Analysing School Infrastructure, Enrolment Patterns, and Teacher Distribution Towards NEP 2020 Goals based on UDISEPlus 2023-24 Data

Abstract

This article examines India’s progress towards achieving universal school education by 2030, a key goal of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. Using data from the Unified District Information System for Education Plus (UDISE+) 2023-24, we analyse the distribution of schools, enrolments, and teachers across different educational levels and states in India. The study evaluates key indicators, including pupil-teacher ratios, single-teacher schools, and school size distributions, to assess the current educational infrastructure and identify gaps that must be addressed to achieve NEP 2020 targets. The findings reveal significant interstate disparities in educational resources and highlight specific challenges that must be overcome to ensure quality universal education by 2030.

1. Introduction

Universal access to quality education represents one of the fundamental pillars for sustainable development and socio-economic progress in any nation. In India, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 has established an ambitious vision of achieving universal school education by 2030, marking a significant shift in the country’s educational framework. This goal aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development (SDG) Goal 4, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all.

The triumvirate of schools, enrolments, and teachers forms the cornerstone of any educational system. Schools serve as the physical and institutional infrastructure where learning occurs, while enrolment figures represent access to and participation in education. As facilitators of knowledge and skill development, teachers are perhaps the most critical component in determining educational quality and outcomes. Understanding the distribution and adequacy of these three elements across different levels of education – primary, upper primary, secondary, and higher secondary – is essential for evaluating progress toward universal education goals.

This article comprehensively analyses the educational landscape using the Unified District Information System for Education Plus data: 2023-24. We examine patterns both at the all-India level and across individual States & Union Territories, focusing on indicators including:

1. Distribution of schools, enrolments, and teachers by educational level
2. Pupil-teacher ratios and average school sizes
3. Prevalence of schools with zero enrolments and single-teacher schools
4. School enrolment size brackets and their distribution

Table 1: Total Number of Schools, Enrolment & Teachers and Percentage of Schools by Levels
Source: UDISEPlus 2023-24

State/UT	Total Number of			Percentage Share of Schools by Category
	Schools	Enrolments	Teachers	Primary	Upper Primary	Secondary	Higher Secondary
India	1471891	248045828	9807600	50.0	29.4	9.8	10.8
A & N Islands	412	72119	5750	50.7	19.2	13.1	17.0
Andhra Pradesh	61373	8741885	338293	61.5	13.5	18.9	6.1
Arunachal Pradesh	3490	323717	24700	48.6	36.8	9.5	5.2
Assam	56630	6922533	342199	66.2	16.7	12.5	4.7
Bihar	94686	21348149	657063	44.0	42.7	2.0	11.2
Chandigarh	230	265706	10237	6.1	18.3	30.4	45.2
Chhattisgarh	56615	5776548	278798	57.3	29.3	4.8	8.6
D & N Haveli & D & D & D	432	141282	4995	37.5	40.5	8.8	13.2
Delhi	5497	4506578	160479	45.1	14.7	6.2	34.0
Goa	1487	304735	14594	58.0	5.2	28.4	8.4
Gujarat	53626	11496709	394053	25.2	50.4	8.3	16.0
Haryana	23517	5599742	250909	41.0	21.2	11.8	26.1
Himachal Pradesh	17826	1426412	101131	60.8	14.0	10.0	15.2
Jammu & Kashmir	24296	2629949	167046	43.7	37.8	13.2	5.3
Jharkhand	44475	7143255	206591	52.5	36.1	7.3	4.1
Karnataka	75869	11926303	433942	30.9	40.0	21.5	7.6
Kerala	15864	6281704	291096	40.4	28.1	12.5	19.0
Ladakh	995	56642	6432	39.4	44.0	11.5	5.1
Lakshadweep	37	12591	911	40.5	24.3	0.0	35.1
Madhya Pradesh	123412	15361543	639525	49.4	35.7	6.7	8.2
Maharashtra	108237	21375970	738114	46.1	27.0	16.5	10.4
Manipur	4646	647434	40921	52.7	20.3	20.8	6.2
Meghalaya	14601	1052884	55726	62.7	24.2	10.2	2.9
Mizoram	3941	293763	23013	37.2	38.9	18.3	5.7
Nagaland	2725	412975	32602	41.8	28.7	21.4	8.1
Odisha	61693	7756910	335496	46.4	33.8	15.3	4.5
Puducherry	735	244828	13202	37.1	9.4	25.2	28.3
Punjab	27404	5988681	273092	49.1	16.9	14.6	19.3
Rajasthan	107757	16786065	775745	35.0	32	6.8	26.1
Sikkim	1254	121395	15489	53.3	25.1	11.5	10.1
Tamil Nadu	58722	12993050	550558	57.9	17.1	9.7	15.3
Telangana	42901	7293644	341460	47.9	17.4	27	7.7
Tripura	4923	689408	37661	50.2	25.3	13.6	10.8
Uttar Pradesh	255087	41662794	1538479	52.3	34	4.7	9.0
Uttarakhand	22551	2372400	130741	57.3	24.4	6.2	12.0
West Bengal	93945	18015525	576557	79.3	9.2	3.5	8.1

