Private EdTech and Educational Equity in India: Access, Capability, and Quality
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55544/sjmars.4.6.10Keywords:
EdTech, educational equity, digital capability, private investment, India, platformization, teacher competence, educational qualityAbstract
India has emerged as one of the world's largest and most visible EdTech markets, shaped by rapid platform expansion, strong policy interest in digital education, and large flows of private capital. Yet the dominant narrative still treats EdTech growth as a proxy for educational progress. That assumption is analytically weak. The central gap in the literature is that private EdTech investment in India is frequently evaluated through reach, enrolment, and platform adoption, while insufficient attention is given to whether such investment produces durable digital capabilities and more equitable educational quality. This conceptual paper addresses that gap by examining private EdTech through the combined lenses of educational equity, digital capability, and platform strategy. It argues that access is a necessary but insufficient condition for educational development, and that the developmental value of private investment depends on how access is converted into meaningful capability under unequal social and institutional conditions.
Methodologically, the paper adopts a conceptual synthesis approach, integrating recent peer reviewed scholarship on digital exclusion, teacher digital competence, platformization, and low income platform use with Indian system level evidence on school infrastructure, adolescent digital access, national policy, and sectoral investment trends. The paper develops three interrelated arguments. First, private EdTech investment can widen educational access, but access alone does not constitute equity. Second, capability formation depends on conversion factors such as affordability, device ownership, language, pedagogy, teacher competence, and institutional support. Third, market led EdTech models may simultaneously extend opportunity and reproduce stratification if they privilege scalable user growth over capability oriented design.
The paper contributes to management scholarship by proposing an Investment to Equity Conversion Framework that explains how private capital, platform strategy, and institutional mediation interact to shape capability and quality outcomes in India. The article concludes that the appropriate basis for evaluating private EdTech is not platform scale, but whether it generates equitable, transferable, and pedagogically meaningful digital capabilities.
References
[1] ASER Centre. (2025). ASER 2024: Annual Status of Education Report 2024 national findings. ASER Centre. https://asercentre.org
[2] Bhatia, K. V. (2025). Edtech platforms from below: A family ethnography of proprietary platforms in low-income communities in India. Learning, Media and Technology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2024.2328693
[3] Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digital competence: The teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 2449-2472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4
[4] Government of India, Ministry of Education. (2020). National Education Policy 2020. Government of India.
[5] Government of India, Ministry of Education. (2025). Unified District Information System for Education Plus (UDISE+) report 2024-25 and related releases. Government of India.
[6] Government of India, Press Information Bureau. (2024, August 2). As of March 2024, out of a total internet subscribers of 954.40 million in India, there are 398.35 million rural internet subscribers. https://www.pib.gov.in
[7] Government of India, Press Information Bureau. (2025, February 4). Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 2024 highlights. https://www.pib.gov.in
[8] Luo, J., et al. (2025). What do we mean by digital equality in education? Toward conceptual clarity. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2025.2487279
[9] Macgilchrist, F. (2024). Challenging the inequitable impacts of edtech. Learning, Media and Technology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2024.2350117
[10] Passey, D. (2024). Populations digitally excluded from education: Issues, factors and recommendations. Education and Information Technologies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-024-09767-w
[11] Reuters. (2024, June 24). Prosus writes off its 9.6% stake in India's Byju's.
[12] Reuters. (2024, July 16). Once India's biggest startup, Byju's faces insolvency proceedings.
[13] Sindakis, S., Aggarwal, S., Nijhawan, P., and Vrontis, D. (2024). Bridging the gap in rural technology adoption: Evidence from India. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 13, Article 80. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-024-00380-w
[14] Tracxn. (2024). EdTech India feed report. Tracxn Technologies.
[15] UNESCO. (2023). Global education monitoring report 2023: Technology in education. UNESCO.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Stallion Journal for Multidisciplinary Associated Research Studies

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

