The University Grants Commission (UGC) recently scrapped non-NET fellowships, which were given to those pursuing MPhil and PhD at central universities. Angered by this, students have been protesting at the commission’s headquarters and universities in New Delhi and other cities over the past week. Sukhadeo Thorat, former chairman of UGC who now heads Indian Council of Social Science Research, speaks to Ranjita Ganesan about the impact of the decision and the state of higher education in India
What is the significance of non-NET fellowships?
There is a larger context to the issue of fellowships. When I was the chairman of UGC from 2006-2011, and the 11th (Five-year) plan began in 2006, we made a strategy document on higher education to be submitted to the ministry. At the time, it became clear that the problem of faculty in universities had taken a serious turn. For 15 years or so, many state governments, had by government order, stopped the recruitment of teachers. Universities were outsourcing staff.
Eighty per cent of those who passed the test were to be given fellowships. This scaling up was with the hope that in five to six years, at least those who express a desire to enter the teaching profession should be here. We saw that in prime central universities, MPhil/PhD students not get fellowships through Rajiv Gandhi or Maulana Azad NET fellowships. So, we approached the ministry to start non-NET fellowships for small amounts of Rs 3,000 or Rs 5,000. The ministry was reluctant but later understood that those who clear tough central university examinations are also competent.
What would the scrapping of the fellowships mean?
I don’t have any figures for the number of students who will be impacted but there will be a higher drop-out rate at the MPhil level. Fellowships help students from poor economic backgrounds. But even if they are economically better off, we cannot expect students to spend four to five years without financial support. They will be a resource to the nation. This fellowship was good enough because at these central universities, accommodation and food is subsidised. There will be a greater impact on the drop-out rate in the courses that follow MPhil.
What could have driven UGC’s decision?
If finances are a reason, they should not be. Increasing the supply and quality of higher education teachers is too important an issue. Even if the bill is slightly high, one could divert funding from one end to another. If monitoring is a concern, it should be noted that no fellowship is given without supervision. According to the guidelines, funding can be discontinued if a student is not working. Every six months, supervisors have to submit a report. This can be made more stringent and monitored carefully.
Is the decision fair?
Fellowships should continue. In the seven years since the introduction of fellowships, vice-chancellors of universities tell me they have larger number of students pursuing a PhD than before. In 10 years’ time, we will have more scholars available for teaching and research.
Does academic research need more government support?
We do need support. To be able to produce good research, you need a good researcher, and you get the training to be a researcher only at the MPhil and PhD level. Such fellowships enhance research capabilities. If I talk of the state of research in social sciences, we have a long way to go. The ministry has taken steps but it is still an underfunded sector. India was ahead of China and Brazil in social sciences till 1995. Now, China has overtaken us. We need to build a community of researchers. That can only be made possible through the MPhil and PhD courses.
What is the significance of non-NET fellowships?
There is a larger context to the issue of fellowships. When I was the chairman of UGC from 2006-2011, and the 11th (Five-year) plan began in 2006, we made a strategy document on higher education to be submitted to the ministry. At the time, it became clear that the problem of faculty in universities had taken a serious turn. For 15 years or so, many state governments, had by government order, stopped the recruitment of teachers. Universities were outsourcing staff.
More From This Section
As a result, the number of students going in for PhD declined quite dramatically because those who wanted to join the profession looked at demand and realised that there had literally been no recruitments. A number of steps were taken to address the crisis. In the short term, we raised the retirement age from 60 to 65. In the long term, the 6th Pay Commission significantly increased teachers’ salary. The next question of increasing the supply of quality teachers by promoting MPhil and PhD was addressed by providing fellowships. There was an increase in NET fellowships.
Eighty per cent of those who passed the test were to be given fellowships. This scaling up was with the hope that in five to six years, at least those who express a desire to enter the teaching profession should be here. We saw that in prime central universities, MPhil/PhD students not get fellowships through Rajiv Gandhi or Maulana Azad NET fellowships. So, we approached the ministry to start non-NET fellowships for small amounts of Rs 3,000 or Rs 5,000. The ministry was reluctant but later understood that those who clear tough central university examinations are also competent.
What would the scrapping of the fellowships mean?
I don’t have any figures for the number of students who will be impacted but there will be a higher drop-out rate at the MPhil level. Fellowships help students from poor economic backgrounds. But even if they are economically better off, we cannot expect students to spend four to five years without financial support. They will be a resource to the nation. This fellowship was good enough because at these central universities, accommodation and food is subsidised. There will be a greater impact on the drop-out rate in the courses that follow MPhil.
What could have driven UGC’s decision?
If finances are a reason, they should not be. Increasing the supply and quality of higher education teachers is too important an issue. Even if the bill is slightly high, one could divert funding from one end to another. If monitoring is a concern, it should be noted that no fellowship is given without supervision. According to the guidelines, funding can be discontinued if a student is not working. Every six months, supervisors have to submit a report. This can be made more stringent and monitored carefully.
Is the decision fair?
Fellowships should continue. In the seven years since the introduction of fellowships, vice-chancellors of universities tell me they have larger number of students pursuing a PhD than before. In 10 years’ time, we will have more scholars available for teaching and research.
Does academic research need more government support?
We do need support. To be able to produce good research, you need a good researcher, and you get the training to be a researcher only at the MPhil and PhD level. Such fellowships enhance research capabilities. If I talk of the state of research in social sciences, we have a long way to go. The ministry has taken steps but it is still an underfunded sector. India was ahead of China and Brazil in social sciences till 1995. Now, China has overtaken us. We need to build a community of researchers. That can only be made possible through the MPhil and PhD courses.