Total Fertility Rate.
Fertility Decline & School Enrollment in India: Insights from UDISE+ 2024-25 & NFHS-5 Data
Published on 4th December 2025 at https://educationforallinindia.com
Introduction
India’s demographic landscape is undergoing a profound transformation, marked by a steady decline in the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) – the average number of children a woman would bear over her lifetime under current age-specific fertility trends. As per the National Family Health Survey-5 (NFHS-5, 2019-21), India’s national TFR has dipped to 2.0, below the replacement level of 2.1 (the minimum needed for population stability, Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, 2024), which is aligned with the National Population Policy 2000 and the National Health Policy 2017. This shift, driven by factors such as improved access to education, healthcare, and family planning, has far-reaching implications for sectors like education. With fewer births, the influx of school-age children is diminishing, potentially reshaping enrollment patterns, resource allocation, and educational equity.
The present article examines how Total Fertility Rate (TFR) relates to secondary-level enrollment ratios: Gross Enrollment Ratio (GER), Net Enrollment Ratio (NER), and Age-specific Enrollment Ratio (ASER) for Classes 9-10 (ages 14-15). Using data from the UDISE+ 2024-25 report (Ministry of Education, 2025) and Education for All in India, it spotlights state-wise differences. Key articles by Prof. Arun C. Mehta – “What Does UDISE+ 2024-25 Enrolment Ratios Reveal About Universal Secondary Education in India?” (Mehta, 2025a) and “Decoding Enrolment Ratios: An Analysis of UDISE+ 2020-21 to 2024-25 Data” (Mehta, 2025b) – offer context on how demographic shifts challenge NEP 2020’s aim of 100% GER by 2030. While data show progress toward universalisation, more precise projections await the delayed Census of India (2025).
Literature Review
Recent scholars links fertility decline to educational dynamics. NFHS-5 data show stark educational gradients in TFR. Illiterate women exhibit a TFR of 3.0, compared to 1.9 for literate women. Among graduates, TFR drops even lower, to 1.6. Registrar General of India, 2023. This pattern aligns with global trends. Socio-economic advancement correlates with lower fertility (United Nations Population Division, 2022).
In education, UDISE+ 2024-25 reports total enrollment of 246.93 million, a seven-year low. There is a drop of 3.46 million at the primary level, attributed to lower birth rates (Ministry of Education, 2025). Mehta’s analyses [Mehta, 2025a; Mehta, 2025b] dissect this trend. Secondary GER has stagnated at 78.7% amid demographic headwinds. Studies like Sanyal (2025) warn of school consolidations in low-fertility states, such as Kerala and Goa, due to insufficient pupil numbers. Conversely, high-TFR states, like Bihar, face enrollment pressures from population growth, which exacerbate infrastructure strains (The Print, 2025).
These works emphasise a “demographic dividend” pivot: low TFR could enhance per-child investments but risks workforce shrinkage by 2050 if enrollment gaps persist (Lancet, 2024).
State-Wise TFR, GER, NER, and ASER at Secondary Level
The following table integrates TFR from NFHS-5 with secondary-level metrics from UDISE+ 2024-25, extracted from the official data on enrollment ratios and DoSEL, 2025. For clarity: GER (Gross Enrollment Ratio) measures total enrollment at a level (including over-age or under-age students) as a percentage of the relevant age group; NER (Net Enrollment Ratio) captures the proportion of students enrolled at the correct age for that level; ASER (Age-Specific Enrollment Ratio) shows exact age alignment. Numbers presented below refer to Classes 9-10 students (ages 14-15).
