Review of Major Findings from CMS: Education 2025

The CMS: Education 2025 survey reveals stark disparities in enrollment and expenditure, underscoring the uneven terrain of India’s school education system.

Enrollment Patterns

In rural areas, 66.0% of students are enrolled in government schools, while 33.9% attend non-government institutions (including 8.9% in private aided, 24.3% in private unaided recognized, and 0.7% others). Urban areas show a reverse trend: only 30.1% in government schools and 70.0% in non-government ones (17.6% private aided, 51.4% private unaided, and 1.0% others). This indicates a stronger reliance on public institutions in rural India, possibly due to accessibility and cost factors, contrasted with urban preferences for private schools, often perceived as offering better quality.

Expenditure on School Education

Average per-student expenditure stands at ₹8,382 in rural areas and ₹23,470 in urban areas across all school types and levels. Government schools are significantly cheaper: ₹2,639 per student in rural and ₹4,128 in urban settings. Non-government schools impose heavier burdens: ₹19,554 rural and ₹31,782 urban. About 57.1% of students reported paying course fees, with higher incidences in non-government schools (98.1% in private unaided) compared to government ones (26.7%). Expenditure rises with education levels, from ₹420 at pre-primary to ₹4,548 at higher secondary in rural private coaching contexts, highlighting escalating costs.

Private Coaching and Funding Sources

Private coaching is prevalent, with 25.5% of rural and 30.7% of urban students engaging in it during the academic year. Average spending on coaching is ₹2,409 per student nationally (₹2,572 for males, ₹2,227 for females), increasing with levels (e.g., ₹9,950 at higher secondary in urban areas). Funding primarily comes from household members (95.0% of students), with minimal reliance on external sources like scholarships.

Other Insights

Only 1.3% of households reported erstwhile family members (aged 3+ years) currently in school education, with average expenditure on them at ₹32,725 – higher in urban (₹52,131) than rural (₹29,250) areas, suggesting selective investment in extended family education.

These findings highlight a system where urban and private sectors dominate higher spending and supplementary education, potentially exacerbating inequalities.

Differentiation with NSS 75th Round (2017-18)

The NSS 75th Round, conducted from July 2017 to June 2018, surveyed 113,757 households and focused on broader social consumption on education for ages 3-35, including literacy, attendance, and expenditure. While both surveys address expenditure and enrollment, key differences emerge.

NSSO 75th  Round Household Social Consumption on Education in India: 2017-18

Scope and Methodology

The 75th Round was a year-long comprehensive survey, covering general and vocational education, whereas CMS: Education 2025 is a short-duration (three months) modular survey targeted at school education expenditure for currently enrolled students. The 75th Round included state participation for sub-national estimates, unlike the national-only focus of 2025.

Enrollment and Attendance

In 2017-18, Net Attendance Ratio (NAR) for primary was 85.9% rural and 87.3% urban, dropping to 52.5% rural and 58.8% urban at higher secondary – indicating lower effective participation than the enrollment shares in 2025. The 75th Round noted 71.1% of rural students in government institutions (vs. 66.0% in 2025), suggesting a slight shift toward private schools. Urban government enrollment was 37.6% in 2017-18, compared to 30.1% in 2025, reflecting accelerated privatization.

Expenditure Trends

Average annual expenditure per student in basic courses (school level) was ₹6,906 rural and ₹27,702 urban in 2017-18 – lower than 2025’s ₹8,382 rural and ₹23,470 urban. Adjusted for inflation (approximately 25-30% from 2018 to 2025), real expenditure has risen modestly in rural areas but declined relatively in urban ones, possibly due to post-pandemic subsidies or efficiencies. Government school costs were negligible (often free) in 2017-18, but 2025 shows nominal fees (₹2,639 rural), indicating creeping commercialization. Private coaching incidence was lower: 19.8% overall in 2017-18 (4.4% rural, 23.4% urban) versus 27.0% in 2025 (25.5% rural, 30.7% urban), signalling increased dependence on supplements.

Funding and Equity

Both surveys highlight household funding dominance (over 90%), but 2017-18 reported higher scholarship access (21.7% students) than implied in 2025’s minimal external reliance. Rural-urban gaps widened: expenditure disparity was 4:1 in 2017-18, narrowing slightly to 2.8:1 in 2025, but private-government divides grew (7.4:1 rural in 2025 vs. roughly 5:1 in 2017-18).

