Introduction
Education is an ornament in prosperity and a refuge in adversity.
— Aristotle
» Worldwide higher education reforms
» Changing Policy on Higher
Education in India
» Recent Developments in Indian
Higher Education
» The Plan of this Book
Read PDF Dcoument...
INDIA has seen a consistently high rate of economic growth in the
recent years. It has now become a major player in the global knowledge
economy. Skill-based activities have made significant contribution to this
growth. Such activities depend on the large pool of qualified manpower
that is fed by its large higher education system. It is now widely
accepted that higher education has been critical to India’s emergence
in the global knowledge economy. Yet, it is believed that a crisis is
plaguing the Indian higher education system. While, the National
Knowledge Commission (NKC) set up by the Prime Minister calls it
a ‘quiet crisis’, the Human Resource Minister calls higher education ‘a sick child’. Industries routinely point towards huge skill shortages
and are of the opinion that growth momentum may not be sustained
unless the problem of skill shortages is addressed.
There appear to be endless problems with the Indian higher education
system. The higher education system produces graduates that are
unemployable, though there are mounting skill shortages in a number
of sectors. The standards of academic research are low and declining.
An unwieldy affiliating system, inflexible academic structure, uneven
capacity across subjects, eroding autonomy of academic institutions, low
level of public funding, archaic and dysfunctional regulatory environment
are some of its many problems. Finally, it is widely held that it
suffers from several systemic deficiencies and is driven by populism, and
in the absence of reliable data, there is little informed public debate.
More than 35 years ago, Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, while analysing
the crisis in Indian education, rather than attributing the crisis in Indian
education to administrative neglect or to thoughtless action, pointed
out that the ‘grave failures in policy-making in the field of education
require the analysis of the characteristics of the economic and social
forces operating in India, and response of public policy to these forces’
(Amartya Sen, ‘The Crisis in Indian education’, Lal Bahadur Shastri
Memorial Lectures, 10–11 March 1970). He emphasised that ‘due to
the government’s tendency to formulate educational policies based on
public pressure, often wrong policies are pursued.’ Unfortunately, it
is believed that policy-making suffers from similar failure even today.
Rather than pragmatism, it is populism, ideology and vested interests
that drive policy. It seeks to achieve arbitrarily set goals that are often
elusive and, more than that, pursued half-heartedly.
Page Up
Worldwide higher education reforms
The emergence of a global economy due to increased trade, investment
and mobility of people and, more recently, work across borders has
forced nation states to adapt their systems of higher education to the
changed global realities. Rather than continuing with their inward
looking policies, several countries are reshaping their systems of higher
education for making them globally competitive. Pragmatism rather
than ideology is driving this change. The United States of America
has major plans for investment in higher education. The United
Kingdom has injected new dynamism in the higher education sector
through competition and incentives. China has undertaken a package
of comprehensive reforms in higher education for over the past two
decades. The government in China has declared education, science and
technology to be the strategic driving forces of sustainable economic
growth. Pakistan has embarked upon wide-ranging systemic reforms.
Despite the fact that the United States has the finest system of
higher education in the world, it had set up a commission to examine
the future of higher education in September 2005, with a mandate to
ensure that America remains the world’s leader in higher education and
innovation.1 While the report of the commission has been received and
is being processed for implementation, the US government has already
committed to invest USD134 billion in higher education over the next
10 years. In the United Kingdom, where higher education is primarily
in the public sector, faced with problems of deteriorating standards due
to inadequate funding and failing accountability, several innovations in
financing, such as performance-based funding for teaching and research
and portable students’ aid, and so on, were introduced over the past
decade. This helped the UK higher education system to become one
of the best systems of higher education in the world again. In a highly
sensitive and bold decision, the UK government has now allowed the
universities to compete for students and charge variable fees, bringing
an end to the regulated fee regime in the UK (DfES, 2003).
Higher education reforms in China were initiated along with wider
economic reforms to become a market economy in the year 1978. Prior
to that, higher education was in the public sector. There was no tuition
fee. The government even took care of living expenses of the students.
