Education Views | Insightful Perspectives and Analysis - Edinbox

There are moments in the corporate world when the public façade of boardroom diplomacy breaks—and the rawness of personal defiance takes center stage. Byju Raveendran, the once-revered edtech pioneer who built India’s most talked-about unicorn, has stepped into such a moment. This weekend, he turned to social media—not just for optics but to launch an explosive counteroffensive.

In a dramatic post on X (formerly Twitter), Raveendran announced that he had filed a First Information Report (FIR) against Pankaj Srivastava, the former Resolution Professional (RP) for Think & Learn, along with EY employees Rahul, Dinkar, and Lokesh, accusing them of conspiring with Glas Trust—a firm representing Byju’s lenders and spearheading the insolvency proceedings.

His language was unequivocal and emotional:

“I am not a flower; I am the fire that will break GLAS.”

With that, he made it clear: the battle for Byju’s is now as personal as it is legal. The post also included a snapshot of the FIR, accompanied by a sharply worded accusation—calling GLAS an “association of crooks” and claiming that EY acted as their “agents.”

This comes in the wake of a whistleblower post from an EY India insider on LinkedIn, alleging collusion between EY and Glas Trust. According to the whistleblower, EY had privileged access to sensitive documents that could indicate criminal wrongdoing, and key executives acted in ways that undercut Byju’s ability to restructure on its own terms.

Byju’s financial collapse—sparked by a $1.2 billion default on a Term Loan B—has been playing out like a corporate thriller. In June 2024, the NCLT (National Company Law Tribunal) handed over control of Byju’s finances to the lenders. Since then, Glas Trust has effectively run the show. Raveendran's resistance to that decision has been consistent but largely unheeded—until now, when he’s gone on the offensive.

In another piercing post, Raveendran challenged EY India Chairman Rajiv Memani directly:

“Is this fraud INDIVIDUAL or INSTITUTIONAL @Rajivmemani?” he asked.

He then invoked his own accolades as EY Entrepreneur of the Year 2018 and 2020, in a not-so-subtle reminder of his past affiliation with the very institution he now accuses.

There’s a distinct shift here—not just in tone, but in strategy. Raveendran is no longer looking for backdoor negotiations. He’s painting himself as a founder betrayed, a reformer wronged, and a fighter rising from the wreckage. Whether this fiery stance will rekindle investor faith or further isolate him remains to be seen.

But one thing’s clear: this isn’t just about Byju’s anymore. It’s about power, accountability, and the way India’s startup dream interacts with global capital and its enforcers.

We’ll be watching closely—because if there’s any fire still left in the edtech giant, this might just be the blaze that reveals it.

On April 11, Odisha will see a milestone in its healthcare history. Union Health Minister J.P. Nadda will formally launch the Ayushman Bharat – Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PMJAY) in the state, promising free healthcare to more than 3.5 crore citizens. The scheme, integrating with the already existing Gopabandhu Jan Arogya Yojana (GJAY), marks a bold initiative to cover 86% of the state's population under medical coverage.

And yet, as Odisha gets ready to celebrate this move towards healthcare inclusion, a sharply contrasting narrative is unfolding elsewhere in the nation—one that casts a long shadow over the credibility and governance of the very same scheme.

Only days prior to the Odisha launch, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) conducted a wide-ranging operation in Jharkhand, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, and Delhi, raiding 21 premises in relation to an alleged money-laundering racket within the Ayushman Bharat system. At the center of the probe are three third-party administrators (TPAs) — MDIndia, Medi Assist, and Safeway Insurance — whose function was to simplify services, not circumvent them.

The charges are serious. Fake treatments, doctored records, and even instances of dead patients "receiving" treatment have emerged, partly thanks to a scathing Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report. What was conceived as India's response to universal health coverage is now grappling with the painful reality of gaps in implementation and systemic weaknesses.

The contrast between Odisha's festive rollout and the ED's crackdown elsewhere is interesting. It begs the question: Can a scheme aimed at empowering the poor live with weak accountability?

