Karnataka Minority Education Vision Group

Taking the first discussion forward

Building on our first meeting on 30 September, the discussion concentrated on:

• Define the remit. Clarify what the Group should examine, the recommendations it should prepare and how the work should be organised.
• Establish the baseline. Bring together existing records and identify questions that require further investigation.
• Examine educational provision. Review institutions, teaching, scholarships, coaching and other support.
• Work between meetings. Form smaller groups, undertake visits and return with specific observations and proposals.

The presentations contained several possible programmes and methods. These remain proposals for examination; this account does not treat them as adopted schemes.

A proposed framework for the work

Mr. Amman’s presentation organised the proposed work around three connected components.

1. 1

   Establish the evidence

   Combine administrative records with students’ experiences. Examine the present position across communities, districts and genders.

2. 2

   Evaluate existing provision

   Examine whom institutions and schemes reach, how resources are used and whether intended educational outcomes are achieved.

3. 3

   Prepare recommendations

   Identify immediate, medium-term and longer-term measures, with responsibilities and measurable outcomes.

The subsequent discussion developed the proposed terms of reference around access, enrolment, attendance, learning, retention, higher education, institutional conditions, support schemes and regional differences.

Building the baseline

Members discussed the need to assemble evidence across the student’s education:

• School participation. Enrolment, regular attendance, children never enrolled and children who have discontinued.
• Learning and examinations. Subject understanding, marks and readiness for the next stage.
• Progression after SSLC. PUC, ITIs, diplomas, other training and subsequent higher education.
• Higher education. Undergraduate, postgraduate and professional-course participation.
• Support received. Scholarship awareness, applications, access and institutional support.
• Later outcomes. Employment, the kind of work obtained, skills and entrepreneurship.

Members stressed the importance of recent evidence, including the period after COVID, rather than relying entirely on older studies.

Reading the preliminary enrolment analysis correctly

The presentation used 2025–26 records to explore differences between communities, districts, boys and girls, and institution types. Members raised several technical questions:

• Same-year class comparisons. Comparing enrolment in Classes 9–10 with Classes 11–12 provides an initial indication of differences between stages. It does not track the same students over time.
• Alternative pathways. Students entering ITIs, diplomas or other courses must be accounted for before interpreting lower PUC enrolment as discontinuation.
• Education hubs. Students may travel to another district for study. Enrolment at an institution’s location cannot automatically be read as participation among that district’s resident population.
• Small numbers. Unusually high ratios in smaller community groups require examination of underlying counts and denominators.
• Historical comparison. Additional years of data are needed to establish whether a pattern persists and to examine successive student cohorts.

A problem of access, a change of educational route and discontinuation require different responses.

District, gender and community differences

The discussion called for analysis at a level where differences can be understood:

• District and division. Comparisons involving coastal Karnataka, Kalaburagi and districts such as Yadgir, Raichur and Haveri raised questions for further investigation.
• Boys and girls. Participation after SSLC should be examined alongside examination marks, the courses entered and subsequent progression.
• Different minority communities. The overall minority picture should be accompanied by community-specific analysis.
• Differences within communities. Members raised social and economic background, including OBC groups within Muslim communities and Dalit Christians.
• Institution type. Government, aided, private unaided and welfare institutions should be examined within the wider picture of minority students’ education.

Possible explanations involving household income, early employment, gig work, migration and family circumstances were discussed. These need investigation before being presented as established causes.

Understanding the reasons behind the numbers

A proposed survey of 5,000–10,000 respondents would seek perspectives from students, parents and teachers across districts and communities.

• Discontinuation. Why do students discontinue at particular stages?
• Financial pressures. How do household finances and employment opportunities affect educational choices?
• Continuation. What helps students remain in education?
• Preparation. Are students learning sufficiently to benefit from further study?
• Access to support. How do families experience scholarships and other support?

The sample, questionnaire, coverage and method would need to be designed before commissioning.

Members also proposed district consultations, smaller-group visits and an online route for public suggestions. Telangana’s minority inquiry and Kerala’s Paloli Committee were discussed as references for consultation and the preparation of recommendations.

Measuring learning and institutional quality

The discussion distinguished foundational literacy and numeracy from the further subject preparation needed through elementary school and into secondary education.

• Assess learning directly. Develop a proposal with Azim Premji Foundation involvement, including comparisons with suitable schools.
• Examine language and subject understanding. Identify where difficulty arises from the language of instruction, the subject itself or both.
• Look beyond pass percentages. Examine marks, subject performance and readiness for PUC or professional study.
• Maintain student learning profiles. Use evidence about individual students to identify the support they require.
• Set institutional standards. Consider class size, staffing, teacher preparation, laboratories, computer facilities and the learning environment.
• Prioritise support. A grading approach, including an A/B/C model, was suggested to help identify institutions requiring the most attention.

