Published: 12:20 AM, 22 August 2026
Pulling Students Away to Private Teaching Has Become a Validated Crime in Our Country
Education is supposed to be a noble service, and teachers are expected to guide students with knowledge, discipline and moral values. Yet in Bangladesh, a disturbing practice has become increasingly common: some teachers use their positions in schools and colleges to attract, pressure or persuade students to attend their private coaching classes. What should be regarded as a serious violation of professional ethics has, in many places, become an almost accepted feature of the education system.
Private tutoring itself is not necessarily harmful. Many students need additional academic support, especially when they struggle with difficult subjects. The real problem begins when teachers deliberately weaken classroom teaching or use their influence over students to create a market for their own private lessons. In such circumstances, the boundary between teaching and commercial exploitation becomes dangerously blurred.
Bangladesh has had rules intended to restrict this practice for years. The 2012 policy on teachers' coaching activities prohibited teachers from privately tutoring students from their own institutions, while allowing limited private teaching of students from other institutions under specified conditions. Yet reports indicate that the rules have frequently been ignored.
The problem is not simply that students attend coaching centres. It is the manner in which some students are drawn into them. A teacher who teaches a particular student during school hours possesses considerable authority. If that teacher suggests that students who attend his or her private classes will receive better guidance, notes or examination preparation, students and parents may feel that joining is almost compulsory.
Some students may even fear that refusing private lessons could affect their academic relationship with the teacher. Such pressure is deeply unfair. A classroom should be a place where every student receives the teacher's best effort, regardless of whether the student pays additional money outside school.
This practice creates a serious conflict of interest. A teacher's primary responsibility is to provide quality education during institutional hours. If students are deliberately encouraged to depend on private lessons for what should have been taught in school, the educational institution gradually loses its importance. Students may begin to believe that school classes are merely formalities and that real education takes place in coaching centres.
The consequences are particularly severe for poorer families. Wealthier parents may be able to pay for several private tutors or coaching programs, but low-income families often cannot. When private coaching becomes essential for academic success, education becomes increasingly unequal. A student from a poor family may work just as hard as a wealthy classmate but still fall behind because the family cannot afford additional lessons.
The coaching industry has already become a substantial part of Bangladesh's education economy. A Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics survey reported thousands of coaching centres across the country, with hundreds of thousands of students and tens of thousands of staff members. This indicates that private coaching is no longer a small supplementary activity; it has developed into a parallel educational system.
There is also a psychological cost. Students spend their school hours in classrooms, then move from one coaching centre to another in the afternoon and evening. Their schedules become crowded with lectures, assignments, tests and examinations. Instead of developing curiosity, creativity and independent learning habits, many students become focused almost entirely on securing marks.
Parents also share some responsibility for the growth of this culture. Many believe that their children cannot succeed in examinations without coaching. Faced with intense competition, they may willingly spend large portions of their income on private tuition. This creates a cycle: parents demand coaching, teachers supply it, students become dependent on it, and schools gradually lose their central role.
But blaming parents alone would be unfair. The education system itself must examine why families feel that regular classroom teaching is insufficient. Large classes, inadequate supervision, examination-centered learning and weaknesses in teaching quality can encourage dependence on private coaching. Unless these underlying problems are addressed, simply banning coaching centres may not solve the crisis.
The government has repeatedly attempted to control coaching businesses, but enforcement has been weak. A recent review of Bangladesh's coaching-centre policy noted that governments have issued numerous orders since 2009, yet permanent closures have been extremely limited. The continuing gap between policy and enforcement has allowed the problem to survive.
The proposed Education Act 2026 has renewed debate about commercial coaching centres. The government has moved towards stronger legal measures intended to reduce the commercialization of education and restore the importance of classrooms. However, legislation alone will not be enough. Rules must be clear, realistic and consistently enforced.
Educational authorities should establish effective monitoring systems in schools and colleges. Complaints against teachers who pressure students into private classes should be investigated promptly. If evidence is found, disciplinary action should follow. At the same time, teachers must be given fair salaries, professional development opportunities and a respectful working environment so that financial pressure does not become an excuse for unethical conduct.
Schools should also provide remedial classes for students who genuinely need additional help. Such support should be organized transparently by the institution rather than being turned into a private business controlled by individual teachers.
Most importantly, society must change its attitude towards education. Academic success should not depend on how much money a family can spend after school. A good teacher should be judged by the quality of teaching provided in the classroom, not by the number of private students gathered after school hours.
Pulling students away from institutional teaching for personal financial gain is more than a professional misconduct issue. It undermines equality, weakens public confidence in education and places an unfair financial burden on families. When such behaviour becomes normalised and authorities repeatedly fail to stop it, an unethical practice can begin to look like an endorsed crime.
Bangladesh cannot build a strong and equitable society on a two-tier education system in which classroom learning is treated as secondary and private coaching as essential. The classroom must once again become the heart of education. Teachers must regain their professional dignity, students must regain their right to learn without financial pressure, and the authorities must demonstrate that education is a public responsibility—not a marketplace where access to a teacher depends on one's ability to pay.
Mahfuz Ul Hasib Chowdhury
is a contributor to different
English newspapers and magazines. The writer is also a Commonwealth
Open University Fellow.