|
State/UT
|
TFR (NFHS-5)
% |
GER Sec (%)
% |
NER Sec (%)
% |
ASER Sec (%) % |
| India | 2.0 | 78.7 | 47.5 | 77.3 |
| Andaman & Nicobar Islands | 1.3 | 92.3 | 51.0 | 90.8 |
| Andhra Pradesh | 1.7 | 89.4 | 64.6 | 88.5 |
| Arunachal Pradesh | 1.8 | 69.3 | 34.4 | 74.1 |
| Assam | 1.9 | 79.6 | 47.8 | 76.5 |
| Bihar | 3.0 | 51.1 | 28.8 | 54.3 |
| Chandigarh | 1.4 | 110.1 | 72.6 | 75.6 |
| Chhattisgarh | 1.8 | 77.5 | 46.5 | 67.0 |
| Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu | 1.8 | 104.9 | 71.1 | 100.0 |
| Delhi | 1.6 | 101.1 | 77.1 | 100.0 |
| Goa | 1.3 | 107.5 | 75.3 | 100.0 |
| Gujarat | 1.9 | 74.7 | 42.1 | 67.0 |
| Haryana | 1.9 | 90.3 | 60.1 | 94.5 |
| Himachal Pradesh | 1.7 | 102.6 | 40.9 | 94.8 |
| Jammu & Kashmir | 1.4 | 66.1 | 35.2 | 61.2 |
| Jharkhand | 2.3 | 72.6 | 44.4 | 76.5 |
| Karnataka | 1.7 | 101.3 | 71.4 | 99.5 |
| Kerala | 1.8 | 98.7 | 73.8 | 97.4 |
| Ladakh | 1.3 | 82.6 | 47.8 | 71.9 |
| Lakshadweep | 1.4 | 79.5 | 61.8 | 72.3 |
| Madhya Pradesh | 2.0 | 68.2 | 37.3 | 62.1 |
| Maharashtra | 1.7 | 93.6 | 62.2 | 85.9 |
| Manipur | 2.2 | 78.8 | 52.4 | 83.4 |
| Meghalaya | 2.9 | 86.2 | 42.3 | 94.4 |
| Mizoram | 1.9 | 95.5 | 62.6 | 94.8 |
| Nagaland | 1.7 | 61.8 | 37.5 | 60.0 |
| Odisha | 1.8 | 84.0 | 65.1 | 84.4 |
| Puducherry | 1.5 | 98.1 | 80.2 | 95.8 |
| Punjab | 1.6 | 92.6 | 53.9 | 91.6 |
| Rajasthan | 2.0 | 82.2 | 45.6 | 79.2 |
| Sikkim | 1.1 | 72.0 | 41.5 | 67.3 |
| Tamil Nadu | 1.8 | 95.5 | 81.3 | 94.7 |
| Telangana | 1.8 | 99.9 | 59.4 | 94.0 |
| Tripura | 1.7 | 80.2 | 63.3 | 79.4 |
| Uttar Pradesh | 2.4 | 64.3 | 31.9 | 68.4 |
| Uttarakhand | 1.9 | 93.4 | 50.2 | 94.5 |
| West Bengal | 1.6 | 99.4 | 44.2 | 92.1 |
Sources: TFR from NFHS-5 Government of India, 2024; Enrollment ratios from UDISE+ 2024-25 DoSEL, 2025.
Brief Analysis
Aligning with Education for All in India, the data reveals a nuanced correlation. Low-TFR states, such as Sikkim (1.1) and Kerala (1.8), often have higher GER (72.0% and 98.7%, respectively) and ASER (67.3% and 97.4%); this reflects better retention and access (Mehta, 2025a). Conversely, high-TFR states like Bihar (TFR 3.0) lag. Bihar records a GER of 51.1% and an NER of 28.8%, burdened by infrastructural deficits and socio-economic barriers (Mehta, 2025b).
Nationally, secondary GER is 78.7%, which falls short of NEP targets. NER is 47.5%, indicating overage enrollment. ASER is 77.3%; this is closer to GER, suggesting improved age-appropriateness but persistent dropouts (11.5% at secondary), Ministry of Education, 2025. Gender parity is evident. Girls’ GER is 80.2%, surpassing boys’ at 77.3%; this is a gain since NEP.
The Lancet (2024) projects India’s TFR at 1.29 by 2050; this would amplify enrollment declines (The Lancet, 2024). The upcoming census will refine these projections, factoring in post-2021 migration and the effects of COVID-19 (Census of India, 2025).
Impact of Low TFR on School Enrollment
Low TFR directly curtails the school-age cohort; this has driven an 11 lakh enrollment dip in 2024-25, with primary levels hit hardest (34 lakh decline) due to fewer entrants (The Print, 2025). In Kerala and Goa, this leads to school mergers and closures, freeing resources for quality enhancements such as teacher training (Newsweek, 2025). Smaller classes could improve pupil-teacher ratios (nationally 24:1) and outcomes. Risks include rural depopulation and uneven urban-rural access (IAS Gyan, 2025).
