Why?

Why is the Xchool program necessary?

This article analyzes critical flaws in India's education system through insights from leading tech and education experts, including IIT and IISc academics, Hotmail founder Sabeer Bhatia, and Infosys founder Narayana Murthy. It presents Xchool's innovative evaluation system as a potential solution. The discussion also explores how technological advancement and economic shifts will reshape high school and college education in the coming years.

Perception vs. Reality

Despite popular perceptions that Indians run Silicon Valley, people are now realizing that China is racing ahead in technology, surpassing the US in many areas and leaving the Indian tech sector in the dust. Meanwhile, AI is growing, tech companies are cutting jobs, and the new US government is changing the global economy.

The US & China racing ahead

China's Ministry of Education issued 2025 guidelines establishing a tiered AI education framework: primary schools teach fundamentals, middle schools cover applications, and high schools focus on innovation and algorithms. In the US, organizations like aiEDU, MIT's RAISE, and Code.org develop AI curricula and tools for schools. McGraw Hill offers AI Reader and Writing Assistant to enhance learning experiences. Over 250 US CEOs warn that America risks falling behind China and South Korea in AI education, potentially losing $660 billion annually. They advocate for mandatory computer science and AI education in schools. Indians are aware of the risks, but unsure about what to do.

The Indian crisis

Leaders in technology and education have voiced serious concerns about Indian students and professionals, citing their deficiencies in critical thinking abilities, innovation capabilities, and entrepreneurial drive. Critics widely blame coaching centers and the examination-focused education system as the root cause behind these shortcomings.

This article focuses on top Indian institutions like IITs and IISc. The situation at other colleges is much worse and well known. The vast majority of Indian engineers are unemployable—largely due to rote-based education, lack of practical training, outdated curricula, and limited exposure to industry standards.

What’s wrong with rote learning?

IIT Bombay professor Anurag Mehra wrote an article called "Rote Learning and the Destruction of Creativity" in The India Forum (June 2021). He points out that focusing too much on high marks and competitive exams has created a superficial learning system. This destroys students' natural curiosity and ability to innovate. To fix this problem, he suggests major changes to school facilities, teaching methods, and testing systems to help develop creativity and critical thinking skills.

Infosys founder Narayana Murthy also voiced concerns on this issue. At the Infosys 2022 Prize Ceremony, he talked about "The importance of research in solving pressing problems around us." Murthy called for changing how we teach in schools and colleges to include more questioning and discussion. He also stressed the need to connect classroom learning with real-world problems. According to him, IITs have fallen victim to memorization-based learning because of the harmful influence of coaching centers.

Contrasting Indian and US education systems

Hotmail co-founder Sabeer Bhatia criticized how IITs teach students. In a Business Today article (March 13, 2025), he compared IITs with Stanford University. He said real learning happens through hands-on experience and internet resources, not just classroom teaching. Later, in an Economic Times interview (May 6, 2025), Bhatia strongly criticized Indian education. He said it creates obedient workers rather than independent thinkers.

He talked about creative writing in US schools, where his children are encouraged to write their own stories without worrying about spelling mistakes. "Teachers don't correct those because spelling is irrelevant. What matters is the thought," he explained. In contrast, he said Indian education focuses on memorization: "You're never asked to write a paper. You're asked to memorize 13 chapters and regurgitate them. That is not education."

Bhatia says innovation needs people who think critically—who build things, try new ideas, and aren't scared of failing. But in India, people see failure as shameful, as if one mistake erases all your successes. He believes that as long as India values following orders over independent thinking, the country will waste talent on a system that creates followers instead of innovators. "We are producing an army of useless kids," he said. Bhatia created ShowReel, an AI course that teaches entrepreneurship and critical thinking skills.

Damage caused by coaching centers

In a LinkedIn post from August 29, 2023, Mayank Shrivastava, who leads the M-Tech program at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), criticized coaching centers for teaching shortcuts to pass exams instead of building deep understanding. He found that only 20% of students with top GATE ranks could pass tests requiring written explanations, and only 10% showed a connection between their GATE ranks and how well they did in interviews. Shrivastava pointed out that these coaching centers focus on exam tricks rather than real learning, which hurts students' ability to handle practical work and research tasks.

Shrivastava noticed something strange: even though the number of applicants for entrance exams hasn't grown and there are now many more college seats available, coaching centers have rapidly multiplied with skyrocketing enrollment. He suggests we need to change how parents and society view education. He also believes the coaching industry needs regulation because it exploits students' fears about failing exams. His article suggests that personal interviews might be the best way to find the right students for colleges.

