By Avner Pariat
The Education system in Meghalaya is in crisis. With the state ranking lowest in India’s national Performance Grading Index (PGI), and with indicators for learning outcomes, infrastructure, and governance scoring far below the national average, the message is clear: business as usual is failing. The challenges are structural, long-standing, and deeply political. But unless policy-makers are willing to make hard, unpopular, and sometimes painful decisions, Meghalaya will continue to fall short of its constitutional promise to provide quality education to every child.
This article outlines some difficult but unavoidable choices that the government must face to reform the Education sector. Each decision comes with costs, but postponing them has already exacted an even greater toll on student learning, teacher morale, and public finance.
Merge or Close Under-Enrolled Schools
Meghalaya maintains over 14,000 schools for a population of about 40 lakh. However, as per the Education Department’s Discussion Paper 2025, 206 schools have zero enrolment and over 2,200 have fewer than ten students. Many of these are located in the same villages or on the same campus as other institutions. Continuing to operate these schools stretches resources thin, keeps teachers in posts where they have no impact, and prevents the buildup of quality infrastructure and staff in other viable institutions. The government must conduct a rationalization exercise, closing or merging under-enrolled schools and redirecting those resources to institutions with the capacity to serve students effectively. While politically sensitive, particularly in rural constituencies, this reform is necessary to ensure educational investment delivers solid results.
Eliminate Duplication in the UDISE+ Database
Due to opportunistic registration of multiple school levels (LP, UP, Secondary, Higher Secondary) as separate entities, thousands of schools in Meghalaya are double- or triple-counted in the official UDISE+ system. In reality, around 6,700 of the 14,582 listed schools are part of grouped institutions. This artificial inflation distorts infrastructure metrics and drives down the state’s PGI score. Consolidating records to reflect unique school entities will provide accurate data for planning, improve monitoring, and boost the state’s national ranking. But this also means withdrawing duplicate grants, which will meet resistance from school management committees accustomed to multiple funding streams.
Phase Out the Patchwork of Grant-in-Aid Schemes
Over ten different Grant-in-Aid (GIA) schemes currently operate in Meghalaya, including deficit, deficit-pattern, adhoc, and subject-specific schemes such as the Hindi Grant or Science Grant. Each has its own eligibility, salary structures, and administrative requirements. This complex system absorbs enormous bureaucratic energy and fragments oversight. Consolidating these under a single Meghalaya Education Grant (MEG) will streamline funding and allow for performance-based criteria to guide future increases. However, vested interests that benefit from legacy entitlements and discretionary grants will resist this rationalization. We the Public must fight them, the Government alone will not be able to do this.
Re-balance the Education Budget Towards Infrastructure
More than two-thirds of Meghalaya’s education budget is consumed by teacher salaries, with over 65% of that going to private institutions. Very little is left for improving school infrastructure – despite the fact that only 26% of schools have electricity and fewer than half have basic washroom/toilet facilities. To make a visible difference in the learning environment, the state must study salaries, redeploy surplus staff, and earmark a fixed share of education spending for infrastructure upgrades. This fiscal rebalancing might be very unpopular with teacher unions but is essential for long-term benefit of the system.
Link Public Funding to School Performance and Fee Transparency
At present, schools receive government aid regardless of their academic performance, enrollment trends, or the fees they charge. Some institutions continue to receive large grants while performing poorly or imposing heavy financial burdens on parents. A reformed system must tie funding to results: schools should demonstrate improvements in attendance, pass rates, and infrastructure standards. Moreover, a fee regulation authority must ensure that public funds are not used to subsidize profit-making by private schools. This accountability framework will be contested by private operators but is key to ensuring public money delivers public value.
Enforce Teacher Deployment and Pay Equity
The current system creates gross disparities in teacher salaries. Government-paid ‘deficit’ teachers can earn over Rs 1 lakh per month, while equally qualified peers appointed by school management committees (SMCs) earn just Rs 10,000. In the same institution, such disparities breed resentment and undermine teamwork. Policymakers must move toward standardizing pay scales, rationalizing deployment based on need, and reducing excess staffing in some areas. This would require politically sensitive steps such as offering voluntary retirement or retraining for redeployment. Additionally, the underpaid, overworked oftentimes younger teachers might be more willing to listen and work with the education department.
Invest in Flagship
Government Schools to Challenge Private Dominance
One of the reasons private schools dominate is because many parents see no quality alternative in the public sector. To reverse this, the state must build a network of flagship government schools – a Pine Mount for every district – offering strong academics and quality modern facilities. These schools would serve as benchmarks, raise expectations, and put pressure on private institutions to improve. The capital investment required would be significant even for renovations, but the returns in terms of public trust and educational equity would be transformative. I recall one writer lamenting that Meghalaya’s Educational System had become privatised. I don’t recall a time when it wasn’t. For over a hundred years now, Private schools have been allowed to dominate the landscape but it is time for the state to show that it too can be entrepreneurial. The lesson is clear from the best performers in the country: Education has to be led by the Government. Private can only supplement the effort.
Require Full Financial and Academic Disclosure from Private Grantees
Private schools receiving government grants must be held to the same standards of transparency and reporting as public institutions. This includes audited financial statements, verified enrolment data, teacher attendance records, and academic performance reports. Grants should be contingent on this compliance. Resistance from private school management is expected, but disclosure is a non-negotiable condition for receiving taxpayer funds.
Extend Provident Fund Coverage to All
Currently, only deficit teachers benefit from the Centralized Provident Fund Scheme. However, the law does not exclude others. Extending this benefit to all aided staff would ensure fair and dignified retirement for thousands of teachers. It will require contributions from both employees and employers, and will likely be opposed on cost grounds, but it is a necessary step toward equitable treatment and financial security. This is a low-hanging fruit which the government must pluck.
Finally, I want to add that implementing any of these reforms in a top-down manner will provoke backlash. A structured, inclusive plan for this great transition is essential. This includes consulting with parents, communities and teachers and yes, the school management committees as well. The state must also invest in communication to build public support and explain the long-term benefits of these essential reforms. Meghalaya’s education sector will not improve through incrementalism. It demands courageous leadership willing to take hard, politically unpopular decisions in the interest of long-term public good. The state must rationalize its school network, reform its funding structures, enforce accountability, and reinvest in public education. These choices are difficult but necessary.