NEW DELHI: As concern grows over student stress, suicides in coaching hubs, dummy schools and safety lapses at private institutes, the Centre is weighing the possibility of both a national law to regulate the coaching sector and redesigning entrance exams to make private coaching less decisive in JEE, NEET-UG and CUET-UG. The reason: a nine-member committee set up by the education ministry has concluded that dependence on coaching cannot be tackled only by inspecting institutes or penalising misleading advertisements. The problem, it found, is rooted as much in the design of entrance tests, weak confidence in board marks, dummy schooling and earlyage exam preparation as in the commercial practices of coaching centres. The proposals are part of a report being finalised by the committee, set up in June 2025 under higher education secretary Vineet Joshi to examine students’ dependence on coaching, spread of “dummy schools” and fairness of high-stakes entrance tests, said a source. The final report is likely to be submitted to the govt in a couple of weeks with far-reaching recommendations. The draft’s approach is to regulate the industry and reduce its indispensability.It plans to achieve that through stronger schools, credible boards, entrance tests aligned more closely with classroom learning, and greater transparency in coaching claims. TOI learnt that based on the draft report, the committee recommended that the govt examine “a comprehensive regulatory framework for coaching centres — including consideration of legislative measures”. Citing “the scale and systemic role of the coaching sector”, it calls for “uniform standards on transparency, accountability and student protection”. One of its sharpest proposals is to “mandate transparency — full disclosure of faculty qualifications and verified enrolment-versussuccess data, and curbs on misleading advertising”. According to an official, “The idea is to hit the topperclaim model in which institutes advertise ranks and selections without stating whether candidates were long-term classroom students, test-series users, scholarship students or only associated after results.” The draft also recommends that the govt “examine limits on daily coaching hours for school-going students”, noting that “a two-tothree-hour cap was specifically proposed.” It suggests examining whether intensive coaching should be confined to the post-class XII stage, seeking “jurisdictional clarity between schools and coaching”, and using “real-time biometric attendance to address dummy schooling,” along with student-wellbeing safeguards.Get the latest India news and live updates. Download the TOI App.About the AuthorManash Pratim GohainManash Pratim Gohain is a seasoned journalist with over two decades at The Times of India, where he has built a rich body of work spanning education policy, politics, and governance. Renowned for his incisive coverage of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, accreditation reforms, and skilling initiatives, he has also reported on student politics, urban policy, and social movements. His political reportage—both reflective and news-driven—adds depth to his writing, bridging policy with public impact. Through his 2,500 articles and related outlets, he has emerged as a trusted voice in national discourse, particularly in linking education reform to broader societal change.Read MoreEnd of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosAre We Learning Nothing From Deadly Fire Accidents Across India? Experts Sound AlarmSarla Bhat Murder Case: SIA Files 737-Page Chargesheet, Yasin Malik Named Main AccusedWhat West Bengal’s New Public Safety and Anti-Goonda Bill Means and Why It Is ControversialSonam Wangchuk Begins Indefinite Fast, Urges Nation To Join Education Reform MovementBengal BJP Govt Rolls Back OBC Quota Hike, Scraps 113 Groups Added Under TMCPM Modi To Skip Khamenei Funeral; Bihar Governor, MoS External Affairs To Represent India: Report’In 3 Or 6 Months’: Stalin Predicts Early Polls, Says Vijay-led TVK Govt May Not Last Full TermExplained: Why The Akal Takht Has Summoned 87 Sikh Legislators Over Punjab’s Anti-Sacrilege LawIndia’s First Integrated Battle Groups Explained: A New Era of Border Readiness32 Years After the Pact, Rajasthan Finally Set to Get Yamuna Water from Haryana123PhotostoriesTop 10 countries with the best cuisines in the world5 towns in America where it feels like time stopped 100 years agoThese 5 Zodiac Signs Can Read You in SecondsBTS’ V proves red is the new power colour for Celine at Paris Fashion Week 2026Mothers often put their heart health last: Doctors explain why that’s a mistakeThe hidden impact of “ghost fat”: Understanding body image after major weight lossPsychology says people who don’t have many close friends may be more selective in love, and that’s not always a bad thing10 timeless baby girl names inspired by courageous women warriors in history4 secrets the happiest couples you meet are hiding from youVande Bharat routes under ₹1,500: From Goa to Kerala, these budget trips are worth every rupee123Hot PicksIreland CoachKerala HSCAP third allotment listGermany VS ParaguayFIFA world cup 2026Ketan Agarwal murder caseMumbai monsoonFIFA World Cup Round of ScheduleUS Strike on IranVaibhav SooryavanshiTop TrendingRam Mandir Donation TheftSimone BilesNoida fireFIFA World Cup 2026CBSE Three language GuidelinesBengaluru TechieAnukalp MishraSergei IvanovMK StalinMumbai Local Train News
NEW DELHI: As concern grows over student stress, suicides in coaching hubs, dummy schools and safety lapses at private institutes, the Centre is weighing the possibility of both a national law to regulate the coaching sector and redesigning entrance exams to make private coaching less decisive in JEE, NEET-UG and CUET-UG. The reason: a nine-member committee set up by the education ministry has concluded that dependence on coaching cannot be tackled only by inspecting institutes or penalising misleading advertisements. The problem, it found, is rooted as much in the design of entrance tests, weak confidence in board marks, dummy schooling and earlyage exam preparation as in the commercial practices of coaching centres. The proposals are part of a report being finalised by the committee, set up in June 2025 under higher education secretary Vineet Joshi to examine students’ dependence on coaching, spread of “dummy schools” and fairness of high-stakes entrance tests, said a source. The final report is likely to be submitted to the govt in a couple of weeks with far-reaching recommendations. The draft’s approach is to regulate the industry and reduce its indispensability.It plans to achieve that through stronger schools, credible boards, entrance tests aligned more closely with classroom learning, and greater transparency in coaching claims. TOI learnt that based on the draft report, the committee recommended that the govt examine “a comprehensive regulatory framework for coaching centres — including consideration of legislative measures”. Citing “the scale and systemic role of the coaching sector”, it calls for “uniform standards on transparency, accountability and student protection”. One of its sharpest proposals is to “mandate transparency — full disclosure of faculty qualifications and verified enrolment-versussuccess data, and curbs on misleading advertising”. According to an official, “The idea is to hit the topperclaim model in which institutes advertise ranks and selections without stating whether candidates were long-term classroom students, test-series users, scholarship students or only associated after results.” The draft also recommends that the govt “examine limits on daily coaching hours for school-going students”, noting that “a two-tothree-hour cap was specifically proposed.” It suggests examining whether intensive coaching should be confined to the post-class XII stage, seeking “jurisdictional clarity between schools and coaching”, and using “real-time biometric attendance to address dummy schooling,” along with student-wellbeing safeguards.