High-TFR regions, like Uttar Pradesh (TFR 2.4), face the opposite pressures. Swelling enrollments (42.79 million total) strain facilities and widen NER gaps (31.9%) (UDISE+ 2024-25). Policy must balance both sides: incentivise fertility in low-TFR areas through childcare support, and scale infrastructure in high-TFR zones.
High TFR-Low Enrollment vs. Low TFR-High Enrollment
India’s path to universal secondary education by 2030, as envisioned under the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, depends on addressing stark inter-state disparities in fertility and enrollment. While the national secondary Gross Enrollment Ratio (GER) stands at 78.7%, states with high Total Fertility Rates (TFR > 2.0) often struggle to achieve high GERs. Rapid population growth, combined with infrastructure constraints and socio-economic barriers, results in lower enrollment. In contrast, low-TFR states (TFR < 1.8) typically have higher GERs, supported by decades of targeted reforms that emphasise equity and access. This section profiles five states from each category, based on UDISE+ 2024-25 data and the Ministry of Education, Government of India, 2025. To meet NEP goals, high-TFR states need scalable interventions. They can learn from low-TFR exemplars-such as community-driven literacy drives in Kerala, infrastructure-led universalisation in Himachal Pradesh, and incentive-based retention in Karnataka. These states fostered inclusive systems through social mobilisation, policy continuity, and public-private synergies (Mehta, 2025a).
States with High TFR and Low Secondary Enrollment Ratios
TFRs characterise these states at or above replacement level. They face acute challenges: burgeoning school-age cohorts, strained facilities, higher dropout rates (e.g., Arunachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Chhattisgarh etc;), and widening urban-rural divides. Low Net Enrollment Ratios (NER) reflect over-age entries and access gaps, as shown by ASER, with age-inappropriate progression. Despite demographic pressures, targeted investments could unlock population dividends to drive economic growth; however, current trends risk perpetuating inequality (Registrar General of India, 2023).
| State | TFR | GER Sec | NER Sec | ASER Sec | Major Challenge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bihar | 3.0 | 51.1 | 28.8 | 54.3 | Infrastructure deficit, poverty-driven dropout |
| Uttar Pradesh | 2.4 | 64.3 | 31.9 | 68.4 | Child labour, gender gap in rural areas |
| Jharkhand | 2.3 | 72.6 | 44.4 | 76.5 | Tribal exclusion, teacher shortage |
| Madhya Pradesh | 2.0 | 68.2 | 37.3 | 62.1 | Low female participation |
| Manipur | 2.2 | 78.8 | 52.4 | 83.4 | Conflict-affected access |
Sources: TFR from NFHS-5 Government of India, 2024; Enrollment ratios from UDISE+ 2024-25 DoSEL, 2025.
These five states account for nearly 40% of India’s out-of-school adolescents at secondary level.
Bihar’s dismal GER (51.1%) exemplifies systemic overload. Only 28.8% of enrollments are age-appropriate, amid a TFR-driven influx of 2.5 million primary entrants annually. Uttar Pradesh faces a similar situation: its 64.3% GER masks NER shortfalls caused by child labour in agrarian belts. Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh show only marginal improvement (GER ~70%). NER still lags, signalling bottlenecks in student progression. Manipur’s 78.8% GER benefits from ethnic quotas but falters on NER may be due to insurgency. Collectively, these states make up about 40% of India’s out-of-school adolescents (Ministry of Education, 2025). Without reforms, even with TFR stabilisation at ~1.8 by 2050, enrollment surges could derail NEP universality (The Lancet, 2024).
