By Avner Pariat
The Education sector in Meghalaya stands at a crucial crossroads. While education is universally acknowledged as a fundamental driver of human development, social mobility, and state-building, the current system has become unsustainable – drained by inefficiencies and dominated by private institutions that consume copious amounts of public funds. The Education Department’s recently released Discussion Paper on the Consolidation of Government Grants reveals a troubling pattern: private schools and colleges, though largely funded by the state, remain structurally unaccountable, operationally fragmented, and resistant to reform. It is high time for the government to reclaim control and establish a system grounded in equity, performance, and transparency.
As per the Discussion Paper, private educational institutions in Meghalaya receive the lion’s share of government funding, with 67% of the Rs 2,197.39 crore annual salary expenditure directed towards their teachers and lecturers. That means that every year the Government allocates Rs 1,472.25 crore to private educational institutions. That is just for salaries with little left over for infrastructural intervention and other improvements.
Yet, it is my opinion that these same institutions operate with limited transparency and little obligation to demonstrate outcomes. Most of the deficit and aided private schools are run with significant government support, yet they maintain private-style autonomy over admissions, fee structures, and internal operations – often excluding the very communities whose taxes fund them. This has left many citizens visibly disappointed and angry. For them, it is not a matter of the macro-level data quoted in the Discussion Paper but how they are made to feel. And many feel (and have felt for a long time now) that their children’s futures cannot be handled so haphazardly by private players without governmental oversight. If there is no mechanism to regulate fees, these school will continue to burden parents with high fees – essentially double-dipping into both public and private pockets without delivering commensurate educational outcomes.
Again, in my opinion, very few of these private institutions have shown significant improvements in student learning outcomes, infrastructure, and governance. Meghalaya ranks last in India’s Performance Grading Index (PGI), with especially poor scores in Learning Outcomes, Infrastructure, and Teacher Training – areas where many private institutions should have led, given the generous financial support they receive.
Many private schools have also exploited the fragmented Grant-in-Aid (GIA) system to multiply their claims. It is now common for a single institution to register as multiple schools—LP, UP, Secondary, and Higher Secondary—simply to access more grants. This has artificially inflated school numbers, distorted Unified District Information System for Education Plus (UDISE+) data, and weakened the government’s ability to plan and monitor effectively. 6,702 schools fall under this duplicative model, often operating on the same campus under different funding schemes.
This manipulation is not without consequences. Infrastructure indicators are diluted across artificially divided schools, resulting in falsely low coverage rates for electricity, water, and sanitation—thereby dragging down the state’s PGI scores and obscuring the real conditions of education delivery.
Perhaps the most alarming issue is the absence of performance-based accountability among private schools. Despite receiving government salaries, teachers in these institutions are often poorly monitored. School Management Committees (SMCs), which are supposed to ensure local oversight, lack the authority – or perhaps do not care – to take disciplinary action or enforce standards. As a result, absenteeism and even the use of proxy teachers remain widespread in private-aided schools, especially those under the deficit system.
Even within the same institution, as revealed in the Discussion Paper, the disparity in teacher pay is stark. Government-sanctioned teachers may earn up to Rs 1,00,000 per month while equally qualified staff appointed by the management earn as little as Rs 10,000. This internal inequity fosters resentment, erodes morale, and undermines the credibility of the teaching profession.
Despite their dependence on public funds, many private institutions have resisted consolidation, rationalization, and the introduction of performance-linked funding. The Private School Lobby (PSL) remains one of the most influential and powerful vested interest groups in the state, often deploying religious and minority status cards to lobby for and against numerous issues and reforms.
In addition, there are numerous fragmented teacher associations – over 25 – which though well-meaning, end up diverting the Education Department’s focus away from systemic reform and distracting administration through the continuous grievances they bring to the table. Grievances which could be fixed easily if reforms were allowed to be brought in immediately.
What can be done?
Given this scenario, the government has not only the right but the obligation to step in. The proposed Meghalaya Education Grant (MEG) scheme is a much-needed correction. By consolidating the existing GIA schemes into a single, rule-bound, performance-linked framework, the state can ensure that public funds serve public goals.
Key to this reform is aligning funding with outcomes. Schools and colleges should be rewarded for enrolment, infrastructure development, academic performance, and fee transparency—not for historical privilege or political influence. The MEG also promises greater autonomy to School Managing Committees (SMCs) and Governing Bodies, but this autonomy must come with responsibility and measurable targets.
Additionally, the government must demand transparency from private institutions. Full disclosure of finances, staff rosters, infrastructure status, and student performance must become prerequisites for continued funding.
The crisis in Meghalaya’s education system has been exacerbated by private institutions that benefit from public funds while evading public responsibility. These schools and colleges cannot continue to operate with minimal accountability and unchecked access to the state budget. It is time for the government to reassert its role—not to micromanage schools, but to set the rules of engagement, ensure fair distribution of resources, and protect the interests of students, teachers, and communities.
To truly challenge the dominance of private schools and restore balance in the education ecosystem, the Government of Meghalaya must invest in building and strengthening a robust network of high-quality government schools like Pine Mount, Shillong Public School etc at every district level. At present, many families turn to private institutions not out of preference, but out of necessity—driven by the perception that government schools lack basic infrastructure, qualified teachers, and academic rigour. This has created an uneven playing field where private schools, often subsidized by public funds, continue to thrive while public institutions struggle. By establishing well-equipped, professionally staffed, and transparently managed government schools that offer quality education at no or low cost, the state can create real competition and offer parents a viable, affordable alternative. This will not only increase access and equity but also force private schools to improve their standards in order to remain relevant. Strong public schools will serve as a benchmark for quality, ensuring that education remains a right, not a privilege.