Volume 1, Issue 1 (2026)

भारत में विद्यालयी शिक्षा ने पिछले दो दशकों में पहुँच, नामांकन, विद्यालयों की संख्या, आधारभूत सुविधाओं, छात्रवृत्तियों, बालिका शिक्षा, वंचित समुदायों की भागीदारी और शैक्षिक योजनाओं के विस्तार के स्तर पर उल्लेखनीय प्रगति की है, किन्तु विद्यालयी व्यवस्था की वास्तविक सफलता का आकलन केवल इस आधार पर नहीं किया जा सकता कि कितने बच्चे विद्यालय में नामांकित हैं या कितने वर्ष तक विद्यालय में बने रहते हैं। शिक्षा की गुणवत्ता का सबसे महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न यह है कि विद्यार्थी विद्यालय में बिताए गए समय के दौरान वास्तव में कितना पढ़ना, समझना, लिखना, गणना करना, तर्क करना, समस्या का समाधान करना और अर्जित ज्ञान को जीवन की परिस्थितियों में लागू करना सीखते हैं। प्रस्तुत अध्ययन का उद्देश्य भारत में स्कूली विद्यार्थियों के अधिगम परिणामों की प्रमुख प्रवृत्तियों, हाल की प्रगति, कक्षा-स्तरीय परिवर्तन, सामाजिक एवं क्षेत्रीय असमानताओं और उन संरचनात्मक चुनौतियों का विश्लेषण करना है जो गुणवत्तापूर्ण अधिगम को प्रभावित करती हैं। अध्ययन पूर्णतः द्वितीयक आँकड़ों पर आधारित है और इसमें वार्षिक शिक्षा स्थिति सर्वेक्षण, राष्ट्रीय उपलब्धि सर्वेक्षण, परख राष्ट्रीय सर्वेक्षण तथा विद्यालयी शिक्षा से संबंधित सरकारी प्रशासनिक आँकड़ों का उपयोग किया गया है। उपलब्ध साक्ष्यों से पता चलता है कि महामारी के बाद प्रारम्भिक कक्षाओं में पढ़ने और अंकगणित की बुनियादी क्षमताओं में स्पष्ट सुधार हुआ है तथा वर्ष २०२२ से २०२४ के बीच सरकारी विद्यालयों के विद्यार्थियों में यह सुधार विशेष रूप से उल्लेखनीय रहा है। इसके विपरीत, उच्चतर कक्षाओं में गणित, विज्ञान, अवधारणात्मक समझ और जटिल समस्या समाधान से संबंधित उपलब्धियाँ अपेक्षाकृत कमजोर बनी हुई हैं। अध्ययन यह भी दर्शाता है कि राष्ट्रीय औसत के भीतर राज्यों, सामाजिक समूहों, विद्यालयी परिस्थितियों, भाषा, घरेलू संसाधनों और माध्यमिक स्तर तक विद्यालय में बने रहने की क्षमता के आधार पर महत्त्वपूर्ण अंतर उपस्थित हैं। निष्कर्षतः भारत में विद्यालयी शिक्षा को केवल नामांकन और आधारभूत संरचना केन्द्रित दृष्टिकोण से आगे बढ़ाकर वास्तविक कक्षा-अधिगम, आधारभूत साक्षरता एवं संख्याज्ञान, शिक्षक सहायता, स्तरानुकूल शिक्षण, सतत मूल्यांकन, स्थानीय भाषा और सामाजिक संदर्भ के अनुरूप शैक्षिक हस्तक्षेपों पर अधिक केन्द्रित करने की आवश्यकता है।

The rapid development of large language model tools has altered the way university students approach academic coursework. These tools can explain difficult concepts, generate and revise text, provide formative feedback, support brainstorming, assist with programming, translate academic material, and facilitate personalised interaction with learning content. Their growing use creates important opportunities for higher education, particularly where students require immediate feedback or where instructors work with large classes and limited time. At the same time, large language models raise substantial concerns regarding academic integrity, authorship, factual accuracy, fabricated references, over-reliance, privacy, bias, unequal access, and the validity of conventional assessment practices. This paper critically examines the opportunities and challenges associated with the use of large language model tools in academic coursework. It adopts an integrative analytical review based primarily on recent peer-reviewed empirical studies, systematic reviews, and international guidance published since the widespread availability of conversational generative artificial intelligence. The available evidence indicates that carefully structured use can improve academic performance, writing, formative feedback, engagement, and some forms of problem solving. However, educational benefits depend strongly on task design, student artificial-intelligence literacy, verification practices, and continued human judgement. Unrestricted substitution of machine-generated work for students' intellectual effort can weaken independent reasoning and undermine the validity of assessment. The paper argues that higher education should move beyond a simple choice between prohibition and unrestricted adoption. Instead, institutions should integrate large language model tools through transparent rules, process-based assessment, disclosure of material use, source verification, oral or reflective components, and explicit instruction in critical artificial-intelligence literacy. The central educational challenge is therefore not whether students will encounter these tools, but how their use can support rather than replace the intellectual processes that academic coursework is intended to develop.