Since then, the system of higher education has radically changed. The
concept of cost-sharing and cost recovery was introduced in the early
years of reforms. Tuition fees have now been made compulsory. The
higher education institutions in China were expected to diversify their
revenue sources and, therefore, allowed to have affiliated enterprises
(Sanyal and Martin, 2006).
Apart from increased support from alternative sources, higher education
received increased financial allocations from the government.
Thus, in spite of massive expansion in enrolment, average funding per
student did not go down. Through a national legislation in 2002, China
proactively involved the private sector to contribute and invest in higher
education. This accelerated the growth. To nurture excellence, a selective
approach in funding was adopted. In 1993, special financial allocations
were provided for China’s top 100 institutions to upgrade them to international
standards. In the year 1998, an even higher-level funding was
provided to nine top universities to make them world class.
Australia initiated comprehensive reforms in higher education in
2003. Government funding was significantly enhanced along with
increased provision for subsidised loans and scholarships for students.
The reform package included areas as diverse as teaching, workplace
productivity, governance, student financing, research, cross-sectoral
collaboration and quality (Commonwealth of Australia, 2003). Apart
from the advanced countries, many developing countries took up
ambitious programmes to reform their higher education sector. It was
realised that though primary and secondary education is important, it is
the quality and size of the higher education system that will differentiate
a dynamic economy from a marginalised one in the global knowledgebased
economy.
Based on the recommendation of the Task Force for Improvement
of Higher Education, neighbouring Pakistan replaced its University
Grants Commission (found ineffective) by a proactive Higher Education
Commission that initiated wide-ranging systemic reforms in 2002.
Public funding for higher education was increased significantly from
Rs 3.8 billion in 2002 to Rs 33.7 billion in 2007. To bring in a degree
of transparency and accountability, recurrent funds were allocated
amongst universities on the basis of a funding formula. To address
faculty related issues, changes in the salary structure of academics under
the tenure track system were made. Salaries of active research scholars
were increased significantly. Stringent requirements for the appointment
and promotion of faculty members and strict quality control of PhD
programmes were put in place. The reform programmes also addressed
the issue of access to quality teaching, learning and research resources
(Agarwal, 2008b).
Page Up
Changing Policy on Higher
Education in India
From the early 20th century, there have been several high level commissions
set up to provide policy orientation to the development of
higher education in India. On the basis of the report of the Sadler
Commission (1917–19), also referred to as the Calcutta University
Commission, the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE) was set
up to define the general aims of educational policy and coordinate the
work of various provinces and universities by guarding against needless
duplication and overlapping in the provision of the more costly forms
of education. The University Education Commission, presided over by
Dr S. Radhakrishnan, in its report in 1949 recommended that university
education should be placed in the Concurrent List so that there is a
national guarantee of minimum standards of university education. The
constituent assembly did not agree to it. It was much later, in 1976, that
education was made a concurrent subject with the 42nd Amendment
of the Constitution.
The Kothari Commission (1964–66) examined various aspects of
education at all levels and gave a very comprehensive report full of
insight and wisdom. This report became the basis of the National
Policy on Education, 1968. With this, a common structure of education
(10+2+3) was introduced and implemented by most states over a period
of time. In the school curricula, in addition to laying down a common
scheme of studies for boys and girls, science and mathematics were
incorporated as compulsory subjects and work experience assigned a
place of importance. A beginning was also made in restructuring of
courses at the undergraduate level. Centres of advanced studies were
set up for post-graduate education and research. Detailed estimates were
made to meet requirements of educated manpower in the country.
In 1985, a comprehensive appraisal of the existing educational
scene was made. This was followed by a countrywide debate. It was
noted that while the achievements were impressive in themselves,
the general formulations incorporated in the 1968 policy did not,
however, get translated into a detailed strategy of implementation, accompanied
by the assignment of specific responsibilities and financial
and organisational support. It was further noted that problems of
access, quality, quantity, utility and financial outlay, accumulated over
the years, had assumed such massive proportions that these required
to be tackled with the utmost urgency.
