Centre asks States to take steps to check high secondary school dropout rates
School dropout rates at the secondary level were found to be high in a dozen States, including Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, and Maharashtra, according to a report by a department of the Education Ministry.
Also Read | School dropout rates go from bad to worse in Bihar and Assam
The central government has suggested that the States take special steps to reduce the dropout rate as laid out in the National Education Policy, 2020. Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Jharkhand and Punjab were also found to have high school dropout rates.
The information on dropout rates at the secondary school level was obtained from the minutes of the meetings of the Project Approval Board (PAB), which comes under the Ministry of Education.
The meetings Samagra Shiksha programme for 2025-26 were held between April and May this year with different states.
According to officials, the government wants to achieve a 100% Gross Enrolment Rate (GER) at the school level by 2030 as targeted in the NEP, 2020 and considers dropout as a hindrance.
According to the PAB report, the dropout rate in 2023-24 at the secondary level in Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand, Tripura, Karnataka, Punjab, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu remains an area of concern.
The Centre has advised these states to initiate a special enrolment drive in the form of door-to-door surveys in school catchment areas to identify out-of-school children (OoSC) and to ensure their admissions.
In Bihar, as per the report, there were "large variations" in the reporting of data, especially on OoSC on the PRABANDH portal. The state was directed to initiate a special enrolment drive with the involvement of school management committees to ensure the identification and admission of all OoSC.
The report said 57.06 per cent of school students in Delhi study in government-run schools which make up 48.99 per cent of schools in the national capital.
The PAB expressed concern at the enrolment rate in government schools and suggested that Delhi should prioritise the improvement of Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) and Net Enrolment Ratio (NER) -- both measures of participation in education -- at higher secondary level in the coming years.
In West Bengal, the annual dropout rate at the secondary school level is 17.87%. The state was advised to check the data and work on factors responsible for the high dropout rate.
In Tamil Nadu, the dropout rate at the secondary level — 7.7% — needs to be addressed. The state needs to improve on its 82.9 per cent Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) at the higher secondary level and ensure 100 per cent as aimed in NEP.
In Karnataka, the dropout rate at secondary levels — 22.1% — is higher than the national average for secondary — 4.1% — and therefore, needs to be addressed, the report said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
34 minutes ago
- Time of India
OSHEC without a permanent vice-chairperson for around a year
Bhubaneswar: The Odisha State Higher Education Council (OSHEC) has not had a permanent vice-chairperson for nearly a year. Also, the term of the council's 15 members ended this year. The council became headless after the tenure of OSHEC vice-chairman Asoka Kumar Das ended in Aug last year. He received an extension before leaving office. To manage the affairs, higher education secretary Aravind Agrawal is in-charge of the council. The council's main mandate is to develop policies, educational reform-based schemes, and advise the state govt on achieving excellence and inclusivity in the higher education process and student outcomes, according to the OSHEC Act. The council also takes up a coordinating role with state universities for novel higher educational reform initiatives, depending on the need. It initiates and executes state-specific quality initiatives and brings together vice-chancellors and other eminent academicians on one platform to come up with common innovative solutions on issues. Siba Prasad Adhikary, who was in the search committee for selection of the first vice-chairperson of the council, said there should not be any delay in the appointment of the vice chairperson and members. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với mức chênh lệch giá thấp nhất IC Markets Đăng ký Undo Citing the OSHEC Act, 2017, he said vacancies shall be filled afresh, and the govt should initiate the process of filling any vacancy due to arise before a period of six months from the date of arising of such vacancy. Jayanta Mohapatra, former vice-chancellor of Berhampur University, said the council has a big role in preparing a common syllabus for undergraduate courses, conducting academic audits, monitoring research works, and scrutinising Mukhyamantri Research Innovation (MRI). "Its role is important in the implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) and other programmes in higher education institutions. It cannot become a defunct body. The vice-chairman of the council is a key figure who oversees the functioning of the council and takes important decisions related to the development of higher education in the state. Steps should be taken to address this issue," he added. Higher education secretary Aravind Agrawal could not be contacted for a reaction on the issue despite repeated attempts.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Delhi govt to implement uniform admission age of six years for class 1 from 2026-27; seeks public suggestions
New Delhi: The Delhi government has announced the implementation of a uniform minimum age of six years for admission to class 1 and a restructuring of the foundational stage of school education in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, starting from the 2026-27 academic session. According to a circular issued by the Directorate of Education (DoE), the foundational stage will be reorganised to include three years of pre-primary education prior to Class 1. The move aims to align Delhi's school system with the 5+3+3+4 structure recommended under the NEP. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Ductless Air Conditioners Are Selling Like Crazy [See Why] Keep Cool Click Here Undo The 5+3+3+4 structure introduced under the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 replaces the earlier 10+2 system and reorganizes school education into four developmental stages: five years of the foundational stage, three years of the preparatory stage, three years of the middle stage and four years of the secondary stage. The circular stated that children will be admitted to nursery (also referred to as pre-school or 'Bal Vatika') at the age of three years, to lower KG (pre-school 2) at four years and to upper KG (pre-school 3) at five years. Live Events The admission to class 1, according to the circular, will be allowed only upon completion of six years of age from the academic year 2026-27 onwards. The nomenclature for pre-primary classes is flexible and may be revised as required, it said. The Directorate of Education further stated that all government, government-aided and recognised unaided private schools under its purview are expected to comply with the revised age criteria and foundational structure as per the new directives. In an effort to make the process participatory, the Directorate has invited suggestions and inputs from stakeholders, including parents, teachers, students, the school management, subject experts, professionals, scholars and members of the public, before July 10, the circular added.