By analysing these indicators, we aim to assess India’s current position relative to the NEP 2020 goal of universal school education by 2030 & identify key challenges that must be addressed.

1.1 Data Limitations

Before proceeding with the analysis, it is important to acknowledge several limitations in the UDISE+ 2023-24 data:

1. Temporal limitations: The data represents a snapshot of the 2023-24 academic year and does not undertake longitudinal analysis of trends, which would be valuable for assessing progress toward NEP 2020 goals.
2. Quality indicators: While the data provides comprehensive quantitative information on schools, enrolments, and teachers, it lacks qualitative indicators such as learning outcomes, teacher qualifications, and infrastructure quality, which are crucial for assessing the effectiveness of education.
3. Socio-economic context: The data does not include socio-economic information about students or communities, making it challenging to assess educational equity across different demographic groups.
4. Private education: Although the data includes both government and private schools, it may not fully capture the role and impact of the private education sector, which is tiny, unrecognized schools.
5. COVID-19 impact: The data may reflect some lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on school enrolments and operations, potentially skewing comparisons with pre-pandemic educational patterns.

Despite these limitations, the UDISE+ data represents the most comprehensive and recent information on India’s school education system and provides valuable policy analysis and planning insights.

2. Literature Review

Research on India’s progress toward universal education goals has evolved significantly over the past decades. Early studies by Drèze and Sen (1995) highlighted the fundamental role of education in human development and emphasized the need for public investment in the sector. Implementing the Right to Education (RTE) Act in 2009 prompted numerous studies evaluating its impact on access and quality. Kingdon (2020) examined the challenges in implementing the RTE Act and found that while enrolment rates had improved, learning outcomes remained a concern.

Following the announcement of NEP 2020, several scholars have analyzed its ambitious targets and implementation challenges. Kumar et al. (2021) discussed the policy’s vision for transforming India’s education system and highlighted the need for substantial financial and

Table 2: Percentage of Enrolment & Teachers by Levels of Education
Source: UDISEPlus 2023-24

