AS THE country prepares for the national budget for the 2026–27 financial year, policy-makers face an urgent but often under-discussed challenge: the rising household cost of education. Education is widely celebrated as one major development success. School enrolment has increased significantly over a few decades, gender parity at the primary and secondary levels has improved and higher education opportunities have expanded rapidly. Yet, behind these achievements lies a growing financial crisis for ordinary families. For millions of households, education has become one of the largest and most stressful areas of expenditure.
Although public education is officially subsidised, the reality experienced by families is very different. Parents today bear a heavy and expanding financial burden through private tuition, coaching centres, transport costs, examination fees, digital devices, internet access, hostel accommodation, admission tests and various unofficial educational expenses. Many families now organise their household economy around educational spending. Some reduce food consumption, delay medical treatment, sell assets or take out loans to keep their children studying.
The national budget, therefore, presents an important opportunity. If the government wishes to build a knowledge-driven economy and harness the demographic dividend, reducing the household burden of education must become a national policy priority.
Bangladesh deserves recognition for expanding educational access. Public universities have grown, private universities have multiplied and more young people than ever now aspire to higher education. For many families, education remains the most powerful symbol of social mobility and economic hope.
However, access alone does not guarantee equity or affordability. As educational participation has expanded, public investment in educational quality has not always kept pace. Many public schools and universities continue to struggle with overcrowded classrooms, inadequate laboratories, weak libraries, teacher shortage, outdated teaching methods and limited student support systems. As a result, families increasingly rely on private spending to compensate for weaknesses in the formal system.
This trend has created what economists often call the ‘privatisation of educational cost.’ Even when institutions are technically public, the real cost is transferred to households. Parents are compelled to buy supplementary educational services because they fear mainstream classroom teaching alone is insufficient for academic success.
Perhaps, no phenomenon better illustrates this than the rapid growth of private tutoring and coaching culture. What was once occasional academic support has now become almost compulsory for many students. Across the country, children attend coaching centres before school, after school and at the weekends. Some students depend on multiple tutors simultaneously.
This shadow education system reflects a lack of confidence in conventional classroom learning. Examinations remain heavily memorisation-oriented and highly competitive, pushing families into continuous spending. Parents fear that without coaching, their children will fall behind in public examinations or university admission tests.
For middle-income and lower-middle income households, these costs can be devastating. Families may spend a substantial share of monthly income on educational expenses alone. The burden becomes even more severe when multiple children are studying simultaneously.
The Covid outbreak transformed educational spending patterns. During school closure, digital learning became essential. While digital learning created new opportunities, it also widened inequalities. Wealthier urban households adapted relatively quickly, while poorer families struggled to afford devices and connectivity. In many rural and climate-vulnerable regions, students were left behind altogether.
Even after the pandemic, digital expenditure remains a permanent part of educational cost. Online assignments, virtual classes, educational apps and internet-based learning resources are now integrated into mainstream education. Yet, many households still lack reliable access to affordable digital infrastructure. Therefore, the forthcoming budget must recognise digital educational access as an essential public good rather than a private household responsibility.
The burden becomes particularly acute in higher education. Public universities remain comparatively affordable in terms of tuition fees, but the hidden costs are enormous. Students often spend years in coaching centres preparing for admission tests. Many migrate to cities for educational opportunities, increasing household spending on rent, food, transport and living expenses.
For students attending private universities, the financial pressure is even greater. Tuition fees, semester charges and associated costs can consume a large portion of household income. Families frequently make extraordinary sacrifices because they believe a university degree will guarantee stable employment and upward mobility.
Yet, the growing mismatch between higher education and employment has intensified disappointment. Unemployment and underemployment remain major national concerns. Many young people complete degrees only to discover that labour market opportunities do not match their qualifications.
This creates a painful contradiction. Families are investing heavily in education, but educational returns are becoming increasingly uncertain. When education no longer guarantees economic security, social anxiety deepens.
The burden of educational expenditure is not distributed equally across society. Wealthy households can invest in English-medium schools, international curricula, digital technologies, foreign language training and expensive coaching services. Poor households often depend on under-resourced institutions with limited facilities.
As a result, education risks reproducing inequality instead of reducing it. Rural students, climate-affected communities, children with disabilities and marginalised populations face additional financial and structural barriers.
Girls from poor families remain particularly vulnerable. When household resources become constrained, girls’ education may be interrupted earlier than boys’. Educational inequality, therefore, intersects with gender inequality, regional disparity, and economic vulnerability.
Reducing household educational burden is, therefore, not merely an economic issue. It is also a matter of social justice and national inclusion.
The national budget offers an opportunity to shift the policy conversation from educational expansion to educational affordability and quality. Several budgetary priorities deserve immediate consideration.
First, public expenditure on education must increase substantially. Public spending on education in Bangladesh as a percentage of gross domestic product remains lower than in many developing countries. Without strong investment, households will continue filling the financing gap themselves.
Second, greater investment is needed in improving the quality of public schools and universities. Strengthening teacher training, laboratories, libraries, digital infrastructure and student support services would reduce excessive dependence on private coaching and tutoring.
Third, the government should expand targeted financial assistance for disadvantaged learners. Scholarship, transport stipends, hostel support and digital learning subsidies could significantly reduce pressure on low-income families. Special support should prioritise climate-vulnerable areas, rural communities and female students.
Fourth, the budget should support affordable digital access for students. Reduced taxation on educational devices, subsidised internet packages for students and investment in school-based digital learning facilities could help narrow the digital divide.
Fifth, a strong regulation of coaching centres and private educational institutions is necessary. While coaching culture cannot disappear overnight, a clear oversight of fees, operating standards and commercial practices would help to protect families from exploitative educational markets.
Sixth, investment in technical and vocational education and training must increase significantly. Many families spend heavily, pursuing conventional academic degrees because alternative pathways remain undervalued or inaccessible. Expanding quality skills-based education linked to labour market demand could reduce graduate unemployment and provide more affordable routes to employment.
Finally, the budget should invest more seriously in research and innovation at universities. A strong public higher education system would reduce the pressure driving students towards expensive private alternatives.
Ultimately, the growing household burden of education reflects declining confidence in the quality and sufficiency of mainstream public education. Families spend excessively when they feel schools and universities alone cannot guarantee learning success.
Reducing household expenditure, therefore, requires restoring trust in public institutions. Schools must become places where students can learn without depending excessively on coaching. Universities must become centres of critical thinking, research, employability and innovation rather than merely degree-awarding institutions.
Education should function as a public investment in national development, not as a source of chronic financial anxiety for families.
Bangladesh stands at an important crossroads. Its young population remains one of its greatest strengths. But demographic advantage alone does not guarantee development. The quality, affordability and inclusiveness of education will determine whether this generation becomes a driver of national progress or a source of growing disappointment.
The 2026–27 national budget must, therefore, move beyond rhetorical commitments to education. It must directly address the hidden and rising costs borne by households. Without meaningful intervention, educational inequality and financial stress will continue to deepen.
Education should empower families, not impoverish them. If Bangladesh wants to build an innovative, equitable and knowledge-based society, reducing the household burden of education must become a central pillar of national policy.
Musharraf Tansen is a doctoral researcher at the University of Dhaka.
