Introduction
Education as a Pathway to Progress is a fundamental pillar of societal development, shaping individuals’ futures and driving national progress. Two contrasting case studies illustrate the profound differences in how governments prioritize education, particularly for marginalized or disadvantaged students. In Japan, the Kyu-Shirataki railway station in Hokkaido remained operational for years solely to enable Kana Harada, a high school student, to attend school, reflecting an extraordinary commitment to ensuring access to education for even a single individual. In contrast, India has implemented policies to close or merge thousands of government schools with fewer than 50 students, a decision that disproportionately impacts students from deprived classes who rely on these institutions for free education. This article critically analyzes these divergent approaches, exploring the underlying mindsets of the Japanese and Indian governments, the socio-economic and cultural factors shaping their policies, and the implications for STEM development and national progress. It further evaluates whether Japan’s focus on individual access to education has contributed to its leadership in science, technology, and innovation, while India’s policies may hinder similar advancements. The analysis also addresses the challenges faced by students from deprived classes and the broader implications for equitable development.
Table of Contents
The Case of Kana Harada: Japan’s Commitment to Individual Education
In 2016, the story of Kana Harada, an 18-year-old high school student in Hokkaido, Japan, captured global attention. Kana was the sole regular passenger using the Kyu-Shirataki railway station to commute to her school in Engaru. The station, part of the Sekihoku Main Line operated by Japan Railways (JR) Hokkaido, was slated for closure due to declining passenger numbers, a consequence of Japan’s shrinking rural population. The region’s population had dwindled as younger generations migrated to urban centers, leaving remote areas with aging demographics and underutilized infrastructure. However, upon learning that Kana relied on the station to access her education, JR Hokkaido, with implicit support from local authorities, decided to maintain two daily train services—timed specifically for her commute—until she graduated in March 2016. This decision, reported by outlets like Bloomberg and Global Citizen, meant operating the station at a financial loss, highlighting Japan’s extraordinary commitment to education.
The Kyu-Shirataki case is not an isolated act of benevolence but a reflection of Japan’s broader educational philosophy, which emphasizes universal access, equity, and the belief that education is a fundamental right and a cornerstone of societal progress. Japan’s education system, managed by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), is globally recognized for its excellence, consistently ranking among the top performers in international assessments like the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). In 2018, Japan’s 15-year-olds scored 527 in mathematics and 529 in science on PISA, significantly above the OECD averages of 489 and 489, respectively. Notably, Japan’s education system minimizes the impact of socio-economic status on student outcomes, with only 8.6% of variation in performance attributed to socio-economic factors, compared to the OECD average of 12%.
This commitment to education is deeply rooted in Japan’s historical and cultural context. The Meiji Restoration (1868–1912) marked a turning point, as Japan sought to modernize by adopting Western educational models while preserving its cultural values of discipline, collective responsibility, and respect for learning. The Gakusei (First National Plan for Education) of 1872 established a universal education system, making primary education compulsory and accessible to all social classes. This laid the foundation for Japan’s transformation into a global economic and technological powerhouse. Over the decades, Japan developed policies to ensure equitable access to quality education, even in remote areas. For instance, the teacher rotation system assigns experienced educators to rural schools, ensuring consistent teaching quality across regions. Additionally, programs like the “Super High School” initiative provide specialized STEM education to talented students, fostering innovation and excellence.
The Kyu-Shirataki case exemplifies this ethos. By keeping the station open, JR Hokkaido and local authorities ensured that Kana could complete her education without disruption, recognizing her potential to contribute to society. This decision reflects a broader cultural belief in Japan that education is an investment in human capital, regardless of immediate financial costs. It also underscores the government’s willingness to prioritize long-term societal benefits over short-term economic efficiency, a mindset that has contributed to Japan’s success in STEM and its status as a developed nation.
India’s Policy of School Closures: Efficiency Over Access
In contrast, India’s approach to public education, particularly in rural areas, has been shaped by policies that prioritize administrative efficiency over universal access. Since the early 2000s, several Indian states, including Uttar Pradesh, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, and Rajasthan, have implemented policies to close or merge government schools with fewer than 50 students. These closures are often justified as a means to optimize resources, improve infrastructure, and enhance teacher-student ratios in larger, consolidated schools. For example, in 2017, the Rajasthan government merged over 17,000 schools, citing low enrollment and the need to streamline operations. Similar policies have been adopted in other states, affecting thousands of schools and students.
Government schools in India are critical for marginalized communities, particularly students from Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Other Backward Classes (OBC), and economically disadvantaged groups. These schools provide free education, mid-day meals, and other incentives mandated by the Right to Education (RTE) Act of 2009, which guarantees free and compulsory education for children aged 6 to 14. However, closing schools with low enrollment creates significant barriers to access, particularly in rural areas where alternative schools may be located far away. Students often face long commutes—sometimes 5–10 kilometers—over challenging terrain, which can be prohibitively expensive or physically taxing, especially for girls or children from impoverished families. The World Bank estimates that over 60% of rural Indian households live below the poverty line, making transportation costs a significant barrier. As a result, school closures contribute to higher dropout rates, with UNESCO reporting that 32 million Indian children were out of school in 2020, even before the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the crisis.