In 2011 at a pan-IIT summit, Narayana Murthy said that "Thanks to coaching classes today, the quality of students entering IITs has gone lower and lower." He seems to believe that before coaching classes became common, students were better at innovation and starting businesses. There's no proof of this claim, but some commenters thought this view comes from the changing student population at IITs. Today, more students from poor and middle-class families in small cities attend IITs compared to 30 years ago. For these students, coaching centers and passing entrance exams are their only way to get a valuable degree. The problem is that these entrance exams reward memorization rather than deep understanding and creative thinking.

Further damage caused by institutions

Students from less privileged backgrounds often lack the broader skills necessary for innovation and entrepreneurship. After years of struggle, they understandably prefer secure jobs over business risks. Yet colleges could easily incorporate soft skills and entrepreneurship training into undergraduate programs. As highlighted in a 2008 discussion involving Mohandas Pai, former CFO and HR Chief of Infosys:

The IITs place tremendous emphasis on examination scores and very little on learning. Students are taught by rote, and there is little to no emphasis on critical thinking, logical reasoning, or oral and written communication skills.

Pai further noted that this approach results in "smart, well-educated people who can have trouble with such professional basics as working on a team or good phone manners." The article additionally observes:

Many of India's other educational institutions face even worse problems. Most Indian universities place the same emphasis on rote learning and test scores, and, unlike the IIT's, also lack such fundamentals as electricity and textbooks.

Wasting subsidized college education

Our educational institutions fail to foster genuine interest in technology or guide students toward careers in engineering. Instead, they emphasize tests and rankings to sidestep their true responsibilities. These institutions must be accountable to the public rather than deflecting blame onto students, parents, society, or coaching centers for their systemic problems.

In a June 2023 interview with The Indian Express, IIT Madras Director V. Kamakoti worried about India's deficit of civil and aerospace engineers needed for building infrastructure and supporting the aviation industry. He was dissapointed that many engineering graduates are choosing jobs in marketing and trading overseas instead. He called this a "waste of resources."

Sabeer Bhatia shared similar thoughts in an April 2025 interview with The Economic Times. He said, "Even our brightest IIT grads end up chasing jobs at JP Morgan." According to him, India's weak startup culture is a result of both the education system and society's attitude. People tend to follow safe, proven paths instead of taking risks. He explained that Stanford University encourages students to create new things and supports them in developing their ideas. In contrast, the Indian system tends to discourage and diminish the confidence of creative thinkers.

Moral & psychological malfunction

These institutions not only fail to teach important soft skills, but they also have very unhealthy social environments that seriously harm students' mental health:

IISc Bengaluru is removing ceiling fans from student rooms to stop suicides. "There have been six suicides on campus in just two years." — The Indian Express, December 17, 2021.

The Toxicity of Indian PhD Labs. "I am a PhD student at one of the seven oldest IITs. If you read the news, you've probably seen the very high number of suicides and mental health problems at IITs. Have you wondered why?" — The Wire, July 26, 2022.

The current article doesn't fully explore all education issues, but India's lack of quality higher education is clearly reflected in its absence of world-class public intellectuals. Schools and workplaces are often toxic environments where people mistreat each other through manipulation and harmful behaviors.

Many problems in our society—like lack of civility, corruption, white-collar crimes, and poor treatment of service workers—are reflections of our broken education system. Both families and schools fail to teach basic good behavior, not to mention higher moral values. The way we educate people today seems to be making these problems worse, not better.

Work versus taking exams

Students without genuine interest in engineering or entrepreneurship might be better suited elsewhere. American universities address this through high tuition fees, naturally filtering for committed students. In India, heavily subsidized education leads to excessive competition for top government colleges. Despite their flaws, these institutions remain the most attractive options available.

Companies often demand employees work 90 hours weekly, but these workers are already exhausted. They've spent years studying 90 hours weekly to pass entrance exams, followed by countless more exams in college. By the time they begin learning on the job, they're completely burned out.

Blame exams not coaching centers

India's education system is outdated. It was designed during an era when passing exams guaranteed secure government jobs with good benefits and minimal physical work. Rather than fostering independent thinking, the system trains students to memorize half-true information. This produces followers who execute instructions rather than innovators who create. Such an approach is ill-suited for today's world, which demands creative thinking, competitive spirit, and innovation.

Rather than blaming coaching centers for causing irreversible damage, we should recognize they simply fill a market need. These centers bridge the gap between school education and entrance exam requirements, using rote learning methods because that's what the exams reward. If institutions genuinely want to discourage this approach, they must fundamentally transform their exam-based selection process. While this represents a significant shift, no other viable alternative exists.

True enjoyment of learning stems from curiosity and discovery—not from memorizing facts or using tools without understanding their purpose, as Elon explains in the following video. His teaching approach involves presenting students with a complex problem, showing them how to break it into manageable components, and guiding them to acquire the knowledge and tools needed to solve each part.

