Learning as Privilege: Why Higher Education Remains Out of Reach for India’s Youth
Abstract
The history of formal education in India is marked by a persistent contradiction: while educational institutions have expanded dramatically in number, access to education—particularly higher education—has remained structurally unequal. From its colonial origins as a mechanism of governance and elite reproduction to its post-independence role in nation-building and, later, its neoliberal transformation into a market commodity, education in India has rarely functioned as a universal social right. This article traces the evolution of higher education from the mid-nineteenth century to 2026, situating institutional growth within demographic change, caste and gender hierarchies, and shifting state priorities. Drawing on census data, All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) reports, and policy documents, it demonstrates that despite the proliferation of universities and colleges—particularly after liberalisation and again after 2014—only about one-fourth of eligible youth are currently enrolled in higher education. Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, women, and rural populations remain disproportionately excluded, especially from technical and professional institutions. The paper argues that this exclusion is not merely a failure of implementation but the outcome of long-standing policy choices: chronic underfunding, delayed recognition of education as a right, reliance on private provisioning, and the weakening of public institutions. The failure to universalise education, it concludes, has deep consequences for democracy, citizenship, and social stability in contemporary India.
I. Introduction: Education as Power, Not as a Right
Education in India has never been a neutral or purely benevolent project. From the colonial period to the present, decisions about who is educated, at what level, and at whose expense have reflected prevailing power structures. While the language of policy has increasingly invoked inclusion, equity, and access, the lived reality of Indian education remains one of rationed opportunity.
India today possesses one of the largest higher education systems in the world, with over 52,000 colleges and more than 1,300 universities. Yet fewer than 30% of young people aged 18–23 are enrolled in higher education. This paradox—massive institutional expansion alongside persistent exclusion—forms the central concern of this article.
The analysis proceeds historically, tracing how education evolved from a feudal and colonial privilege into a partially massified but deeply unequal system. It asks a set of interrelated questions:
Why did education remain the preserve of a narrow elite for so long? Why did independence not lead to universalisation? Why has the post-1991 expansion failed to deliver equitable access? And why, even after education was declared a fundamental right, does higher education remain inaccessible to the majority of India’s youth?
II. Education Before the Modern State: Feudal Knowledge and Social Closure
Prior to colonial intervention, education in India existed within diverse institutional forms—pathshalas, gurukuls, madrasas, and maktabs. These systems were not insignificant; historical studies suggest that basic literacy was more widespread than colonial narratives later admitted. However, access to advanced learning was tightly regulated by caste, gender, and religion.
Knowledge functioned as social capital, closely guarded by dominant groups. Women, Dalits, Adivasis, and lower occupational castes were systematically excluded. Education did not serve as a vehicle of mobility but as a means of preserving hierarchy.
This social closure shaped the colonial encounter. When the British introduced formal education, they did so not to democratise knowledge but to restructure elite formation.
III. Colonial Education and the Birth of the University System (1850–1900)
The colonial state’s education policy was guided by administrative convenience rather than social transformation. Macaulay’s Minute on Education (1835) made explicit the aim of creating a small English-educated class to assist colonial governance.
The establishment of universities in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras in 1857 marked the formal beginning of modern higher education. These universities were affiliating and examining bodies, not teaching universities. Their primary role was credentialing, not knowledge production.
By 1900, India had only about five universities and roughly 150 colleges.
Table 1: Higher Education Expansion, 1857–1900
Indicator | 1857 | 1900 |
Universities | 3 | 5 |
Colleges | ~20 | ~150 |
Literacy (15+) | <2% | ~5% |
Population | ~200 million | ~240 million |
Higher education served less than one-tenth of one percent of the population. Its beneficiaries were overwhelmingly urban, male, and upper caste.
IV. Slow Growth and Persistent Exclusion: 1901–1947
In the early twentieth century, nationalist pressures forced the colonial state to modestly expand education. Universities were established in Lahore, Allahabad, and elsewhere, and colleges increased in number.
By 1910, there were approximately 170–180 colleges affiliated with five universities. By independence in 1947, the number of colleges had risen to 636 and universities to 19.
Table 2: Higher Education under Late Colonial Rule
Indicator | 1901 | 1947 |
Universities | 5 | 19 |
Colleges | ~150 | 636 |
Literacy | ~5% | ~12% |
GER(Gross Enrolment Ratio,) | <1% | ~1.5% |
Despite this growth, higher education remained socially exclusive. SC/ST participation was negligible, women’s enrolment minimal, and rural access extremely limited.
Colonial India thus bequeathed to the postcolonial state a structurally elitist education system.
V. Independence and the Developmentalist Turn (1947–1977)
The post-independence Indian state recognised education as central to nation-building. The establishment of IITs, AIIMS, and central universities reflected a belief in scientific and technical modernity.
However, the expansion of higher education occurred without universalisation of school education. This created a narrow funnel: only those who survived multiple layers of social and economic filtering could aspire to higher education.