The Hindu
6 hours ago
- The Hindu
A critical look at UGC's recent regulations for Ph.D. guides, in the light of NEP 2020
Academic research in India is once again at a pivotal crossroads. In a recent directive, the University Grants Commission (UGC) has stipulated that research supervisors for Ph.D. candidates must belong to institutions with recognised postgraduate research centres. This move, intended to ensure quality control and institutional accountability, comes at a time when the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 is advocating the democratisation and decentralisation of research — starting right from undergraduate programmes. The apparent contradiction between these two directions raises fundamental questions about the future of research in India. Quality vs. accessibility On the surface, the UGC's intention seems well-founded. Research is a rigorous activity demanding access to institutional infrastructure, peer support, and ethical oversight. Restricting supervisors to PG research centres ensures that minimum academic standards are upheld. However, this measure inadvertently sidelines a vast cohort of capable researchers and teachers from UG colleges, who may possess strong academic credentials, extensive research experience, and proven track records but are now deemed ineligible solely due to institutional affiliation. The policy runs the risk of converting what should be an intellectually inclusive process into an exclusive club, centred around a few institutions with 'recognised' status. Is research potential a property of an institution or an individual? Individual merit This brings us to a crucial philosophical and pedagogical question: Should research supervision be institution-centric or individual-centric? There are several instances where professors in non-research PG colleges have published in high-impact journals, received fellowships, and mentored scholars informally with great success. By denying these individuals the ability to formally guide Ph.D. students, the system fails to recognise merit and performance outside bureaucratic boundaries. Ironically, NEP 2020 emphasises promoting research from the undergraduate level, allowing students to engage in high-level inquiry and innovation as early as the fourth year. How, then, do we reconcile this vision with a restrictive policy that limits who can guide future researchers? Repercussions The implications of this policy could be far-reaching. First, it may lead to overcrowding of researchers under a few supervisors in PG research centres, reducing the quality of mentorship. Second, it may demoralise qualified teachers in UG institutions who are eager to contribute to national knowledge production. Third, it creates a two-tiered system; those who are 'research-worthy' and those who are not, based not on talent but institutional status. Additionally, the assumption that only PG centres have the necessary infrastructure is increasingly outdated in the digital age. With open-access journals, virtual laboratories, collaborative tools, and global research networks, much of the academic work today transcends physical campuses. Need for balance A more nuanced framework is urgently needed: one that upholds academic quality while actively nurturing individual research talent. To begin with, merit-based accreditation should be introduced, allowing experienced faculty from non-PG research centres to independently apply to be Ph.D. guides based on academic credentials, such as publication records, citation indices, or leadership in funded research projects. In place of blanket bans on entire categories of institutions, regular institutional audits should be conducted to assess and certify research readiness in undergraduate colleges, ensuring that deserving institutions are not unfairly excluded. Additionally, collaborative mentorship models could be adopted, allowing for joint supervision where a researcher has a primary guide from a UG institution and a co-guide from a PG research centre, thereby encouraging mentorship diversity and inter-institutional learning. Policies must also be realigned with the NEP 2020's research-first vision, which calls for building research mentorship capacity across the academic spectrum — including UG colleges — instead of restricting it. Finally, investment in digital infrastructure is essential, enabling equitable access to research databases, tools, and collaborative platforms for all accredited institutions, thereby decentralising research power and making knowledge creation more inclusive. Research is not the privilege of a few but the responsibility of all in the academic ecosystem. UGC's commitment to quality is laudable, but it must not come at the cost of inclusivity and innovation. As India moves towards becoming a global knowledge hub, it is essential to ensure that the structures we build empower every capable mind, not just the ones housed in designated research centres. The strength of a nation's research culture lies not in institutional labels but in the intellectual spirit it chooses to nurture. The writer is a Professor and Head of the Department of English, M. J. College, Jalgaon, Maharashtra.
