Context and Crisis

·       Each year, nearly 70 lakh students in India contend for a limited number of undergraduate seats through fiercely competitive entrance exams like JEE, NEET, CUET, and CLAT. The extreme mismatch between the number of aspirants and available seats in premier institutions has spawned a multibillion-rupee coaching industry, perpetuating a high-pressure culture that exerts an enormous toll on young minds.

·       Recent developments—ranging from financial irregularities in coaching centres to the tragic rise in student suicides—have exposed the deep-rooted flaws in this examination-driven system. The time has come to fundamentally rethink undergraduate admissions in India by shifting away from a hyper-competitive model toward one anchored in fairness, equity, and student well-being.

The Coaching Industry and Its Consequences

·       The booming coaching industry represents one of the most visible—and damaging—manifestations of the existing system. In the case of the JEE alone, which sees around 15 lakh applicants annually, coaching centres often charge exorbitant fees ranging from ₹6 to ₹7 lakh over two years. This places an immense financial burden on families and transforms adolescence into a period of relentless academic pressure rather than holistic growth.

·       Children as young as 14 are funneled into intensive coaching regimes, where they are made to solve problems from advanced texts such as Irodov and Krotov—far beyond what undergraduate studies require. This high-stakes grind often results in anxiety, depression, social withdrawal, and, in devastating cases, suicide.

·       Although governments have attempted to regulate the coaching sector, such efforts fail to address the root cause: an entrance examination system that amplifies marginal percentile differences into decisive outcomes. This approach inherently disadvantages talented students who lack access to expensive coaching, while privileging those with financial resources. Consequently, what should ideally be an assessment of fundamental understanding in school-level subjects is distorted into a race governed by artificial and exclusionary rankings.

The False Promise of Meritocracy

·       The current structure sustains a dangerous illusion of meritocracy. Philosopher Michael Sandel warns against societies where success is interpreted solely as a result of individual brilliance, discounting the roles of systemic privilege and sheer luck. In India, this illusion is even more deeply ingrained. A student from a well-off urban background, with access to elite coaching and educational support, is vastly more likely to secure a top rank than a rural counterpart with similar potential but fewer resources.

·       This results in an admissions ecosystem that masquerades as fair while reproducing structural inequalities. True merit becomes obscured by socio-economic disparities, and access to elite education is framed not by capability, but by capital.

International Perspectives: Lessons in Reform

·       India can draw inspiration from global practices that have successfully addressed similar challenges. The Netherlands, for instance, has adopted a weighted lottery system for medical school admissions. Students who meet a minimum threshold are all eligible, with higher academic performance providing only a slight advantage. This model reduces bias, encourages diversity, and alleviates pressure, acknowledging that minute score variations do not meaningfully reflect differences in competence.

·       China’s “double reduction” policy, enacted in 2021, offers another instructive example. By severely limiting for-profit tutoring and nationalising educational support systems, the Chinese government sought to ease the financial and emotional burdens on students and families. These reforms demonstrate that structural change—when guided by equity—can yield a more balanced and humane educational environment.

Charting a New Course for India

·       A more just and effective admissions system in India must begin with restoring faith in the school education framework. The Class 12 board examinations already offer a rigorous benchmark of academic readiness. A baseline threshold—such as 80% in core subjects like physics, chemistry, and mathematics—could be used to identify a qualified pool of applicants. Within this pool, a weighted lottery could be implemented, wherein higher marks marginally increase the probability of selection without dominating the process.

·       To preserve affirmative action, existing reservation policies should be integrated within this framework, with special provisions to prioritise students from rural backgrounds and government schools. This would promote social mobility and justice while preserving academic standards.

·       If entrance exams continue to be used, they must be severed from the private coaching industry. Coaching could either be banned outright or brought under public ownership, with high-quality, free online resources made universally accessible. Additionally, to reduce the rigid hierarchy among institutions like the IITs, the government could implement annual student exchange programmes and faculty rotations across campuses. Such steps would foster academic integration, enhance diversity, and equalise the quality of education.

Conclusion: A Crossroads for Indian Education

India’s entrance examination system now stands at a pivotal moment. The choice is between continuing with a narrow, toxic model that pushes students into a high-stakes rat race, or adopting an admissions process built on fairness, compassion, and inclusivity. A lottery-based or partially randomised selection mechanism would liberate students from the exhausting treadmill of coaching and restore their adolescence as a time of learning, growth, and discovery.

Elite education must be reimagined as a space accessible to all who are capable—not just those who can afford it. The future of India’s youth, and of the nation itself, hinges on whether it can redefine merit to include equity, and whether it can create an environment where young people thrive not as machines chasing scores, but as well-rounded learners and citizens.