As Meghalaya once again finds itself near the bottom of India’s Performance Grading Index (PGI), the recurring question remains: why does Meghalaya continue to perform poorly in education rankings despite launching multiple reforms and initiatives?
The larger question is now no longer about the state’s continuous poor rankings, but about whether the reforms introduced by the government are truly reaching classrooms, students and teachers. Going by the performance, one can infer that these initiatives are mere policy announcements with limited ground impact.
Over the past few years, Meghalaya has launched several ambitious education initiatives. These include the Meghalaya Teacher Training Academy (MTTA), the CM LEAD Fellowship, Community-Integrated Skill Learning (CISL), school rationalisation policies, and new opportunities for school dropouts to re-enter the education system. On paper, these reforms appear transformative. Yet the PGI scores continue to remain weak.
The gap between policy vision and implementation is now becoming the central issue in Meghalaya’s education story.
Why Meghalaya’s PGI Rank Remains So Low
The Performance Grading Index evaluates states across areas such as learning outcomes, school infrastructure, governance, teacher training, enrolment and equity. Meghalaya’s poor ranking reflects structural weaknesses that cannot be solved quickly.
One of the biggest problems is learning outcomes. Many students in government schools continue to struggle with foundational literacy and numeracy. Even when enrolment improves, actual classroom learning remains inconsistent, especially in rural and remote regions.
Infrastructure gaps also remain severe. Several schools still face shortages of science labs, digital learning facilities, libraries, functional toilets, internet access, and adequate classrooms. Multi-grade teaching is common in rural Meghalaya, where one teacher often handles multiple classes simultaneously.
Teacher shortages and uneven teacher quality continue to affect educational standards. While the government has established the Meghalaya Teacher Training Academy (MTTA) to improve Continuous Professional Development (CPD), the initiative is still in its early stages and has not yet transformed classroom learning statewide.
The academy aims to improve teacher efficiency and professional development while aligning training with projects supported by the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank.
However, many experts believe that training programmes alone cannot improve outcomes unless teachers receive consistent monitoring, modern teaching resources and stronger support at the school level.
Another major factor behind the low PGI score is administrative complexity. Meghalaya’s difficult terrain, scattered population, and remote villages make monitoring schools far more challenging than in many other states. Delivering quality education uniformly across hill districts remains a major logistical challenge.
Is the Government Not Doing Enough?
The criticism against the government is not that it has done nothing. In fact, Meghalaya has introduced more education reforms in recent years than many northeastern states. The real concern is whether these reforms are producing measurable outcomes quickly enough.
The government has taken difficult administrative decisions, including the rationalisation of schools. According to reform data, over 3,000 schools were removed or merged under the rationalisation exercise to improve resource utilisation.
The policy aimed to address extremely low-enrolment schools, duplicate institutions operating nearby, and inefficient distribution of resources. After rationalisation, the number of schools reportedly reduced from over 14,500 to around 11,443.
Supporters say this was necessary to concentrate teachers and infrastructure in fewer but stronger schools. Critics, however, argue that school mergers may increase travel burdens for children in remote villages and potentially worsen dropout rates if transportation is not improved.
The government has also attempted to strengthen leadership and governance through the CM LEAD Fellowship programme.
The fellowship places professionals across Meghalaya’s districts to support the implementation, planning, and monitoring of reforms. While innovative, the programme remains relatively small in scale. With only a limited number of fellows across districts, its impact may not yet be large enough to significantly influence statewide educational indicators.
Another reform focuses on reintegrating school dropouts into the education system. Meghalaya has opened opportunities for private candidates and non-traditional learners to complete SSLC examinations through open-board-style pathways.
This initiative is socially important because Meghalaya faces high dropout rates in several regions.
The state has also seen a substantial improvement in the SSLC results. From 53% pass percentage in 2015, Meghalaya has recorded 97% this year.
Therefore, the issue may not simply be that the government is “not doing enough.” Rather, the reforms are still struggling against long-standing systemic problems that require years of sustained implementation.
Lack of Practical Implementation
One of the most discussed initiatives in Meghalaya has been the STEM-related school transport initiative aimed at reducing congestion during school hours and improving student mobility.
The intention behind the initiative was strong: to streamline transportation, reduce traffic chaos around schools, and create a more efficient school environment.
However, the programme struggled because it focused more on logistical management than on actual STEM learning outcomes. While transportation reforms may improve attendance and accessibility, they do not automatically improve science, mathematics, or technology education standards.
Many schools still lack fully equipped laboratories, trained science teachers, stable electricity, internet access, and practical learning opportunities. Without strengthening these foundations, STEM-focused reforms are unlikely to produce significant academic improvements. The government was also unable to fully convince many parents and citizens about the effectiveness of the initiative. Traffic congestion around schools continues to remain a major issue, and several concerns raised by parents regarding safety, accessibility, and implementation remain unanswered. As a result, public confidence in such reforms has weakened, raising broader questions about how future education reforms will gain public support if existing concerns are not properly addressed.
There also remains a clear gap between policy design and classroom execution. Students may hear about digital education and innovation, but classrooms often continue to rely on outdated teaching methods and limited hands-on learning.
The state’s new Community-Integrated Skill Learning (CISL) initiative attempts to address this by connecting education with practical community skills.
The CISL programme introduces family trades, sports, arts, entrepreneurship, agriculture, and practical skills into school education. It is believed that this approach can make education more locally relevant and engaging. However, unless core academic quality improves alongside skill learning, Meghalaya may continue to struggle in national academic performance indicators like the PGI.
What Can Be Done Now
If Meghalaya wants to improve its PGI ranking meaningfully, reforms must move beyond announcements and translate into measurable classroom outcomes.
The first priority should be foundational learning. Reading, writing, and mathematics at the primary level must become the centre of reform. Without strong foundational skills, later reforms cannot succeed.
Second, teacher quality must improve continuously. The MTTA has potential, but training should become practical, classroom-focused, and regularly evaluated through improvements in student performance.
Third, investment in rural infrastructure remains essential. Digital classrooms, science laboratories, internet connectivity, transportation access, and functional school buildings must expand across remote districts.
Fourth, Meghalaya must improve monitoring and accountability. Policies often fail because implementation weakens at the district and school levels. Better data tracking, regular inspections, and transparent performance evaluations are necessary.
Finally, education reforms should balance local relevance with national competitiveness. Initiatives like CISL are valuable because they connect students to Meghalaya’s culture and economy, but students must also remain competitive in national examinations, higher education, and modern job markets.
A State in Transition
Meghalaya’s education story is more complex than a single PGI ranking suggests. The state is clearly attempting structural reforms, some of which are ambitious and innovative. Yet the results remain slow because the challenges are deep-rooted and systemic.
The real question is no longer whether reforms exist. The question is whether Meghalaya can sustain these reforms long enough — and implement them strongly enough — to finally transform learning outcomes across the state.
Until that happens, the gap between policy ambition and educational reality may continue to define Meghalaya’s PGI performance.
WATCH MORE VIDEOS