State/UT	Percentage Share of Enrolments by Level				Percentage Share of Teachers by School Category
	Primary	Upper Primary	Secondary	Higher Secondary	Primary	Upper Primary	Secondary	Higher Secondary
India	48.7	25.4	14.9	10.9	24.0	28.6	16.2	31.1
Andaman & Nicobar Islands	46.1	23.6	15.9	14.4	17.3	16.9	17.5	48.3
Andhra Pradesh	46.1	25.7	16.5	11.6	28.6	14.0	42.7	14.7
Arunachal Pradesh	53.7	24.0	13.4	8.9	19.1	42.6	20.6	17.6
Assam	53.4	25.1	14.3	7.2	32.6	20.5	29.1	17.8
Bihar	54.1	26.4	11.7	7.7	23.9	54.7	3.2	18.2
Chandigarh	45.0	23.9	15.3	15.8	2.0	7.5	26.2	64.4
Chhattisgarh	50.7	25.3	14.3	9.7	31.1	30.6	7.3	30.9
Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu	50.9	25.1	15.5	8.4	13.2	37.0	10.7	39.1
Delhi	44.6	25.9	16.0	13.5	16.2	7.0	5.3	71.5
Goa	48.5	23.7	15.1	12.8	20.4	4.4	53.2	22.0
Gujarat	48.6	27.6	14.9	8.9	8.6	56.1	6.0	29.3
Haryana	45.6	26.6	16.0	11.8	16.4	13.6	11.4	58.6
Himachal Pradesh	47.9	23.4	15.6	13.1	21.5	10.9	16.9	50.7
Jammu & Kashmir	56.2	21.5	13.1	9.2	17.7	36.5	26.2	19.5
Jharkhand	50.9	26.5	13.5	9.1	22.7	41.5	17.5	18.2
Karnataka	46.0	26.5	17.3	10.2	10.9	34.2	38.7	16.2
Kerala	46.3	23.7	15.8	14.2	15.9	20.8	14.6	48.7
Ladakh	58.0	20.5	14.0	7.5	14.6	42.6	26.4	16.4
Lakshadweep	51.5	22.1	13.3	13.1	24.9	24.6	0.0	50.5
Madhya Pradesh	51.2	25.9	13.9	9.0	21.2	37.9	11.6	29.4
Maharashtra	44.2	25.9	16.9	13.0	18.9	27.1	25.1	28.8
Manipur	55.3	21.7	13.1	9.8	21.6	19.1	36.9	22.4
Meghalaya	63.9	20.6	10.4	5.1	42.5	26.9	19.9	10.7
Mizoram	55.9	22.2	13.6	8.3	25.1	46.2	19.3	9.4
Nagaland	56.6	21.3	12.9	9.2	20.2	26.1	30.7	22.9
Odisha	44.7	27.6	16.0	11.7	21.4	37.5	29.2	11.9
Puducherry	46.2	23.5	16	14.3	14.0	5.9	22.9	57.3
Punjab	52.1	21.9	13.8	12.2	19.7	9.8	18.9	51.5
Rajasthan	49.6	24.7	14.5	11.2	10.8	28.8	9.2	51.2
Sikkim	50.8	21.3	14.9	13.0	22.8	25.1	19.7	32.4
Tamil Nadu	45.7	24.6	15.9	13.8	20.6	13.2	12.5	53.8
Telangana	47.8	25.2	15.3	11.8	14.3	16.0	52.7	16.9
Tripura	48.4	25.2	14.6	11.8	20.5	20.0	21.8	37.6
Uttar Pradesh	49.4	25.4	13.7	11.5	36.6	34.1	5.6	23.7
Uttarakhand	47.7	24.2	15.0	13.1	23.7	25.2	8.8	42.3
West Bengal	47.0	24.5	17.0	11.5	52.2	6.7	6.5	34.6

human resource investments to achieve universal education by 2030. Tilak (2021) critically examined the NEP 2020’s financing framework and questioned whether the proposed increase in education expenditure to 6% of GDP would meet the policy’s ambitious goals.

In the context of educational infrastructure, Ramachandran (2018) analyzed teacher availability and quality across Indian states, finding significant disparities that could impede progress toward universal education. Similarly, Muralidharan (2013) examined the effectiveness of education interventions in India and emphasized the importance of teacher presence and engagement for improving learning outcomes.

Recent work by the Azim Premji Foundation (2023) has highlighted the continuing challenges in India’s education system, including teacher shortages, inadequate infrastructure, and learning gaps, particularly in rural and economically disadvantaged areas. Their research suggests that despite progress in enrolment, significant barriers remain to achieving the quality education envisioned in NEP 2020.