To be sure, the vision of Ayushman Bharat is still profoundly moving. In Odisha, for instance, where much of the population lies beyond the reach of private health care, the scheme guarantees not only affordability but dignity in gaining access to life-saving services. A family cover of ₹5 lakh a year — and a similar amount set aside for women — is no trifling measure. If implemented properly, it has the potential to fill long-standing gaps in the healthcare system.

But sight alone won't do.

The fact itself that Jharkhand's highest functionaries, including those of the State Arogya Society, are on the watchlist indicates institutional fissures. When third-party go-betweens, left in charge of the well-being of millions, are accused of diverting funds under ghost patients and falsified bills, the harm goes beyond figures—it undercuts public confidence.

So what can Odisha learn from this juxtaposition?

Firstly, transparency must be non-negotiable. Every empaneled hospital, insurance handler, and data operator should be under regular audit. Secondly, states must not treat implementation as a box-ticking exercise. Localized corruption often thrives in administrative apathy—Odisha must ensure that its converged model with GJAY does not become a bureaucratic juggernaut prone to manipulation.

Lastly, there must be citizen awareness. Whether Ayushman Bharat succeeds in Odisha will not only rely on rollout ceremonies and political showmanship, but on whether or not people actually know their entitlements under the scheme and how to claim them.

While one region of India greets a new era of public health, another recalls why vigilance is as necessary as vision. Ayushman Bharat stands at a fork in the road today—Odisha has to ensure that its path ahead doesn't trudge down the same pitfalls that threaten to undermine its promise elsewhere.

As the curtains draw on CBSE Class 12 board exams for the 2024-25 academic year, thousands of students now await at the doorway to their next great leap—college admissions. While anticipation grows over the forthcoming announcement of the result, another fascinating development goes unnoticed in influencing the way forward: CBSE's initiative to hold an orientation program on the Central Universities Entrance Test (CUET) for school principals and counselors.

At first glance, the two events may seem disconnected—one marking the end of a long academic journey, the other preparing stakeholders for the next phase. But look closer, and you’ll find a clear pattern: CBSE is transitioning from being just an examining authority to becoming a more holistic educational facilitator.

The orientation of CUET is a timely move. With CUET being a significant gateway to India's central universities now, schools must reform their support mechanisms to make sure students navigate through this standardized admissions process. Although for some, CUET has brought structure and disarray—structure in the form of a universal criterion, disarray due to its relatively new status and evolving nature.

By directly involving principals and counsellors, CBSE is not just disseminating information—It is building an ecosystem where academic counselling is not just a reactive exercise but a planned one. These front-line teachers will be in a better position to advise students on test patterns, syllabus alignment, and even stress management tips during the admission season. This can be a game-changer, particularly for schools in rural and semi-urban areas where CUET awareness is still low.

While all this is happening, those students who have recently appeared for their board exams are left in limbo—awaiting results, with no idea what the future holds. Timely and clear counselling is not a luxury for them; it's a necessity. And that's where CBSE's two-pronged approach—finishing one academic milestone while setting the stage for the next—deserves special mention. It is not just conducting tests and releasing marks; it is taking extra efforts to build a connecting link between school learning and higher learning.

But there are reservations. When will the result be declared? Will the orientation program be shared with students and parents? To what extent are schools ready to implement CUET-based counseling systems on ground level?

As we wait for the Class 12 results to be made live on cbse.nic.in or cbseresults.nic.in, it is reassuring to note that CBSE is taking a forward-looking approach. But the real success of this initiative will be in follow-through—whether the takeaways from the orientation sessions are followed up with tangible strategies in schools.

At this point of change, the challenge for CBSE is not just to deliver results, but also deliver relevance. And if the two initiatives are anything to judge by, the board is beginning to realize that the purpose of the board is no longer about marking answer papers—but shaping futures.

The University Grants Commission (UGC) has unveiled new draft guidelines that transfer the authority to appoint Vice-Chancellors (VCs) of state universities largely to Governors, who are Chancellors in a majority of states. This action has caused a political storm, especially in opposition-governed states such as Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala, which view it as an effort to limit their control over higher education institutions. The guidelines also threaten debarment from UGC schemes for non-compliance, which has raised concerns regarding central overreach into state matters.

