.
Moreover, the government must regulate private coaching centers that have turned education into a profit-driven enterprise. Setting fee caps, ensuring transparency in their operations, and providing scholarships for underprivileged students would be far more effective steps than curbing teachers’ ability to support students during vacations.
In conclusion, the ban on private tuitions by government school teachers is not only illogical but also appears to serve vested interests rather than the greater good. It unfairly targets teachers, disadvantages students, and benefits private coaching centers at the expense of parents’ hard-earned money. The government must revisit this policy and adopt a more balanced, inclusive approach to improving the quality of education in Jammu and Kashmir. Anything less is a betrayal of its responsibility to students, teachers, and the public at large.