The present study builds on this literature by utilizing the most recent UDISE+ data to provide an updated assessment of India’s educational landscape, focusing specifically on the distribution of schools, enrolments, and teachers as key indicators of progress toward universal education goals.

3. Analysis of School, Enrolment, and Teacher Distribution

3.1 National Overview

According to UDISE+ 2023-24 data, India has 1,471,891 schools with 248,045,828 students enrolled and 9,807,600 teachers employed. The distribution of schools across different levels reveals that half (50.0%) are primary schools, followed by upper primary (29.4%), higher secondary (10.8%), and secondary schools (9.8%). This pyramid structure reflects the traditional organization of India’s school education system, with a broad base of primary schools narrowing toward higher levels.

Enrolment distribution follows a similar pattern, with primary education accounting for 48.7% of total enrolments, followed by upper primary (25.4%), secondary (14.9%), and higher secondary (10.9%). The gradual decrease in enrolment percentages at higher levels indicates issues with retention and progression through the education system—a challenge that must be addressed to achieve universal school education by 2030.

Interestingly, the distribution of teachers does not align proportionally with schools or enrolments. While primary schools constitute 50% of all schools, they employ only 24.0% of teachers. In contrast, higher secondary schools, representing just 10.8% of all schools, employ 31.1% of teachers. This disparity suggests that higher-level schools have better teacher allocation, potentially reflecting the specialized subject knowledge required at these levels but also indicating resource inequities that could affect learning outcomes in primary education.

Table 3: State-wise highlights of the UDISE+ 2023-24 data: Schools, Enrolments and Teachers
Source: UDISEPlus 2023-24

					Teachers in schools having zero Enrolments		Enrolments  in Single Teacher Schools
State/UT	Pupil-Teacher Ratio	Average Teachers Per School	Average Enrolments Per School	Schools with Zero Enrolments		Schools with Single Teachers
India	25	7	169	12954	31981	110971	3994097
A & N Islands	13	14	175	3	3	11	87
Andhra Pradesh	26	6	142	84	251	12611	218016
Arunachal Pradesh	13	7	93	240	58	618	7980
Assam	20	6	122	0	0	2633	92888
Bihar	32	7	225	117	544	2637	291127
Chandigarh	26	45	1155	0	0	0	0
Chhattisgarh	21	5	102	108	148	5840	215592
D & N Haveli & Daman & Diu	28	12	327	0	0	1	5
Delhi	28	29	820	0	0	13	454
Goa	21	10	205	4	16	238	3142
Gujarat	29	7	214	274	382	2462	87322
Haryana	22	11	238	81	178	867	40828
Himachal Pradesh	14	6	80	6	10	3473	65819
Jammu & Kashmir	16	7	108	119	238	1330	31054
Jharkhand	35	5	161	199	398	8353	410199
Karnataka	27	6	157	1078	1572	7821	274814
Kerala	22	18	396	104	504	76	1224
Ladakh	9	6	57	35	21	83	733
Lakshadweep	14	25	340	0	0	0	0
Madhya Pradesh	24	5	124	1211	1924	13198	587208
Maharashtra	29	7	197	18	76	8196	167534
Manipur	16	9	139	83	354	320	7699
Meghalaya	19	4	72	146	277	1451	51456
Mizoram	13	6	75	39	73	96	3039
Nagaland	13	12	152	12	24	31	368
Odisha	23	5	126	8	16	1065	50189
Puducherry	19	18	333	0	0	0	0
Punjab	22	10	219	15	35	2092	69532
Rajasthan	22	7	156	2167	4398	7688	225187
Sikkim	8	12	97	1	1	34	282
Tamil Nadu	24	9	221	490	889	2758	80586
Telangana	21	8	170	2097	2000	5985	88429
Tripura	18	8	140	10	12	311	6885
Uttar Pradesh	27	6	163	906	2895	8866	611950
Uttarakhand	18	6	105	45	57	3447	53773
West Bengal	31	6	192	3254	14627	6366	248696