The closure policy reflects a pragmatic approach to resource allocation but overlooks the unique challenges faced by rural and marginalized communities. India’s education system faces systemic issues, including teacher shortages, inadequate infrastructure, and uneven quality. According to the Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) 2022, only 20% of rural government schools have functional computers, and 40% lack basic sanitation facilities. Teacher absenteeism and reliance on contractual teachers further undermine quality, particularly in rural areas. Unlike Japan’s teacher rotation system, India struggles with uneven teacher distribution, with urban schools often attracting more qualified educators. The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 aims to address these challenges by emphasizing foundational literacy, numeracy, and STEM education, but its implementation remains inconsistent, particularly in rural regions.
The closure of schools with low enrollment exacerbates educational disparities, particularly for students from deprived classes. These students, often first-generation learners, face socio-economic barriers like poverty, caste discrimination, and gender inequality. For example, girls in rural areas are more likely to drop out due to safety concerns during long commutes or societal pressures to prioritize domestic responsibilities. The policy of school closures, while intended to improve efficiency, risks perpetuating cycles of poverty and exclusion, as education is a critical pathway for social mobility.
Comparative Analysis: Mindsets and Priorities
The Kyu-Shirataki case and India’s school closure policies reveal fundamentally different governmental mindsets toward education, particularly for marginalized students.
Japan’s Mindset: Education as a Social Good Japan’s decision to maintain the Kyu-Shirataki station for Kana Harada reflects a collectivist mindset that views education as a public good essential for societal progress. This approach is rooted in Japan’s post-World War II reforms, which prioritized universal education to rebuild the nation after devastation. The Japanese government invests heavily in education, with public expenditure on education accounting for 3.5% of GDP in 2020, according to OECD data. MEXT’s policies, such as the 2022 multi-billion-dollar fund to promote STEM education and innovation in universities, demonstrate a commitment to fostering human capital across all demographics.
Japan’s education system is designed to minimize disparities. The teacher rotation system ensures that rural and urban schools benefit from experienced educators, while initiatives like the “Super High School” program and Kosen Colleges (technical institutes) provide specialized STEM training to students from diverse backgrounds. The Kyu-Shirataki case, while symbolic, reflects a broader commitment to ensuring that no student is left behind, regardless of their circumstances. This ethos is underpinned by cultural values of discipline, perseverance, and collective responsibility, which emphasize the role of education in building a cohesive and innovative society.
The decision to keep the station open also highlights Japan’s willingness to prioritize long-term societal benefits over short-term financial losses. By ensuring Kana’s access to education, the government recognized her potential to contribute to Japan’s knowledge economy, whether through STEM or other fields. This aligns with Japan’s broader investment in human capital, which has been a key driver of its economic and technological success. Japan’s low socio-economic disparities in education outcomes, as evidenced by PISA, suggest that such policies create a more equitable system that fosters talent across all demographics.
India’s Mindset: Efficiency and Scale In contrast, India’s policy of closing schools with fewer than 50 students reflects a mindset focused on efficiency and scale, often at the expense of equity. India’s education system is vast, with over 1.5 million schools and 250 million students, making it one of the largest in the world. The government faces significant challenges, including limited budgets, infrastructure deficits, and a diverse population with varying needs. Public expenditure on education in India was 4.6% of GDP in 2020, higher than Japan’s, but this funding is spread thin across a massive system. The closure of schools is often framed as a necessary measure to consolidate resources, improve facilities, and address teacher shortages. However, this approach fails to account for the geographical and socio-economic barriers faced by rural students, particularly those from deprived classes.
The Indian government’s focus on efficiency is driven by practical considerations but overlooks the long-term consequences of reduced access. The RTE Act mandates free education, yet school closures undermine this commitment by creating physical and financial barriers. For example, a 2018 study by the National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA) found that school mergers in Rajasthan increased dropout rates by 10% among girls in rural areas. The policy also reflects a utilitarian approach, prioritizing the needs of the majority (students in larger schools) over the minority (students in low-enrollment schools). This contrasts sharply with Japan’s emphasis on individual access, as seen in the Kyu-Shirataki case.
The mindset is further shaped by India’s socio-political context. Education is a state subject under India’s federal structure, leading to inconsistent policies across regions. States like Uttar Pradesh, with large populations and strained budgets, prioritize cost-cutting measures, while others, like Kerala, have invested in rural education infrastructure with better outcomes. The NEP 2020 aims to modernize education by emphasizing STEM, vocational training, and digital learning, but its success depends on addressing access barriers. Without targeted interventions—such as mobile schools, transportation subsidies, or community-based learning centers—students from deprived classes will continue to face exclusion.
Implications for STEM Development
Japan’s emphasis on universal access to EDUCATION has been a key factor in its dominance in STEM fields. The country’s high performance on PISA and TIMSS reflects a system that prepares students for rigorous academic and technical pursuits. Initiatives like the “Super High School” program, Kosen Colleges, and the 2022 STEM fund have strengthened Japan’s universities and research institutions, fostering innovations in robotics, artificial intelligence, and engineering. Japan’s equitable education system ensures that talent is nurtured across all demographics, contributing to its status as a global leader in technology. The Kyu-Shirataki case, while small in scale, reflects a system that values every student’s potential to contribute to national development.
