Mainstream WeeklyThe inauguration of the first Telangana Public School (TPS) at Arutla by Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy marks an important moment in the history of public education in Telangana. The Chief Minister described the initiative as a flagship effort to restore confidence among parents in government education. He announced that Telangana Public Schools would eventually be established in every Assembly constituency, offering high-quality English-medium education, transportation, sports facilities, and nutritious meals.
At a time when public education has suffered decades of neglect, this renewed commitment deserves appreciation. Any serious effort to strengthen government schools is welcome. Yet the launch of Telangana Public Schools also raises a deeper question that has received little attention: What is the ultimate purpose of public education?
Is it merely to provide parents with a better choice in an educational marketplace? Or is it to create a more democratic, equal, and cohesive society? The answer to this question determines whether Telangana’s educational reforms represent a genuine transformation or simply a new version of educational competition.
The Language of Confidence and Choice
The Chief Minister repeatedly emphasized that Telangana Public Schools would "instil confidence" among parents. The Telangana Education Policy 2026 similarly envisions creating attractive public institutions capable of competing with private schools. The underlying logic is straightforward. If government schools become good enough, parents will voluntarily choose them. As public schools improve, private schools may gradually lose relevance.
This argument appears persuasive. Indeed, many contemporary education reformers argue that the existence of private schools should be accepted and that the state should focus on creating high-quality public alternatives. Over time, they argue, superior public institutions will attract students and force weaker private institutions to disappear. At first glance, this seems a reasonable strategy. However, it rests on a particular understanding of education—one that views schools primarily through the lens of competition and parental choice rather than in the broader idea of education as a common good.
The Difference Between Public Good and Common Good
Most contemporary education policies, including NEP 2020 and many state-level reforms, speak the language of what philosophers call a "public good." A public good approach asks: Are schools available? Do parents have choices? Can students access quality education? Are educational opportunities expanding? These are important questions.
But there is another perspective: the idea of education as a "common good." A common good approach asks: What kind of society are schools creating? Are children from different social backgrounds learning together? Are schools reducing social divisions or reinforcing them? Are they strengthening democratic citizenship and social solidarity? The difference may appear subtle, but its consequences are profound.
The Problem with Competition as a Philosophy
The Arutla Telangana Public School is designed to attract parents by offering facilities often associated with private institutions: English-medium instruction, transportation, sports training, and enhanced infrastructure. Yet if TPS succeeds primarily by competing with other schools, it may unintentionally reproduce the very logic that has fragmented education over the last three decades.
Imagine a constituency where one prestigious Telangana Public School emerges alongside several ordinary government schools and numerous private schools. Parents naturally compete for admission. Those who secure seats feel fortunate. Others continue elsewhere. The result may be a better school, but not necessarily a better educational system. More importantly, society remains divided into different educational streams. Children from different economic backgrounds continue to study separately. The issue is not whether TPS is good or bad. The issue is whether educational excellence is being built through integration or through competition.
The Forgotten Vision of the Common School System
Nearly sixty years ago, the Kothari Commission proposed the Common School System. Its objective was not merely to improve school quality. Its objective was to ensure that children of different classes, castes, religions, and occupations learned together in common neighbourhood schools. The Commission understood something that contemporary policies often overlook: A democracy cannot flourish if its citizens grow up in separate educational worlds.
When the children of farmers, labourers, teachers, bureaucrats, politicians, and businesspersons study together, schools become institutions of democracy. When they study separately, schools become institutions of social reproduction. The common school idea was therefore not merely an educational proposal. It was a vision of society itself.
Michael Sandel and the Question We Are Not Asking
Political philosopher Michael Sandel argues that modern societies have become excessively organized around competition, ranking, credentials, and individual advancement. We celebrate choice and achievement, but rarely ask what kind of community we are creating. This insight is highly relevant to Telangana’s educational reforms. The debate today focuses on: Which school is better? How can parents be attracted? How can government schools compete with private schools? These are important concerns. But Sandel would ask a different question: What kind of society emerges when education is organized primarily around competition?
If schools become mechanisms for sorting winners and losers, society becomes increasingly divided. If education becomes a race for prestigious institutions, social solidarity weakens. A good society requires not only excellent schools but also shared institutions where citizens learn to live together.
The Meritocratic Trap
The Chief Minister’s speech also emphasized that students should aspire to become IAS officers, IPS officers, and political leaders. Aspiration is important. But education cannot be judged solely by how many students rise to elite positions. A society also depends on: teachers, nurses, technicians, farmers, artisans, caregivers, sanitation workers. The common good requires respect for all socially necessary work. When education celebrates only elite careers, it risks reinforcing a hierarchy of human worth. The purpose of education is not merely to produce winners. It is to cultivate capable, ethical, and socially responsible citizens.
Beyond Better Schools
The Telangana Public School initiative represents an important attempt to rebuild confidence in government education. But the real measure of its success should not be how many students leave private schools. Nor should success be measured solely by enrolment numbers, examination results, or competitive achievements. The deeper question is whether Telangana Public Schools contribute to building a more equal, integrated, and democratic society. The challenge before Telangana is therefore larger than creating excellent public schools. It is to create a public education system that serves the common good. A society does not become democratic simply because citizens have choices. It becomes democratic when citizens share institutions, experiences, and aspirations. The future of Telangana education should therefore be judged not only by the quality of its schools, but by the kind of society those schools help create. For ultimately, the most important educational question is not: "Which school should parents choose?" It is: "What kind of society do we want our children to build together?"
(Author: Adama Srinivas Reddy is a faculty member at Kakatiya Government College (Autonomous),Kakatiya University, Hanamkonda, and General Secretary of the Society for Change in Education, Telangana.)