3.2 Interstate Variations

Analysis of state-level data reveals significant variations in educational infrastructure and resource allocation across India:

1. School distribution: West Bengal has the highest concentration of primary schools (79.3% of all schools in the state), while Chandigarh has the lowest (6.1%). Conversely, Chandigarh has the highest proportion of higher secondary schools (45.2%), while Meghalaya has the lowest (2.9%). These variations reflect different state-level priorities and historical development patterns in education.
2. Enrolment patterns: Meghalaya shows the highest proportion of primary enrolment (63.9%), significantly above the national average of 48.7%, while Maharashtra has the lowest (44.2%). For higher secondary education, Delhi has the highest enrolment share (13.5%), while Meghalaya has the lowest (5.1%). These differences highlight varying progression rates through education levels across states.
3. Teacher allocation: Delhi allocates 71.5% of its teachers to higher secondary schools—more than double the national average of 31.1%—while Mizoram allocates only 9.4%. At the primary level, West Bengal employs 52.2% of its teachers in primary schools, while Chandigarh employs just 2.0%. These stark differences reflect varying approaches to teacher deployment and potentially different pupil-teacher ratios across states and education levels.

3.3 Regional Patterns

Regional patterns emerge when grouping states by geographical location:

1. Northern states (including Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir, and Himachal Pradesh) generally have a more balanced distribution of schools across different levels than the national average.
2. Southern states (including Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana) show higher proportions of secondary schools and relatively lower proportions of upper primary schools.
3. Northeastern states (including Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, and Tripura) typically have higher concentrations of primary schools and enrolments, with limited higher secondary infrastructure.
4. Union territories (particularly Delhi and Chandigarh) demonstrate markedly different patterns from states, with significantly higher proportions of higher secondary schools and teacher allocations.

These regional variations reflect historical development patterns, demographic differences, and varying state education policies, all of which have implications for achieving the NEP 2020 goal of universal education by 2030.

4. Analysis of Educational Efficiency Indicators

4.1 Pupil-Teacher Ratio

The pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) is a critical indicator of educational quality and resource allocation. The national average PTR is 25, indicating approximately 25 students for each teacher across India. However, significant interstate variations exist:

1. High PTR states: Jharkhand (35), Bihar (32), and West Bengal (31) have the highest PTRs, considerably above the national average. These high ratios suggest potential teacher shortages or overcrowded classrooms that could negatively impact educational quality.
2. Low PTR states: Sikkim (8), Ladakh (9), and Himachal Pradesh (14) have the lowest PTRs, suggesting better teacher availability. However, extremely low PTRs may sometimes indicate inefficient teacher deployment rather than optimal learning conditions, particularly in states with difficult terrain and small, scattered schools.

The Right to Education Act recommends a PTR of 30:1 for primary and 35:1 for upper primary levels. While the national average falls within these guidelines, eight states exceed these thresholds, indicating areas where teacher recruitment or redeployment may be necessary to achieve NEP 2020 quality targets.

4.2 Average Teachers and Enrolments Per School

The national averages of 7 teachers and 169 students per school mask substantial variations across states:

1. Resource-rich educational environments: Chandigarh stands out with an average of 45 teachers and 1,155 students per school, followed by Delhi with 29 teachers and 820 students. These figures suggest the presence of large, well-staffed institutions in urban areas.
2. Resource-constrained environments: States like Meghalaya (4 teachers per school), Madhya Pradesh, and Chhattisgarh (5 teachers per school) have significantly fewer teachers per institution than the national average. Similarly, Ladakh (57 students per school), Himachal Pradesh (80 students per school), and Sikkim (97 students per school) have the lowest average enrolments per school, likely reflecting small schools serving dispersed populations in mountainous terrain.

The relationship between average school size and educational outcomes is complex. While larger schools may offer economies of scale and more diverse resources, smaller schools may better serve remote communities and provide more personalized attention. The NEP 2020 promotes the concept of school complexes to address these trade-offs, particularly in areas with small, scattered schools.