Change is necessary and inevitable

As technology and political events change our economy, our education system also needs to evolve. When asked why they don't produce more entrepreneurs, institutions often blame lack of funding. While India does spend less on research than countries like the US, schools should look for partnerships with companies and foreign universities. But asking for more money isn't the real solution when institutions are using what they already have to teach memorization instead of useful skills.

The best students in India should work together instead of just competing for grades. Colleges should cut back on coursework and give students chances to explore their own ideas through entrepreneurship workshops or real-world experience in companies. Many student projects will fail, but that's an important lesson they need. These students have passed many exams but haven't learned how to deal with failure, which is essential for success. As Sabeer Bhatia points out, many graduates avoid hands-on work and prefer management positions where they can give “gyaan” and blame others when things go wrong.

Some reports claim that "about 95% of graduates are unemployable." While this number might be exaggerated, most people agree that many engineering graduates can't find jobs because they lack practical skills and their education is outdated. These statistics previously didn't include the top colleges (IITs, NITs, and a few others). Unfortunately, the situation has become even worse over time.

The futility of competitive exams

Competitive exams function primarily as elimination tools, allowing selectors to avoid conducting subjective evaluations of candidates—assessments that are essential for understanding students' genuine motivation and interest in a discipline. Students aspiring to study engineering at top institutions should demonstrate authentic interest in technology and entrepreneurship, rather than solving difficult problems with no practical purpose or memorizing facts they'll quickly forget.

In a low-trust society, any subjective evaluation method, such as assessing student projects, risks being perceived as unfair or suspicious. The single-shot elimination exam system avoids this mistrust but then deflects blame for its negative consequences onto students, parents, coaching centers, and society. To break free from memorization-based learning, institutions must fundamentally transform their exam-centric selection process.

Admissions to top colleges worldwide typically evaluate three criteria: intelligence, basic knowledge, and special interests. While competitive entrance exams attempt to measure intelligence and knowledge, they completely fail to reveal whether students have genuine interest in fields like engineering.

The current selection process incorrectly assumes that students who excel at memorizing facts and taking tests would also be interested in pursuing engineering careers—an assumption that hasn't withstood fact-checking. These competitive exams are largely redundant since standardized tests like the SAT already assess intelligence, and high school exams already verify the basic knowledge required for engineering.

Solution: The Xchool evaluation system

The Xchool program evaluates proficiency gradually in a stress-free manner, eliminating the need for exam cramming. It empowers students to learn independently while recording their achievements on the Xchool platform. Students build comprehensive profiles showcasing their genuine achievements—including written articles, projects, advanced courses, business ventures, sports accomplishments, and artistic creations.

Colleges can efficiently review the data using desired parameters and compare these portfolios during the selection process. A brief interview serves as the final step, simply confirming the student's motivation and program fit. If government and private educational institutions adopted the Xchool approach, Indian students would engage in more meaningful learning experiences and gain valuable practical skills.

Benefits of the continuous evaluation system

Students need guidance based on their interests and strengths. Matching students with appropriate careers is essential—not only for their individual success and happiness, but also for society's advancement.

The 'continuous evaluation' system can more effectively place students in college programs they're genuinely suited for. For example, a student passionate about computer science can focus on relevant college courses during school, instead of wasting time on advanced chemistry which may be irrelevant to them. This approach gives students more control over their future.

Transitioning from rote learning to special achievements

While we shouldn't expect too much from high school students, today's internet access and AI technology make learning and writing more accessible for exceptional students. Talented students must be identified early, allowing them to pursue college-level courses or projects aligned with their interests.

The rote learning challenge persists because many school teachers themselves were trained through memorization methods and know no alternative teaching approaches. Fortunately, abundant free online resources now exist, allowing students to access world-class educational materials from leading institutions, including US universities. Students can document this self-directed learning on the Xchool platform, earning credit for their learning. They can also showcase credentials from established providers like Coursera directly on their profiles.

Solving the coaching center problem

If selection processes emphasized special achievements rather than elimination exams, coaching centers would naturally shift toward developing children's natural talents instead of merely teaching them to solve textbook problems. These centers could function like elite schools, nurturing talented students toward outstanding careers.

Coaching institutes could serve as valuable bridges between students, colleges, and industry. They can identify talented high school students, while private universities can offer career-oriented programs that emphasize hands-on projects over traditional coursework and examinations. This approach provides learners with meaningful education.

In this way, coaching centers become legitimate stakeholders in the education process. They become accountable to the students they recruit and to the colleges and industries they serve. Their reputation would depend on identifying the right talent and properly preparing students for college and career. Currently, they lack proper incentives—they simply admit as many students as possible and force-feed them information. If a student fails, they bear no responsibility.