Overall, 2025 shows rising costs and privatization, with modular design enabling quicker policy insights compared to the exhaustive 75th Round.

Critical Analysis with Regard to NEP 2020

NEP 2020 targets 100% GER by 2030, foundational literacy/numeracy by 2025, reduced dropouts, and equitable access, emphasizing public education strengthening and technology integration.

Progress Toward 100% GER

CMS: Education 2025 does not compute GER directly but implies challenges through enrollment patterns. High government reliance in rural areas aligns with NEP’s equity focus, but urban privatization (70%) questions public system efficacy. If enrollment shares reflect access, rural GER may approach targets, but urban shifts to private suggest overcrowding or quality issues in government schools. Compared to NEP’s 2030 goal, persistent rural-urban divides (e.g., lower private coaching in rural at 25.5% vs. 30.7% urban) indicate unequal preparation for higher levels, potentially hindering universal secondary GER (currently ~77.4% per UDISE+).

Expenditure and Equity Implications

Rising costs contradict NEP’s affordability emphasis. Non-government expenditure (₹31,782 urban) burdens low-income families, undermining free/compulsory education under RTE. Private coaching prevalence (27%) highlights curriculum gaps, countering NEP’s holistic learning push. Gender expenditure gaps (males higher) challenge equity goals, though narrowed from 2017-18.

Other Recommendations

NEP advocates vocational integration and digital education, but 2025’s focus on traditional expenditure misses these. Household funding dominance underscores limited scholarships, against NEP’s support mechanisms. Critically, without state-level data, the survey limits localized interventions for NEP’s decentralized implementation.

While progress is evident in enrollment shares, findings suggest NEP targets require accelerated public investment to curb privatization and costs.

Consistency with UDISE+ Data and Major Deviations

UDISE+ 2023-24, as analysed on educationforallinindia.com, reports GER at primary 93%, upper primary 89.7%, secondary 77.4%, and higher secondary 56.2% – indicating near-universal elementary access but gaps at higher levels. Enrollment by management: government schools hold ~54% nationally (down from 60% in 2017-18), private ~46%.

CMS: Education 2025’s enrollment shares (national average ~48% government, derived from rural-urban weights) deviate slightly upward for government (due to rural bias), but align directionally with UDISE+’s privatization trend. Rural government dominance (66%) matches UDISE+’s ~70% rural government enrollment, while urban (30%) is consistent with ~40% urban government share.

Deviations: UDISE+ focuses on institutional data (e.g., dropout 14.1% secondary), while NSS is household-based, potentially underreporting non-enrolled. Expenditure is absent in UDISE+, but NSS’s high private costs align with UDISE+’s growing private schools. Major inconsistency: UDISE+ shows GER growth with fluctuation, but NSS’s coaching reliance implies quality issues not captured in enrollment metrics.

Findings have profound implications for universal school education. Rural dependence on affordable government schools supports universalization, but low expenditure (₹8,382) may correlate with poorer quality, leading to higher dropouts (UDISE+ secondary ~12% rural). Urban privatization widens access gaps for marginalized groups, challenging RTE’s free education mandate. Increased private coaching (from 19.8% in 2017-18) signals systemic deficiencies, potentially deterring universal participation at higher levels. Government vs. private: Public schools’ low costs promote inclusion, but quality perceptions drive private shifts, implying need for NEP-aligned upgrades. Rural-urban: Wider urban expenditure (2.8x rural) exacerbates migration-induced disparities, hindering 100% GER. Overall, without cost controls and public enhancements, universalization by 2030 remains elusive, especially for secondary/higher secondary.

Concluding Observations

The CMS: Education 2025 illuminates persistent challenges in India’s education landscape, with rising costs and privatization threatening equity amid NEP 2020 ambitions. Compared to the 75th Round, it shows modest expenditure increases and heightened supplementary education needs, signalling incomplete progress toward universalization. NSSO data, widely regarded as reliable due to rigorous methodology and large sample sizes, remains underutilized in district and state annual planning, primarily serving researchers. This lack of awareness limits its potential to inform localized policy, a concern for effective NEP implementation. Alignment with UDISE+ on enrollment trends is reassuring, but deviations in quality indicators urge integrated data use. Policymakers must prioritize rural government school investments, expand scholarships, and regulate private fees to realize NEP goals. As detailed on educationforallinindia.com, sustained data-driven reforms are essential for an inclusive, universal system.