4.3 Schools with Zero Enrolments

The presence of 12,954 schools with zero enrolments (0.9% of all schools) across India represents a concerning inefficiency in the educational system. These “ghost schools” employ 31,981 teachers (0.3% of the total teaching workforce) who are effectively not teaching students.

State-level analysis reveals that:

1. Karnataka (1,078 schools), Madhya Pradesh (1,211 schools), Rajasthan (2,167 schools), Telangana (2,097 schools), and West Bengal (3,254 schools) account for over 75% of all zero-enrolment schools in India.
2. Several states and union territories, including Assam, Chandigarh, Dadra & Nagar Haveli & Daman & Diu, Delhi, Lakshadweep, and Puducherry, report no schools with zero enrolments.

Zero-enrolment schools represent resource misallocation and identify areas where school rationalization or consolidation may be necessary to achieve the efficiency targets outlined in NEP 2020.

4.4 Single-Teacher Schools

The UDISE+ data reveals that 110,971 schools (7.5% of all schools) in India operate with just a single teacher, serving nearly 4 million students (1.6% of total enrolment). These single-teacher schools face significant challenges in delivering quality education across multiple grades and subjects, as required by NEP 2020.

The distribution of single-teacher schools shows distinct patterns:

1. High prevalence states: Andhra Pradesh (12,611 schools), Jharkhand (8,353 schools), Karnataka (7,821 schools), Madhya Pradesh (13,198 schools), Maharashtra (8,196 schools), Rajasthan (7,688 schools), Telangana (5,985 schools), Uttar Pradesh (8,866 schools), and West Bengal (6,366 schools) collectively account for 72% of all single-teacher schools in India.
2. Low prevalence states: Chandigarh and Lakshadweep report no single-teacher schools, while Delhi, Nagaland, and Puducherry have fewer than 50 each.

The concentration of single-teacher schools in certain states highlights areas where teacher recruitment and deployment should be prioritized to achieve the quality education standards envisioned in NEP 2020. It also suggests that school rationalization may be necessary in some contexts to ensure adequate teaching resources for all students.

5. Analysis of School Size Distribution

5.1 National School Size Distribution

The distribution of schools across various enrolment brackets provides insights into the structure of India’s education system and the resources available to students:

1. Small schools: Approximately 20.6% of India’s schools have enrolments of 30 or fewer students, while 34.9% have 50 or fewer students. These small schools may struggle with resource adequacy and teacher availability.
2. Medium-sized schools: The largest single category is schools with 101-200 students, accounting for 20.8% of all schools in India. This range likely represents an optimal size for many educational contexts, balancing resource efficiency with personalized attention.
3. Large schools: Only 6.6% have enrolments exceeding 500 students, while 13.8% have more than 300 students. These larger institutions are typically found in urban areas and may offer more diverse resources but face challenges related to classroom overcrowding and individualized attention.

This distribution reveals a predominance of small to medium-sized schools across India, with implications for resource allocation, teacher deployment, and implementing NEP 2020 quality standards. The prevalence of small schools in India’s educational landscape demands urgent attention to differentiated planning approaches. The current practice of applying relatively uniform planning models across drastically different institutional scales results in inefficiencies, resource misallocation, and missed opportunities for educational enhancement. While Samagra Shiksha provides some provisions for small schools, a more comprehensive and specialized framework is necessary

5.2 Interstate Variations in School Size

State-level analysis reveals striking differences in school size distributions:

1. States with high proportions of small schools: Ladakh (65.6% of schools with 30 or fewer students), Uttarakhand (48.8%), Himachal Pradesh (48.9%), and Arunachal Pradesh (47.8%) have the highest percentages of very small schools. These states share characteristics such as mountainous terrain and dispersed populations that necessitate smaller, more accessible schools.
2. States with high proportions of large schools: Delhi (49.1% of schools with more than 500 students), Chandigarh (76.5%), and Kerala (24.3%) have the highest percentages of very large schools. These are predominantly urbanized regions with high population densities.
3. States with balanced distributions: States like Bihar, Gujarat, and Tamil Nadu show more even distributions of school sizes, with significant numbers in both small and large categories.