States with Low TFR and High Secondary Enrollment Ratios
Low-TFR states show how demographic stability enables focused investment. GERs often exceed 90%. High ASER reflects efficient, age-aligned progression and robust retention (e.g., Tamil Nadu’s secondary retention at 92%). Historical emphasis on equity, predating national mandates, is key (Mehta, 2025 b.).
| State | TFR | GER Sec | NER Sec | ASER Sec | Historical Enablers |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kerala | 1.8 | 98.7 | 73.8 | 97.4 | 19th-century social reforms, total literacy movement |
| Tamil Nadu | 1.8 | 95.5 | 81.3 | 94.7 | Dravidian social justice, mid-day meals |
| Himachal Pradesh | 1.7 | 102.6 | 40.9 | 94.8 | Massive school-building post-1970s, community ownership |
| Karnataka | 1.7 | 101.3 | 71.4 | 99.5 | Incentives + rural road connectivity |
| Maharashtra | 1.7 | 93.6 | 62.2 | 85.9 | Girls’ scholarships, vocational integration |
Strategic Lessons for High-TFR States
Kerala’s near-universal GER (98.7%) reflects a legacy of 19th-century royal grants and missionary inclusion. These efforts led to the 1991 literacy milestone and to primary universality in 2016 through the Athulyam program. Himachal Pradesh’s 102.6% GER was driven by infrastructure surges after 1971 and community mobilisation. Bureaucratic efficiency and panchayats helped achieve universal elementary education. Karnataka’s 101.3% GER has been driven by mid-day meals, free uniforms, and enrollment drives since the 2000s. Rural transport networks have also boosted retention to 95%. Maharashtra’s 93.6% GER benefits from 2024’s free higher education for marginalised girls and co-ed mergers, building on approx 16.4% budget allocations for vocational integration. Tamil Nadu’s 95.5% GER can be traced to 1970s social justice policies, Dalit-inclusive mission schools, and curriculum decongestion. These policies have ensured 81.3% NER through equitable access.
Strategic Imperatives for NEP 2030: Lessons from Low-TFR Successes
Achieving 100% secondary GER by 2030 demands a pivot toward high-TFR states, which house 35% of India’s secondary-age population yet account for only 25% of enrollments (Ministry of Education, 2025). Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, for instance, require ~15 million additional secondary school seats, which are feasible via scaled-up Samagra Shiksha allocations. These states must emulate the low-TFR models’ historical strengths:
- Community and Social Mobilisation (Kerala/Tamil Nadu): Early caste-inclusive reforms-e.g., Kerala’s Ezhava-led adult literacy and Tamil Nadu’s 19th-century mission integrations-built trust and gender parity (female GER 105% in both). High-TFR states could launch localised drives, partnering NGOs for tribal outreach in Jharkhand.
- Infrastructure and Accessibility (Himachal Pradesh/Karnataka): Himachal’s post-independence school-building spree ensured 95% village coverage, while Karnataka’s rural roads enabled 97.4% primary enrollment. Replicate via Operation Blackboard expansions in Madhya Pradesh, targeting schools within 5 km.
- Incentives and Teacher Quality (Maharashtra/All): Maharashtra’s scholarships and teacher training under NEP Connect lifted female NER by 5% since 2023. High-TFR states should prioritise mid-day meals (universalised in Bihar but underfunded) and continuous professional development, reducing pupil-teacher ratios from 35:1 to 25:1.
Historically, these low-TFR states succeeded through sustained political will-Kerala’s 35-40% devolved education budgets since 1996 and Himachal’s policy continuity-contrasting high-TFR fragmentation Mehta, 2025b. Cross-state learning platforms, like NEP-inspired twinning, could accelerate adoption. As the 2025 census approaches, these strategies will clarify projections, ensuring fertility transitions bolster rather than hinder educational equity (Census of India, 2025).
Concluding Observations
India’s TFR decline heralds a demographic opportunity, yet secondary enrollment metrics underscore urgency. Low-TFR states lead in access, but national universality demands targeted interventions-bridging NER-ASER gaps and leveraging data for equity, as Mehta notes – without adaptive policies, NEP 2030 goals risk evasion [Mehta, 2025a]. The next census will illuminate trajectories; until then, integrating fertility projections into education planning is imperative for sustainable growth.
Suggested Readings
- Mehta, A.C. (2025a). What Do UDISE+ 2024-25 Enrolment Ratios Reveal? Link.
- Mehta, A.C. (2025b). Decoding Enrolment Ratios: UDISE+ 2020-21 to 2024-25.Link.
- Government of India. (2025). UDISE+ 2024-25 Report.Link.
- The Lancet. (2024). Global Burden of Disease Study: India’s Fertility Forecast.Link.
- Sanyal, S. (2025). India’s Birth Rate Decline and School Closures.Link.