Opposition-ruled governments contend that their universities have long been strongholds of intellectual and political freedom, and this action jeopardizes their autonomy. In West Bengal, where the government of Mamata Banerjee has frequently had run-ins with the Governor over appointments to universities, the new rules will further intensify tensions. The state government has traditionally complained about the Governor interfering with the governance of education, and the policy change is construed as another attempt to strip states of power.

Kerala's Left Democratic Front (LDF) government, which too has had a tumultuous relationship with the Governor, sees this as a political move to gain control over educational institutions. The state has been assertive in asserting educational autonomy, and observers feel that imposing these guidelines may result in greater politicization of academic appointments.

In the same vein, in Tamil Nadu, the DMK ruling party firmly opposed any Governor-led action in university administration. The state government has always supported a democratic and open-minded process in the appointment of VCs, stressing that educational institutions should best represent the people and not outside political interests.

Earlier, state governments used to have a major role in the appointment of VCs through search committees. The new guidelines suggest that Governors, being Chancellors, constitute a three-member search-cum-selection committee, providing them with greater say in the final appointment. Critics say that this change would politicize the hiring process, enabling the central government to exert indirect control over universities in opposition-ruled states.

Governors, once considered neutral figures, have become flashpoints of controversy in state politics. In states where opposition parties rule, such as Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal, Governors have often been in conflict with the elected government. This new UGC directive can be expected to increase these conflicts because state governments see it as an invasion of their right to rule over educational institutions.

The Indian Constitution identifies education as a Concurrent List subject, and hence both the Centre and states can legislate on it. The new guidelines issued by the UGC are legally questionable as to whether the central government is exceeding its jurisdiction by giving Governors more authority over university matters. Opposition states can move court against these regulations on the grounds that they are against federal principles and encroach upon state autonomy.

Though the UGC says the guidelines are intended to streamline the VC appointment process, they have evoked huge political and legal issues. For opposition-governed states, the initiative is a bid to take control of higher education to the center. With a 30-day public consultation period on the table, the battle over university autonomy and federal regulation in education will only escalate. The ultimate result will determine the destiny of higher education management in India, whether state governments will be able to maintain autonomy of their universities or central control will further permeate into academic governance.

In a first for the Indian edtech industry, an instant 1-on-1 tutoring platform developed in India is revolutionizing learning outcomes for the United States as a whole. A recently released Johns Hopkins University study has validated that Filo, an instant one-on-one online tutoring platform developed in India, is making genuine academic gains in under-resourced students in Jefferson County Public Schools in Birmingham, Alabama.

The research discovers an astonishing improvement in academic achievement for students who made use of Filo's instant tutoring. Boys in the program scored 14 points higher than other boys, and African American students 11 points higher. Both of these student groups, comprising 70% of the district students, have traditionally been the targets of systemic educational disadvantage.

By providing round-the-clock, on-demand tutoring, Filo is actually filling learning gaps and revalidating the importance of individualized learning. Its effect is especially meaningful as it is also in line with the fundamental pillars of India's National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, namely competency-based learning, flexible, and personalized learning.

Filo's success in Alabama adds traction to India's expanding influence on world education policy and innovation. Its real-time tutoring model, already changing the learning outcomes of millions of students in rural India by instant matching them with AI-powered matching against the finest tutors, now presages a new paradigm—Indian edtech is revolutionizing world standards.

The Johns Hopkins study, and statistical reports of other impact studies, confirms Filo as one of the very few platforms reporting measurable learning gains across a range of educational systems. This places India at the forefront of education policy and education technology.

Filo's patented model of instant tutoring brings students into contact with master tutors in real time, providing one-on-one academic assistance at any hour. This groundbreaking model guarantees that students, irrespective of any geographical or socio-economic context, have access to quality education according to their requirements.