Is the Xchool system fair?

The Xchool system empowers students to gain worldwide visibility without relying on meaningless board and competitive exams, opening up more possibilities. Consider a talented, poor student from a small town. Coaching centers would have a strong incentive to identify this student, develop their skills, and guide them to a suitable college based on their preparation and interests. Talented students can be easily identified through simple IQ tests and matched to their desired fields. Currently, such students blindly progress through the coaching system, focusing only on clearing the next exam with no future planning.

For coaching centers to engage students in project work for specialized fields, they would need faculty with appropriate backgrounds who can facilitate such opportunities, rather than relying solely on school subject teachers. This would represent a positive shift. Since not everyone can access suitable project work, college-level coursework in relevant subjects, available online, should be considered equally valuable.

Minimal regulation is needed for coaching centers, including maximum fee caps with 30% structured as a success fee payable upon successful student admission. Restrictions should also apply to how centers reward top performers. Centers should conduct recruitment and placement transparently, with clear grievance redressal mechanisms. While corruption remains possible, public exposure would quickly damage a center's reputation, discouraging such practices.

Can the system be used in government institutions?

Government institutions in India are neither accountable to the public nor to market forces. Instead, they blame society, coaching centers, and insufficient funding for their problems. Every government admission and appointment relies on elimination/competitive exams, which has led to the proliferation of coaching centers—causing enormous harm with minimal benefit.

This system selects individuals who excel at memorizing information, solving textbook problems, and taking timed tests. It fails to produce the critical thinkers, innovators, industrialists, leaders, and public intellectuals that the country desperately needs. While the world advances toward self-driving cars, we remain stuck in traffic—honking horns and losing our patience—a direct consequence of 80 years of exam-centered education.

Government institutions must be held accountable to the public. They claim coaching centers teach the wrong way, but this raises an important question: if coaching centers taught the "right way," would these institutions accept it, or would they still insist on students taking their competitive exams? Xchool offers a solution by allowing testing at the competitive exam level without requiring it to be completed in a single sitting.

Huge policy decisions are on the horizon

Indian government institutions cannot be compared to the best universities in the US because the US attracts global talent and funding that India cannot match. In fact, India exports talent to the US every year. Rather than demanding the impossible from Indian institutions, we should focus on practical improvements. At minimum, they should eliminate the root cause of most problems—the exam-centric education system—and replace it with approaches emphasizing experimental and industrial applications.

These government institutions create problematic incentives through subsidized education while simultaneously complaining about insufficient funding. Their flawed selection process denies opportunities to those who might have thrived in technology careers and benefited society. Instead, they waste valuable resources on individuals who excel at clearing exams but may not be suited for the field.

The Indian public faces a critical choice: adopt a reasonable system or lose in the global talent market. AI can now perform any task that requires rote learning. The current lack of recruitment at IITs should serve as a wake-up call. Unless India embraces modern educational approaches, its large youth population—underskilled and underemployed—will become a significant liability rather than an asset.

The changing college landscape

A 2017 article quoted two IIT directors who said education needs big changes to keep up with today's world. According to Director Biswas, IITs should improve teaching of soft skills, data analysis, and Internet of Things. The article pointed out that while top IITs have good funding and staff, other engineering colleges are struggling badly.

Normally, universities rely on research labs to give students hands-on experience along with classroom learning. But in India, the government doesn't have enough money to build modern research facilities. This means colleges need to partner with companies to provide students with practical, real-world experience.

Online learning and AI technology are changing how colleges work. Big traditional campuses with many departments aren't as necessary anymore. This gives smaller colleges a chance to succeed by connecting with Indian companies. For example, colleges that focus on one area—like computer engineering—can offer specialized training while working with other Indian or foreign universities to provide online courses.

Knowledge and technology are moving at such a rapid pace that it is hard for undergraduate educational institutions to keep up. It is enough to ensure that students know the basics of each subject, from which they can pursue their own education according to their priorities and interests, using AI and every other means available. This is the essence of "personalized" education. Forcing students to learn things that they will eventually forget is a waste of time and resources that a developing country like India can no longer afford.

The Xchool evaluation platform and profile offers an effective, cost-efficient way for private institutions and companies to provide career opportunities to committed students. This would create healthy competition against the current system that is failing to serve students' needs.

Conclusion

Contemporary society presents its own set of "competitions," and archaic board and competitive examinations have far outlived their usefulness. On the other hand, Indians have always valued education. They have been victims of political, economic, and social factors that have denied them a good education. Hence, the present proposal seeks to remedy the situation by empowering the public to participate in the betterment of education.