Reading Between the Lines of Accelerating India’s Development

“Except getting most of the children to school, everything that could go wrong has gone wrong with school education in India.” 

Kartik Muralidharan’s Accelerating India’s Development canvasses education in a way that cuts through institutional jargon and speaks directly to those working within the system. The book names what has faltered over decades while maintaining a disarming optimism through its solutions that hold immense potential if implemented with care and sincerity.

I write this as a fellow educator who has spent nearly two years on the ground, struggling and occasionally succeeding at bridging mammoth learning gaps in a government school in Central Delhi. While Muralidharan addresses many systemic issues, I focus on a few that shape our students’ quotidian realities.

He traces India’s educational challenges back to the early decades after independence, when prioritising tertiary education came at the cost of investing in universal primary schooling. That short-sighted choice produced generations of learners entering higher grades without foundational skills, deepening India’s skill crisis. When he writes, “It must be a miracle that more do not drop out given how demoralizing it must be to attend school without following much of what is going on,” I think of Mahera in my Grade 7 classroom who shows up to school every day yet still grapples with the alphabet while her peers juggle complex equations.

Despite allocating nearly 3% of GDP to education, structural problems persist. India has succeeded in bringing children to school, but schooling has not translated into learning. The system continues to reward quantity over quality, leaving students several grades below curricular expectations. This indifference toward real learning manifests in classrooms, where students begin to experience education as something that merely happens to them rather than something meant for them.

Muralidharan also describes the system as a filtration mechanism — effective at identifying exceptional students while leaving many others behind. The issue is not excellence itself, but how this structure diverts attention from those who fall steadily below curricular standards, often pushing them toward cramming or cheating just to stay afloat.

In response, leadership frequently turns to input-heavy or infrastructure-driven solutions that resemble placing a non-waterproof bandage on a broken leg. Instead of recognising instruction as the binding constraint, programmes are introduced that do little to address foundational deficits. Technology cannot transform classrooms where students cannot yet read. Swachh Bharat campaigns teaching fifteen-year-olds how to wash their hands feel as redundant as an echo in an empty room. These patterns reveal a deeper problem: bureaucratic incentives reward the appearance of activity rather than its outcomes.

Perhaps the most hopeful part of the book lies in Muralidharan’s grounded, practical, and implementable solutions. Investment in foundational learning is now inevitable, and while initiatives like NIPUN Bharat recognise this, they could be bolstered by several of his recommendations. Tailored instruction, introducing volunteers into classrooms, and fixing testing standards feel particularly urgent. Albeit, from my experience, these changes must occur simultaneously rather than sequentially to produce real progress.

His emphasis on accountability rests on the integrity of administrative data. The proposal for nested supervision where teachers record digital data while supervisors re-test random samples, is promising, but it also raises concerns. If schools continue to be rewarded primarily for high results rather than genuine growth, multiple layers of dishonesty may emerge. Alignment around goals must ensure educators do not feel pressured to inflate progress when learning advances slowly.

Another compelling suggestion is leveraging private expertise for public good by inviting high-quality nonprofit organisations to operate underutilised urban government schools. Institutions like Teach For India often bring a deeply student-centred approach rooted in differentiated learning and high expectations for every child. With sufficient autonomy, such partnerships could help dismantle prevailing institutional barriers.

While much of Muralidharan’s vision resonates with me, a few proposals leave me uneasy. Volunteer-led after-school programmes assume that additional hours automatically improve outcomes. In reality, extended tuition schedules often leave students with little time for self-study — a crucial habit during formative years. Integrating targeted instructional support within school hours may achieve similar results without overwhelming them.

Similarly, the idea that low-paid volunteers can improve learning outcomes holds some truth.I have witnessed the power of individual attention firsthand. Yet, low compensation often leads to higher absenteeism. Teaching is emotionally demanding work, and inconsistent incentives produce inconsistent outcomes. Adequate budgeting for staffing would make such initiatives more sustainable.

I would also emphasise meaningful parent engagement. Much of students’ indifference toward education begins at home, where learning is rarely framed as transformative. Unless that cycle shifts, no amount of external motivation inside school walls can compensate. Parent-focused policies — sustained engagement programmes, community workshops, and structured communication — could rebuild the value placed on education beyond the classroom.

As Paulo Freire wrote, “There’s no such thing as neutral education. Education either functions as an instrument to bring about conformity or freedom.” For too long, our system has treated students as passive participants. It is time to recognise their agency and potential to contribute meaningfully to India’s development. Muralidharan has outlined bold steps; the responsibility now lies with policymakers to break the cycle of superficial reform and invest where it truly matters. Otherwise, as he warns, by 2047 India may add another 200 million children who complete primary school without being able to read a single paragraph.