These variations reflect differences in population density, geographical constraints, historical development patterns, and state education policies. They also suggest that different approaches to achieving NEP 2020 goals may be required across states, with some needing to focus on consolidating very small schools and others on reducing overcrowding in large institutions.

5.3 Relationship Between School Size and Other Indicators

Cross-analysis of school size with other indicators reveals important patterns:

1. Single-teacher schools and small enrolments: States with high percentages of single-teacher schools (such as Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Jharkhand) also tend to have higher proportions of schools with small enrolments, suggesting that teacher allocation challenges are closely linked to school size.
2. PTR and school size: States with large average school sizes (such as Chandigarh and Delhi) tend to have higher PTRs, indicating potential challenges in maintaining optimal teacher-student interactions in large institutions.
3. Urban-rural divide: The data suggests a divide between predominantly rural states, which tend to have more small schools with limited teacher resources, and more urbanized states and union territories, which have larger schools with better teacher allocations.

These relationships highlight the complex interplay between school size, resource allocation, and educational quality—all factors that must be considered in planning for universal education by 2030.

6. Conclusion and Policy Implications

This UDISE+ 2023-24 data analysis provides valuable insights into India’s progress toward achieving universal school education by 2030, as envisaged in NEP 2020. Several key findings emerge:

1. Structural imbalances: The distribution of schools, enrolments, and teachers across educational levels reveals structural imbalances, with primary education having a disproportionately large share of schools and enrolments but a smaller share of teachers. Addressing these imbalances through better teacher allocation will be crucial for improving educational quality.
2. Interstate disparities: Significant variations exist across states in almost all indicators, reflecting historical development patterns, geographical constraints, and diverse policy approaches. These disparities suggest that a one-size-fits-all approach to achieving NEP 2020 goals may not be practical.
3. Resource inefficiencies: The presence of zero-enrolment and single-teacher schools points to inefficiencies in resource allocation that need to be addressed through school rationalization, teacher redeployment, and targeted recruitment.
4. School size challenges: The predominance of very small schools in many states creates challenges for resource adequacy and teacher deployment, while large schools in urban areas may face overcrowding and individualized attention issues.

Based on these findings, we propose the following policy recommendations to accelerate progress toward NEP 2020 goals:

1. Targeted teacher recruitment and deployment: Address teacher shortages in states with high PTRs and high prevalence of single-teacher schools through targeted recruitment and improved deployment strategies.
2. School rationalization and consolidation: Implement the NEP 2020 recommendation of school complexes, particularly in areas with numerous small schools, to optimize resource utilization while maintaining accessibility.
3. State-specific strategies: Develop tailored strategies for different states based on their specific challenges, such as addressing geographic dispersion in Himalayan states or managing large urban schools in metropolitan areas.
4. Address zero-enrolment schools: Investigate and address the phenomenon of zero-enrolment schools by revitalizing these institutions or reallocating their resources to areas of need.
5. Strengthen secondary and higher secondary infrastructure: Increase investment in secondary and higher secondary schools, particularly in states with low proportions of these institutions, to support the complete school education cycle envisioned in NEP 2020.
6. Data-driven monitoring: Establish robust monitoring systems beyond quantitative indicators to track qualitative aspects of education, including learning outcomes and teacher effectiveness.

The goal of universal school education by 2030 is ambitious but achievable if these systemic challenges are addressed through coordinated, evidence-based interventions at the national and state levels. The UDISE+ data provides a valuable foundation for planning these interventions but must be supplemented with qualitative assessments and regular progress monitoring to ensure that genuine improvements in educational quality accompany quantitative expansion.

