Coaching centres grapple with new guidelines, wary of 16-year age limit, fee scrutiny

“Certain regulations may pose challenges for both coaching centres and students. For instance, stringent accreditation requirements, excessive fees for compliance and rigid curriculum guidelines could burden coaching centres,” said Srinivas Konduti, Director of the Sanjay Ghodawat IIT and Medical Academy.

Additionally, regulations that limit the flexibility of teaching methods and impose strict time constraints may impact the learning experience for students, Konduti said, adding that students might face increased pressure due to additional assessments or standardised testing.

The state government will be responsible for monitoring the activities of the coaching centre and scrutinising the registration eligibility and activities of the coaching centre.

‘Uniform code will kill liberty’

“Every institution runs with a slight difference in the memorandum and articles of the association of the institution. Putting a uniform code to all will kill liberty,” said Konduti. Coaching centres look at the requirement of students, in line with their standard of education. “Say, like a student from a vernacular medium who struggles with the English language to mobilise his/her ideas and comprehension into answering,” he added.

ALSO READ | Ayodhya to create 15% surge in civil engineering jobs riding on Ram Mandir growth wave

Similarly, Gaurav Goel, Co-founder and CEO of Toprankers, said that while hefty financial penalties are necessary to discourage non-compliance, they could be a formidable challenge for smaller coaching centres with limited resources. “It is therefore essential to find a balance that ensures compliance without putting an excessive burden on institutions,” he said.

‘Age factor limits education’

Coaching centres cannot engage tutors qualifying less than graduation, enrol students below 16 years of age, make misleading promises, and guarantee a rank or good marks, according to the new guidelines.

While much of this is seen as a shot in the arm, coaching centres think specifying an age limit will hinder learning. “We need to understand the difference between home tuition and coaching centres. The age of 16 is also probably looked at from the angle of the entrance exam. But if a child is weak in maths, science, or a language and wants coaching in the 8th or 9th standard, where can he go,” wondered Anthony Fernandes, founder of Shaalaa.com.

“Coming with the belief that age should not be a barrier for any kind of learning, I would request the government to reconsider the age factor in the guidelines,” said Nitin Viijay, Founder & CEO of Motion Education.

ALSO READ | Colleges change assignments, assessment methods with GenAI integration

The guidelines stipulate that the tuition fees for different courses shall be fair and reasonable. For instance, if the student has paid for the course in full and is leaving the course in the middle of the prescribed period, the student will be refunded the fees deposited earlier for the remaining period, on a pro-rata basis, within 10 days. If the student is residing in a hostel of the coaching centre, the hostel fees, mess charges etc shall also be refunded.

Fernandes questioned the idea of fees being governed by the government, pointing out that each location has a different rent and cost of living. “The market will always find its price. Misleading advertisements are the bigger culprit; they can artificially take the price up by promising what they are not offering or cannot offer—sparking the fear of ‘losing out’ in parents and making them pay high fees without comparing them with another coaching class or by making a wrong comparison,” he said.

Need for more legal teeth

The guidelines regulating coaching institutes have been framed to address the need for a legal framework and manage the unregulated growth of private coaching centres.

In case of violations, the guidelines suggest penal action such as imposition of fines and revocation of the registration/licence of the coaching centre.

“While these penalties seem reasonable as penal consequences, another potential penalty that may be added is imposition of liability on coaching centres to refund the full fees previously paid by the student for services,” said Abhinay Sharma, Managing Partner of law firm ASL Partners.

ALSO READ | Schools sceptical of later hours for children, say “problem lies elsewhere”

While the guidelines are broad, experts say they cannot be taken as sufficient to curb the unregulated growth of private coaching centres.
Sharma also said coaching centres should not be permitted to compel regular attendance by students. Even if attendance has to be maintained, the minimum requirement should be low and reasonable, he contended.

Further, he said coaching centres should not be permitted to adopt ‘batch segregation’—segregation of students on any basis, most commonly on performance. Moreover, demoting a student to a lower-performing batch will diminish his/her morale and motivation to improve, thus, defeating the purpose of such segregation, Sharma said.

“There is a requirement for a specific rule that mandates proper and comfortable seating for every student. Most coaching centres require students to sit in uncomfortable and small spaces, on the floor, etc,” he added.