Digital technology has become increasingly important to school education in India, but expansion in connectivity has not produced equal opportunities for students. This study examines digital access and educational inequality among school students using secondary data from UDISE+ 2025–26, the NITI Aayog analysis of UDISE+ data for 2014–15 to 2024–25, and the Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 2024. The analysis distinguishes between school-level digital infrastructure, household access, individual control over devices, digital skills and educational use. At the national level, the proportion of schools with computer facilities reached 69.9 per cent and internet connectivity 67.4 per cent in 2025–26. The longer comparable UDISE+ series shows that functional computer availability rose from 26.42 per cent in 2014–15 to 64.7 per cent in 2024–25, while school internet access rose from 8.05 to 63.5 per cent. These improvements conceal striking interstate disparities: in 2024–25 computer availability ranged from 100 per cent in Lakshadweep to 19.7 per cent in Meghalaya, while internet availability ranged from 100 per cent in several Union Territories to 18.6 per cent in West Bengal. ASER 2024 further reveals that household smartphone availability among rural adolescents aged 14–16 is close to universal, but access does not imply autonomy or digital competence. Although 90.2 per cent of boys and 88.1 per cent of girls reported a smartphone at home, only 36.2 per cent of boys and 26.9 per cent of girls who could use a smartphone owned one themselves. Gender differences become more pronounced in effective device availability, digital safety and selected digital tasks. The study concludes that India's contemporary digital divide is increasingly a divide not simply of connectivity but of ownership, autonomy, skills, quality of access and meaningful educational use.

India has achieved substantial expansion in school participation, teacher availability and educational infrastructure, yet national averages conceal pronounced differences in progression, learning and school resources across States and Union Territories. This study examines recent trends and regional disparities in Indian school education using secondary data from UDISE+ 2025–26, NITI Aayog’s decadal analysis of UDISE+ data for 2014–15 to 2024–25, and the Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 2024. The latest administrative data cover approximately 14.67 lakh schools, 24.72 crore students and 1.03 crore teachers. The analysis shows that the central challenge in Indian schooling is increasingly shifting from initial access to continued participation beyond the elementary stage, foundational learning, and equitable access to educational resources. Higher-secondary participation improved considerably during the last decade, but large interstate gaps persist. In 2024–25, secondary Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) ranged from 110.1 per cent in Chandigarh to 51.1 per cent in Bihar, while higher-secondary GER ranged from 107.4 per cent in Chandigarh to 38.1 per cent in Bihar. Transition from secondary to higher secondary ranged from 100 per cent in Delhi and Chandigarh to 47.8 per cent in Meghalaya. Digital infrastructure is similarly unequal: computer facilities were available in 100 per cent of schools in Lakshadweep but only 19.7 per cent in Meghalaya. Rural learning indicators recovered substantially after the pandemic, but ASER 2024 shows that foundational competencies remain uneven and incomplete. The findings suggest that India requires geographically differentiated interventions concentrating on secondary-stage retention, foundational learning, digital and physical infrastructure, and the intersection of regional and socioeconomic disadvantage.

Teacher educators occupy a central position in the preparation of future teachers and are expected to fulfil instructional, mentoring, assessment, research, administrative and institutional responsibilities simultaneously. The coexistence of these demands can shape their satisfaction with work, their commitment to the teaching profession and the degree of role conflict they experience. The present study examines the interrelationships among job satisfaction, professional commitment and role conflict among teacher educators in B.Ed. colleges. A quantitative, cross-sectional approach was adopted, and the reported structural relationships were examined through partial least-squares structural equation modelling. The model explained 12.7% of the variance in job satisfaction and 10.4% of the variance in professional commitment. Role conflict demonstrated a statistically significant association with job satisfaction, whereas its direct relationship with professional commitment was not statistically significant. Job satisfaction also did not show a statistically significant direct relationship with professional commitment in the reported structural model. These findings suggest that role-related conditions are particularly relevant to the immediate work experience of teacher educators, while professional commitment may be influenced by a broader range of personal, institutional and professional factors. The study emphasises the importance of clear role allocation, manageable workloads, supportive leadership, professional autonomy and meaningful development opportunities in teacher-education institutions.