In contrast, India’s school closure policies risk widening the STEM talent gap. Students from deprived classes, who rely on government schools, are disproportionately affected by closures, TTENTION: limited access to education, particularly in rural areas, can hinder their ability to pursue STEM education. The World Bank highlights that 70% of children in low- and middle-income countries, including India, suffer from “learning poverty,” unable to read or understand a simple paragraph by age 10. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated this crisis, with school closures disrupting education for millions. Without access to quality education, these students are less likely to develop the foundational skills needed for STEM fields, limiting India’s ability to build a robust STEM workforce.
The NEP 2020 emphasizes STEM and vocational training, but its implementation faces challenges, including inadequate infrastructure and teacher shortages. For example, ASER 2022 found that only 43% of rural students in Grade 5 could perform basic arithmetic, compared to 95% in Japan. India’s learning crisis, compounded by school closures, risks creating a generation with limited STEM competencies, hindering its ambition to become a global innovation hub. While India has made strides in technology, with a $4 trillion economy and a growing IT sector, educational disparities threaten its long-term competitiveness.
Japan’s equitable education system has been a key driver of its economic and technological success. By minimizing socio-economic disparities and investing in STEM, Japan has built a workforce capable of sustaining its developed status. India, with its young and growing population, has a demographic dividend, but without universal access to quality education, this potential may remain unrealized. The World Bank estimates that the global learning crisis could cost this generation $21 trillion in lifetime earnings, with India bearing a significant share due to access barriers.
Critical Analysis: The Mindset Toward Deprived Classes
The treatment of students from deprived classes in India reveals systemic challenges rooted in socio-economic and cultural factors. Government schools are often the only option for children from SC, ST, OBC, and economically disadvantaged backgrounds, who face barriers like poverty, caste discrimination, and gender inequality. School closures disproportionately affect these students, as private schools are often unaffordable or inaccessible. For example, a 2020 UNICEF report noted that 60% of girls in rural India drop out before completing secondary education, often due to access barriers. The closure policy reflects a utilitarian mindset that prioritizes cost efficiency over equity, risking the exclusion of the most vulnerable.
In Japan, the education system is designed to minimize disparities. Policies like teacher rotation, inclusive education for students with disabilities, and subsidies for rural schools ensure that all students have access to quality education. The Kyu-Shirataki case demonstrates a commitment to individual potential, regardless of circumstances. This contrasts with India, where the focus on efficiency often overlooks the needs of deprived classes, reinforcing inequalities. For instance, the closure of schools in tribal areas of Jharkhand has forced students to travel long distances, leading to dropout rates as high as 30%, according to a 2021 NIEPA study.
India’s mindset is also shaped by political dynamics. Education is a politically sensitive issue, and school closures are often framed as reforms to improve quality. However, they can be perceived as neglecting rural communities, particularly those from deprived classes. The NEP 2020’s emphasis on technology and skill development is promising, but its success depends on addressing access barriers through innovative solutions like community learning centers or mobile schools.
Broader Implications for Development
Japan’s education system has been a cornerstone of its economic and technological success. By ensuring equitable access and investing in STEM, Japan has built a workforce capable of driving innovation in a resource-scarce nation. The Kyu-Shirataki case reflects a broader commitment to human capital development, enabling Japan to overcome challenges like a declining population.
India, with its demographic dividend, has immense potential. However, school closures and educational disparities threaten to limit this potential. The learning crisis could hinder India’s ability to compete in a knowledge-driven global economy, particularly in STEM fields. Addressing these challenges requires a shift in mindset, prioritizing access and equity to harness India’s human capital for sustainable development.
Conclusion
The contrasting cases of Kana Harada and India’s school closures highlight fundamental differences in how Japan and India approach education. Japan’s commitment to individual access, as seen in the Kyu-Shirataki case, reflects a mindset that values every student’s potential, contributing to its STEM leadership and developed status. India’s focus on efficiency, while pragmatic, risks excluding marginalized students, hindering STEM development and national progress. To realize its potential, India must invest in equitable access, drawing inspiration from Japan’s model to build an inclusive education system that drives innovation and development.
References
- Japan • NCEE. (2023). Retrieved from ncee.org.
- Inclusive Education in Japan and Its Role in International Cooperation. (2024). Asia Pacific Education Review.
- Train Station Closes After Its Lone Student-Passenger Graduates. (2016). Global Citizen.
- Kyu-Shirataki Train Station in Hokkaido, Japan, Closes After Student Graduates. (2016). Bloomberg.
- Education – Postwar Reforms, Globalization, Technology. (2025). Britannica.
- Education Overview: Development news, research, data. (2014). World Bank.
- Annual Status of Education Report (ASER). (2022). ASER Centre.
- Right to Education Act: Challenges and Opportunities. (2020). UNICEF India.
- School Mergers and Their Impact on Rural Education. (2021). National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration (NIEPA).