Table 3: Expansion after Independence
Indicator | 1947 | 1977 |
Universities | 19 | ~100 |
Colleges | 636 | ~4,000 |
GER (Gross Enrolment Ratio,) | ~1.5% | ~6% |
Female GER(Gross Enrolment Ratio,) | <2% | ~4% |
Higher education expanded in absolute numbers but remained inaccessible to the majority. Elite institutions absorbed disproportionate resources, while mass education lagged behind.
VI. Social Justice without Capacity: 1978–1990
The late 1970s and 1980s witnessed important political shifts, including the articulation of social justice demands. Reservation policies expanded access for SCs and STs in principle.
Yet this period was marked by stagnant public investment. Colleges and universities multiplied without adequate faculty, infrastructure, or funding.
Table 4: Pre-Liberalisation Phase
Indicator | 1978 | 1990 |
Universities | ~100 | ~185 |
Colleges | ~4,000 | ~7,500 |
GER(Gross Enrolment Ratio,) | ~6% | ~8% |
Access expanded slowly, but quality eroded, and regional disparities widened.
VII. Liberalisation and the Marketisation of Education (1991–2013)
The economic reforms of the early 1990s fundamentally altered the education sector. The state retreated from direct provisioning, encouraging private participation, particularly in professional and technical education.
Private colleges proliferated rapidly, especially in engineering, management, and medicine.
Table 5: Liberalisation Era Growth
Indicator | 1991 | 2013 |
Universities | ~185 | ~700 |
Colleges | ~7,500 | ~38,000 |
GER(Gross Enrolment Ratio,) | ~8% | ~23% |
Private Share (Colleges) | ~30% | ~65% |
While enrolment increased, access became increasingly mediated by ability to pay. Education was transformed into a commodity, financed through family savings and debt.
VIII. Expansion without Universal Access: 2014–2026
Since 2014, India has witnessed another phase of rapid institutional growth. By 2025–26, the country had over 52,000 colleges and 1,338 universities.
Table 6: Higher Education Expansion, 2014–2026
Indicator | 2014–15 | 2025–26 |
Colleges | 38,498 | 52,081 |
Universities | ~760 | 1,338 |
Enrollment | ~3.3 crore | ~4.9 crore |
GER(Gross Enrolment Ratio,) | ~23% | ~28.4% |
Despite this scale, nearly 70–75 million eligible youth remain outside higher education.
IX. Who Is Left Out? Caste, Gender, and Region
Access to higher education remains deeply unequal.
Table 7: GER(Gross Enrolment Ratio,) by Social Group (2025–26)
Group | GER |
Overall | ~28.4% |
SC | ~25% |
ST | ~18% |
Women (Overall) | ~29% |
ST Women | <15% |
SC/ST students remain underrepresented in elite technical and medical institutions. Regional disparities are stark, with states like Bihar and Jharkhand lagging far behind urbanised regions.
X. Public vs Private Institutions: Capacity and Responsibility
Although private institutions dominate numerically, public institutions educate a disproportionate share of students.
Table 8: Institutional Share and Enrollment
Category | Govt/Gov-Aided | Private |
Colleges | ~21.4% | ~78.6% |
Enrollment Share | ~34.5% | ~66.3% |
This underscores the continued relevance of public education in ensuring affordability and scale.
XI. Policy Failures and Structural Constraints
Three interlinked failures define India’s education crisis:
1. Delayed Recognition of Education as a Right
Education became a fundamental right only in 2002, and higher education remains outside enforceable guarantees.
2. Chronic Underfunding
Public expenditure on education remains around 3% of GDP—far below the 6% recommended by the Kothari Commission and later policy frameworks.
3. Unregulated Market Expansion
Private dominance without robust regulation has led to uneven quality, high costs, and exclusion.
XII.Consequences for Democracy and Citizenship
The failure to universalise education has profound consequences:
Youth unemployment and underemployment
Informalisation of labour
Social alienation and political polarisation
Brain drain
Weak democratic participation
Education is central not only to economic development but to the creation of informed, responsible citizens.
Conclusion
India’s education system has grown enormously in scale but remains deeply unequal in access. This is not a technical failure but a political one. Without a decisive commitment to universal, publicly funded education—especially at the higher level—India risks squandering its demographic advantage and undermining its democratic future.
References
1. All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE), various years. Ministry of Education, Government of India.
2. Census of India, 1911; 1951.
3. Government of India (1966): Report of the Education Commission (Kothari Commission).
4. Government of India (2020): National Education Policy 2020.
5. Tilak, J B G (1993): “Financing Higher Education in India,” Economic & Political Weekly.
6. Béteille, André (2009): Universities at the Crossroads.
7. Deshpande, Satish (2013): Contemporary India.
8. Nambissan, Geetha B (2010): “Privatisation of Education in India,” Economic & Political Weekly.
9. World Bank (2023): Education and Skills Development in India.
No comments:
Post a Comment