Commenting on the study results, Rohit Kumar, Co-founder, Filo, highlighted the importance of this achievement: "This study validates what we at Filo always suspected—personalized learning with real-time learning has the potential to transform education at scale. An Indian-designed solution making a real difference in US classrooms is not just a milestone for us, but for the future of global education. This is proof of technology's potential to shatter learning barriers, and we've only just begun." Filo's achievement not only underscores the potential of real-time tutoring by AI but also makes India ever more pivotal to determining global education policy. With NEP 2020 serving as the guiding policy, Indian edtech firms are now showing the world the way scalable, adaptive models of learning can be rolled out effectively across the world.

"The National Education Policy (NEP 2020) has been the driving force in navigating Filo's vision for utilizing technology for individualized, just-in-time peer tutoring. As part of its vision, we have been able to achieve substantial learning outcomes in India, Middle East, and USA, delivering high-quality education to growing numbers of people, making it more efficient and accessible to all parts of the globe," stated Shashank Singhal, Director at Filo.

Parenting is a deeply personal journey, shaped by culture, environment, and personal values. For Kristen Fischer, an American mother of three, that journey has led her to India—a country she now calls home. Having moved with her family in 2021, Fischer believes that raising her children in India offers them a richer, more fulfilling upbringing than they would have had in the United States.

Her perspective, shared in a now-viral Instagram video, has sparked widespread conversation. With her child walking along an Indian street in the background, Fischer detailed why she believes India provides a better environment for her children’s development. Her reasons, outlined in her post, offer a thought-provoking take on cross-cultural parenting.

A Childhood Rooted in Diversity and Resilience

Fischer emphasizes the cultural depth and diversity that India offers. Unlike the relatively homogenous cultural landscape of many American suburbs, she believes India’s multilingual, multiethnic society will give her children a more profound understanding of different traditions, languages, and worldviews.

"Living in India will expose my children to a rich diversity of cultures, languages, and customs," she wrote. "This aids them in gaining a deep understanding and appreciation of other cultures, promoting open-mindedness and adaptability."

Language, too, plays a key role in her decision. In a multilingual country like India, Fischer’s children have the opportunity to learn Hindi and other regional languages, in addition to English. She believes this will not only enhance their cognitive abilities but also open doors for their future.

Beyond language and culture, Fischer sees India as a place where her children will develop a broader worldview. Being surrounded by diverse economic and social conditions, they will gain a heightened sense of global awareness—something she feels they might not have been exposed to in the U.S.

Building Emotional Intelligence and Stronger Family Bonds

Another factor influencing Fischer’s decision is the strong emphasis on family in Indian society. Unlike the more individualistic culture of the U.S., where children often move out early to pursue independence, she appreciates the tight-knit family values she sees in India.

"Close relationships and extensive family networks are emphasized in many Indian families," she noted. "This gives my children a feeling of belonging, emotional support, and stronger family ties."

Additionally, she believes the challenges of adapting to life in India—be it adjusting to a different education system or learning new social norms—will make her children more resilient and emotionally intelligent. Navigating unfamiliar environments, she argues, will prepare them for the uncertainties of life in a way that a more predictable childhood in the U.S. might not.

Sparking Debate: A Bold Choice or a Risky Experiment?

Fischer’s views have resonated with many, with several social media users praising her for embracing a different culture. One commenter wrote, "Your children are very fortunate to be raised in Indian culture." Another added, "What impresses me most is your willingness to learn and appreciate diversity."

However, not everyone agrees with her perspective. Some users pointed out the irony of her decision, given that many Indian families aspire to move to the U.S. for better opportunities. One comment read, "When Indians are emigrating to the U.S., it's interesting to see someone choose the opposite path and fully commit to it."

Others questioned how her children might adjust in the long run. "Will they experience cultural shock if they move back to the U.S. someday?" one user asked. "They might end up being foreigners in both places—where they live and where they’re from."

A Personal Choice in an Ever-Globalizing World

Ultimately, Fischer’s decision to raise her children in India reflects a larger conversation about global parenting and the shifting perceptions of East vs. West. In a world where borders are increasingly blurred, her story challenges the conventional wisdom that raising children in the U.S. is inherently "better."

For Fischer, India isn’t just where she lives—it’s where she believes her children will thrive. Whether one agrees with her perspective or not, her journey serves as a reminder that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to parenting. Sometimes, the best choices for our children lie beyond the familiar comforts of home.