In the background explicated previously, the National Policy on
Education (NPE), 1986 was put in place. It was noted in the preamble
to the policy that education in India stood at the crossroads, and
neither normal linear expansion nor the existing pace and nature
of improvement of the situation would help. It was also noted that
education has an acculturating role. It refines sensitivities and perceptions
that contribute to national cohesion, a scientific temper and
independence of mind and spirit—thus furthering the goals of socialism,
secularism and democracy enshrined in our Constitution. Education
develops manpower for different levels of the economy. It is also the
substrate on which research and development flourish, being the
ultimate guarantee of national self-reliance. Accepting the fact that
education is a unique investment in the present and the future, a
very comprehensive policy document was approved in 1986. This was
supplemented with a Programme of Action (PoA) in 1992.
On review now, one sees that many of the recommendations of
the NPE, 1986 read with PoA, 1992 have been only partly fulfilled.
Moreover, there has been no effort to modify the previous policy prescriptions
or to develop a new one. After the economic reforms were
undertaken in the early 1990s, their influence on development of higher
education has been ignored. With the economic reforms of the 1990s,
the private sector has come to occupy a central role in the economic
development of the nation. There is a need for a holistic review of the
instruments currently available for managing the higher education system
such as the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act, the All India
Council of Technical Education (AICTE) Act, and so on, which have
become outdated in the present context. In this context, it is important
to develop a new national policy framework for higher education in the
current and emerging contexts. Such a policy framework should not be
developed by political processes, but by an independent, high-powered
commission.
Page Up
Recent Developments in Indian
Higher Education
Higher education has received a lot of attention in India over the past
few years. There are four reasons for this recent focus. First, country’s
weak higher education system is being blamed for skill shortages in
several sectors of economy. Second, reservation quotas in higher education
institutions, particularly the more reputed ones that provide
access to high status and best-paid jobs became a highly divisive issue,
central to the policy of inclusive growth and distributive justice, and
hence politically very important. Third, in the backdrop of the first two
developments, it began to be argued that the country would not be able
to sustain its growth momentum and maintain competitiveness unless
problems with higher education are fixed. Last, demand for higher
education continues to outpace the supply due to growing population
of young people, gains in school education, the growing middle class
and their rising aspirations.
It is widely believed that technological advances and a shift in
demographic provide India with a window of opportunity to productively
engage its huge pool of human resources, and become a leader
in both the rapidly expanding sectors of services and highly skilled
manufacturing. This would, however, require revamping the higher
education sector. Hence many steps have been taken to augment supply,
improve quality and fix many of the problems faced by higher
education. The National Knowledge Commission (NKC) that was set
up to examine the higher education sector (amongst other things) made
several useful and important recommendations. The Government of
India has increased funding significantly during the Eleventh Five Year
Plan. Many new institutions have been planned and some of them are
already operational. There are many good ideas in the plan document.
All these efforts, however, appear to be somewhat disconnected. Some
even appear to be at cross-purposes with each other. Several suggestions
appear to be merely impressionistic views of individuals, rather than
being supported by data and research. Overall, these efforts do not give
a sense of an integrated reform agenda for Indian higher education. And
in absence of credible data and good analysis, the media continues to
perpetuate and exacerbate certain fallacies and inconsistencies.
With ambiguity in defining its purpose and vagueness about its
quality, debate on higher education is usually full of rhetoric. As pointed
out by Kapur and Crowley, for the higher education ‘sector whose main
purpose is to train people with strong analytical skills, it is ironical that
its own self-analysis is replete with homilies and platitudes, rather than
strong evidence’ (Kapur and Crowley, 2008). Institutions of higher
education today are an integral organ of the state and economy. They
are embedded in the history and culture of a nation and are shaped by
its contemporary realities, ideologies and vested interests. India’s large
size, long history and diverse culture and the complicated nature of
Indian polity and policy process make Indian higher education a very
complex enterprise.