The assessment’s coverage, comparison method, costs and reporting arrangements remain to be settled.

Teacher availability, preparation and classroom support

Members identified English, mathematics and science as subjects requiring particular attention.

• Staffing. Examine vacancies, subject qualifications, deployment and the balance between permanent and temporary teachers.
• Training. Provide continuing subject and teaching support, with arrangements that survive transfers or staff changes.
• Academic supervision. Examine how welfare-department schools receive curriculum guidance, classroom support and educational oversight.
• Language provision. Distinguish teaching English as a language from adopting English as the medium of instruction. English-medium schooling with Urdu retained as a first language was one suggestion raised.
• Partnerships. Draw on the experience of foundations, universities and educational institutions, including examples of teacher training and training trainers.

Attendance and support for different learners

• Follow up absences. An institutional representative described pursuing individual cases until students returned to school.
• Monitor both forms of attendance. Examine teacher attendance alongside student attendance.
• Differentiate academic support. Provide suitable help for students struggling with subjects, students needing further practice and high-performing students preparing for competitive examinations.
• Assess chapter and subject understanding. Use regular checks to guide remedial teaching and mentoring.
• Involve parents. Understand barriers to attendance and continuation, rather than relying only on enrolment records.

The discussion also included examination-preparation tools. Their usefulness should be considered alongside sustained subject learning.

Reviewing institutions, schemes and resources

Members proposed examining schools, residential institutions, Maulana Azad schools, hostels, scholarships, coaching and other educational support.

• Coverage. Who receives support, and which districts or groups remain less well served?
• Use of funds. How do allocations and expenditure relate to participation and educational outcomes?
• Effectiveness. Which programmes should be strengthened, modified or reconsidered on the evidence?
• Unaided institutions. What academic, infrastructure or partnership support could help institutions serving minority students?
• Institution mapping. Distinguish minority-managed institutions from the wider set of institutions attended by minority students.

Resource planning also featured in the discussion. One suggestion was to examine larger school models supported by transport, alongside the deployment of teachers across smaller schools. School-building designs were raised as another area for review, subject to the stage of construction and procurement.

Education, employment and community learning

The presentations proposed connecting education more closely with practical skills and future opportunities:

• Earlier exposure to skills. Examples included coding during school and practical accounting, GST and TDS work for commerce students.
• Recognised certification. Provide routes through which practical skills and trades can receive formal recognition.
• Women’s opportunities. Consider continuing education, professional guidance, digital leadership and skills that support economic independence.
• Digital and AI literacy. Prepare teachers as well as students; examine how AI, robotics and other tools could be used feasibly in education.
• Community learning spaces. Explore supplementary learning in suitable existing facilities, including mosque-linked spaces.
• Partnership networks. Connect schools, colleges, families, employers, community organisations and NGOs.

The first presentation emphasised strengthening existing institutions and facilities. It also proposed coordinated work on academic quality, scholarship access, teacher digital capability, careers, women’s opportunities, community learning and education-to-employment information.

A proposed implementation sequence

One presentation set out the following five-year sequence:

1. 1
   First 3 months

   Review and consult

   Review data, verify schemes and consult contributors.

2. 2
   Months 3–6

   Prepare the pilots

   Complete baseline planning and prepare pilot proposals.

3. 3
   Months 6–12

   Test and assess

   Run approved pilots and assess early results.

4. 4
   Years 2–3

   Expand what works

   Expand interventions supported by measurable evidence.

5. 5
   Years 4–5

   Establish continuity

   Establish arrangements that allow proven approaches to continue.

This was a proposed implementation horizon. It does not establish the Group’s tenure or an approved timetable. Members also stressed the need for useful recommendations and practical work much earlier.

Follow-up before the next meeting

The closing discussion called for the following work. Responsibilities, dates and necessary approvals remain to be confirmed.

Terms of reference

Consolidate the circulated wording and members’ amendments.

Subcommittees

Invite members’ interests, then confirm each group’s purpose, convener and membership.

Visits

A proposal envisaged groups visiting two or three institutions in and around Bengaluru and returning with observations. Visits and meetings in Kalaburagi were also suggested.

Learning assessment

Obtain a proposal covering method, comparison schools, costs and reporting.

Data requests

Obtain further years of student records and extend the evidence to higher education, scholarships, teachers and institutional conditions.

Departmental support

Identify the personnel and coordination arrangements needed to sustain the work.

Meeting access

Consider hybrid participation so members unable to attend physically can contribute.

My contribution and your guidance

As Chairman, I would like us to return with progress on these items. As a Rajya Sabha Member from Karnataka, I can also pursue appropriate questions concerning information held by the Union government and bring those answers into our consideration.

I welcome corrections, relevant studies and suggestions from members. Please share these in the Group.

Mansoor Ali KhanRajya Sabha Member from KarnatakaChairman, Karnataka Minority Education Vision Group