Suggested Readings

Azim Premji Foundation. (2023). State of public school education in India. Bangalore: Azim Premji University.

Drèze, J., & Sen, A. (1995). India: Economic development and social opportunity. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Government of India. (2020). National Education Policy 2020. Ministry of Education.

Kingdon, G. G. (2020). The private schooling phenomenon in India: A review. The Journal of Development Studies, 56(10), 1795-1817.

Kumar, K., Prakash, A., & Singh, K. (2021). National Education Policy 2020 and its comparative analysis with RTE. Economic and Political Weekly, 56(4), 14-17.

Ministry of Education. (2024). Unified District Information System for Education Plus (UDISE+) 2023-24. Government of India.

Muralidharan, K. (2013). Priorities for primary education policy in India’s 12th five-year plan. India Policy Forum, 9(1), 1-61.

Ramachandran, V. (2018). Inside India’s school education system: The teacher and the classroom. New Delhi: Routledge India.

Tilak, J. B. G. (2021). Education in the National Education Policy 2020: Breaking fresh ground or old wine in a new bottle? Journal of Educational Planning and Administration, 35(1), 5-27.

UNESCO. (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and education: All means all. Paris: UNESCO

Frequently Asked Questions: India’s Education System

What is the current state of India’s school education system according to UDISE+ 2023-24?

India has 1,471,891 schools with 248,045,828 students enrolled and 9,807,600 teachers employed. Half (50%) of these are primary schools, followed by upper primary (29.4%), higher secondary (10.8%), and secondary schools (9.8%). The national pupil-teacher ratio is 25:1, with significant variations across states.

What are the major challenges in India’s education system identified by the UDISE+ 2023-24 data?

Major challenges include structural imbalances in teacher allocation across education levels, significant interstate disparities in educational resources, inefficiencies like zero-enrolment schools (12,954) and single-teacher schools (110,971), and the prevalence of very small schools in many states creating resource adequacy issues.

Which states have the highest and lowest pupil-teacher ratios?

States with the highest pupil-teacher ratios are Jharkhand (35:1), Bihar (32:1), and West Bengal (31:1). States with the lowest ratios are Sikkim (8:1), Ladakh (9:1), and Himachal Pradesh (14:1).

How many single-teacher schools exist in India, and where are they concentrated?

One hundred ten thousand nine hundred seventy-one single-teacher schools (7.5% of all schools) serve nearly 4 million students. These are concentrated in states like Andhra Pradesh (12,611), Madhya Pradesh (13,198), Maharashtra (8,196), and Uttar Pradesh (8,866), which collectively account for 72% of all single-teacher schools in India.

What does the data reveal about school sizes across India?

About 20.6% of India’s schools have enrolments of 30 or fewer students, while 34.9% have 50 or fewer students. Only 6.6% have enrolments exceeding 500 students. The largest category is schools with 101-200 students (20.8%). Hilly states tend to have smaller schools, while urbanized regions have larger institutions.

How does the distribution of teachers compare to school and enrolment distribution?

While primary schools constitute 50% of all schools and account for 48.7% of enrolments, they employ only 24% of teachers. Conversely, higher secondary schools (10.8% of schools with 10.9% of enrolments) employ 31.1% of teachers, indicating resource inequities that could affect learning outcomes in primary education.

What policy recommendations emerge from the UDISE+ 2023-24 analysis?

Key recommendations include targeted teacher recruitment for states with high PTRs, school rationalization through the NEP 2020 school complex model, state-specific educational strategies, addressing zero-enrolment schools, strengthening secondary education infrastructure, and implementing data-driven monitoring systems that track qualitative aspects of education.

What progress has India made toward achieving the NEP 2020 goal of universal education by 2030?

While India has established a broad educational infrastructure with high enrolment numbers, significant challenges remain in quality, teacher allocation, and interstate disparities. The analysis suggests that coordinated, evidence-based interventions are needed at national and state levels to achieve universal quality education by 2030.

Education for All in India