”Mushrooming of coaching centres is not merely a commercial development but an “alarm” signalling failure of mainstream education system. If schools are genuinely delivering quality education students should not need a parallel system to prepare for examinations and secure their future.”
JAMMU: Renowned educationist and CEO of SP Smart Schools, Mr. Shivang Satya Gupta has delivered a scathing critique of Jammu and Kashmir’s education system, warning that the growing dependence on coaching centres is producing a generation that risks becoming what he bluntly described as a “Cockroach Janta Party.”
In an interview, Mr. Gupta questioned how a society that takes pride in the legacy of Krishna, Guru Nanak Dev, Guru Gobind Singh, Kabir and Sufi saints could allow its education system to produce young people without the confidence, character and independent thinking expected from an educated generation.
His sharpest criticism was directed at the parallel education system created by coaching centres. Gupta questioned the logic of spending enormous public resources on schools and thousands of teachers while students and parents continue to depend on private coaching for competitive examinations.
Citing approximate figures during the interview, Gupta referred to hundreds of secondary schools, thousands of teachers and around ₹1,200–1,300 crore in salary expenditure, alongside lakhs of students. He stressed that the figures cited were approximate and would need official verification.
For Mr. Gupta, this is the question the education establishment cannot escape.
He argued that the mushrooming of coaching centres is not merely a commercial development but an “alarm” signalling the failure of the mainstream education system. If schools are genuinely delivering quality education, he asked, students should not need a parallel system to prepare for examinations and secure their future.
He also attacked the rise of dummy-school arrangements, questionable attendance practices and the growing separation between formal schooling and actual academic preparation. He called for attendance to be properly verified and for schools to be made genuinely accountable for teaching students rather than merely providing them an institutional identity while coaching centres undertake the real preparation.
Mr. Gupta’s prescription is straightforward: strengthen government and private schools and make them capable of delivering the education students currently seek outside the classroom.
He argued that the government must regulate both public and private educational institutions effectively and prevent coaching centres from becoming an alternative education system. He also questioned practices through which coaching institutions commercially market selections and students, while the contribution of regular schools remains overlooked.
He argued that schools—government or private—must become the primary centres of learning, while coaching should not be allowed to replace mainstream education.
The educationist linked the coaching culture to a wider examination-driven ecosystem involving paper leaks, manipulated attendance and shortcuts to success. His concern, he said, is ultimately not only about marks or competitive examinations but about what kind of citizens the education system is producing.
He called for government, schools, teachers and parents to take collective responsibility for rebuilding confidence in the classroom. In his view, children should be prepared not merely to become doctors, engineers or officers, but responsible citizens with competence and character.
The educationist also advocated stronger government oversight of both government and private institutions and suggested that public support should reach deserving students through transparent scholarships rather than allowing education to become increasingly dependent on commercial coaching networks.
He urged policymakers, teachers and parents to rethink the purpose of education. A child, he argued, should be free to become a doctor, engineer, officer, journalist, technician or professional of choice—but should first become a responsible and ethical human being.
He also advocated transparent scholarships and direct support for deserving students rather than allowing commercial coaching networks to become the primary gateway to educational opportunity.
Gupta’s central warning is therefore as uncomfortable as it is simple: an education system cannot claim success merely because it has schools, teachers and budgets. Its real test is whether children can learn, compete and build character inside those schools—without being pushed into a parallel coaching economy.
