Across India every evening, huge numbers of students juggle school work with long coaching batches as they chase JEE, NEET and CUET dreams. For many households these tests determine a child’s future, and the pressure often begins by Class 9. That pattern may soon shift, as a central panel reviews how the country runs its most competitive entrance exams.
The committee is weighing some far‑reaching changes. One proposal is to hold exams such as JEE, NEET and CUET in Class 11 instead of after Class 12. Another is to restrict coaching to roughly two or three hours a day, replacing the six‑hour marathons common in many institutes. A blended evaluation framework that mixes board results with aptitude‑oriented tests is also being discussed. In addition, the exams could run twice a year, in line with the National Education Policy 2020, so students get more than one attempt and feel less “all‑or‑nothing” pressure.
What is driving this rethink? Members have flagged rising burnout and the spread of “dummy schools”, where students remain enrolled only on paper while spending their days at coaching centres. Large curriculum gaps between state boards and national entrance tests are another concern, as they pull students away from real classroom engagement. To tackle this, NCERT has been tasked with working alongside CBSE and state boards to align syllabi more closely and narrow these gaps.
Handled well, the proposed changes could reshape learning in India. Bringing exams forward might distribute the study burden more evenly, while shorter coaching schedules could return serious learning time to schools. A mixed assessment model could value steady performance across the year instead of a single high-stakes test, with possible benefits for students’ mental health and family life. At Sparsh Academy, such progressive changes align with our vision of balanced, meaningful and student-centric education.
Yet major doubts remain. Could shifting exams to Class 11 simply move the stress earlier? Are schools, particularly in rural or under‑resourced areas, ready to raise teaching standards to the level of top coaching institutes? And will coaching centres merely redesign their offerings to suit the new framework?
In the end, any reform will succeed only if the classroom becomes central again and teachers, not test series, anchor understanding. India’s next big education experiment seeks to restore that equilibrium. Whether it truly slows the coaching race or merely redraws its track will depend on how honestly schools, boards and parents commit to this change.