This book unravels this complexity by taking up a comprehensive
review of the Indian higher education system, assesses its needs, identifies
gaps and provides perspectives for the future. In doing so, it takes into
account several measures planned or taken and provides a glimpse of a
vibrant emerging private sector. Evolving an integrated reform agenda
for higher education in India (or, for that matter, anywhere in the
world because of the various sensitive issues involved) with a long-term
perspective is both complex and difficult, but by looking at the big
picture that the book presents, one could think strategically about it.
Page Up
The Plan of this Book
To intervene in complex systems like ecologies, economies, societies
and nations, it is necessary to first understand how the system is put
together. Thus, the first chapter of the book maps the size, structure and
growth of higher education in India, both in terms of enrolment and
institutions. In doing so, the book also examines trends about Indians
enrolled overseas and international students in India. While analysing
overall growth trends, the book notes the transition from elite to mass
higher education and compares the enrolment pattern with countries
around the world, and discusses the emergence of new providers and
new forms of delivery.
Issues of access and equity are central to higher education in most
countries around the world, particularly in democratic societies. Chapter 2
examines these issues. The chapter also examines the impact of growth
in private finance on access and equity.
Higher education in the private sector has grown fast over the past two
decades. This has not only increased capacity and enhanced students’
choices, but also affected the dynamics of regulation. Its impact on
financing arrangements has been very significant. With this in view,
Chapter 3 has its focus on the growing and vibrant private sector in
higher education, its growth and prospects.
Chapter 4 deals with the financing issues. It analyses the funding of
higher education from both public and private resources. It also examines
overall funding patterns and trends, issue of institutional funding and
student financing (student aid and loans). Keeping the trends in
mind, it offers suggestions on sustainable funding arrangements, with
a particular focus on student financial aid. There is an organic link
between financing and management of higher education, and thus the
chapter also discusses issues relating to institutional management in
the context of new public management philosophy.
Chapter 5 analyses the role of higher education in the development
of workforce, to meet the domestic as well as the global demand for
qualified manpower. It specifically addresses the issue of transition
from education to work and the disjunction between them, which calls
for specific action and the problem of skill shortages. The chapter also
provides a brief outline of the vocational education and training sector.
The two complement each other in skill development, and therefore a
holistic treatment of the subject makes it necessary to cover this sector
as well.
Chapter 6 benchmarks Indian research performance globally
and then evaluates the critical role of academic research in fostering
innovation. On review of its weaknesses, the chapter suggests action
on several fronts.
Chapter 7 discusses the regulatory environment for higher education
as it exists in India today. It identifies specific areas of concern, taking
into consideration the emerging market structure for higher education
and the peculiar nature of competition in higher education. The
chapter proposes a new regulatory environment to address minimum
regulatory concerns, taking care of information failure and facilitating
coordination.
Chapter 8 analyses the progress made on accreditation in India and
points out that accreditation, as it exists today, serves little purpose.
Specific suggestions for changes in accreditation system have been
made.
Chapter 9 examines the conclusions reached in the context of changing
socio-economic and political realities and growing optimism. It
analyses three conceptual issues—purpose, diversity and competition,
and examines the status and prospects of Indian higher education in
terms of three key cross-cutting themes—access and expansion, equity
and inclusion, and quality and excellence. Finally, this chapter looks at
the changing nature of policy support and the imperatives for systemic
governance in the changed scenario.
The focus on data in this book is deliberate, in order to sieve reality
from myth. Perceptions, ideology, vested interests and policy debate
have not been missed either. The evolution of economic purposes of
higher education has been the single most important development in
the education sector in the 20th century, and it resulted in enormous
expansion of higher education in countries around the world, including
India. It shaped debates over equity and access, social and economic
mobility, curriculum and courses, innovation and competitiveness. The
emphasis in this book on the economic role of higher education reflects
this contemporary reality, though civic, moral and intellectual purposes
of higher education are important and will continue to be so.
|
