The real higher education reforms

India needs excellence in higher education with employability

The youth in India want quality higher education that leads to decent employment. The gross enrolment rate in universities, including the distance mode, is nearly one-third and likely to touch 50 per cent by 2030. The dream of education in foreign universities remains strong in spite of the falling rupee. There is a dearth of institutions and courses that offer employable, quality opportunities for larger numbers.
 

The new National Education Policy 2020 lays down a pathway for flexibility with no rigid separation between the arts and sciences, extensive use of technology, multilingualism, life skills, full equity and inclusion, multi-disciplinarity, holistic education, and a light but tight regulatory framework for higher education. A policy is good only if its impact on institutions is immediate through decentralised mandates and management.
 

Any ranking of higher education still finds that the lead positions mostly go to the IITs, the IIMs, the AIIMS, the National Law Schools, and many other institutions set up by the State. Good private institutions have also come up over the last couple of decades but the quality, both of public and private universities, remains an area of concern.
 

The most critical challenge is that the best academics do not have the money to set up a “not for profit” educational institution (Unni Krishnan vs the State of Andhra Pradesh judgment does not permit for-profit institutions) and they cannot get bank loans. They can only do so by joining a private partner whose commitment to excellence may be weak. How does one make private funds build quality institutions with the academics insulated from the market pressures? How does one guarantee good academics in privately-funded institutions?
 

First, we need to permit higher education universities and colleges to be set up under the Companies Act as for-profit institutions. The new policy is quiet on the subject. This becomes important as institutional finance is not available to academics to set up quality institutions. There could always be conditions like ploughing the profits back into the sector.

Second, many state governments can develop partnerships like the land grant system in the US or our own National Law Schools. With the chief justice of the state as the chairperson of its board, states are happy to provide land and even funds for construction. Capital investments from government and private donors, and recurring costs from its own generation make the law schools retain their academic autonomy and excellence. Even the private sector can be given concessional land if they guarantee a specific commitment to academic standards and transparency in recruitment and running the institution.
 

Third, bricks and mortar alone do not ensure excellence. It is the human resource that makes the difference. The policy of having a mentoring institution, as in the case of new IITs and IIMs, and permitting a 10-year lien to IIT faculty to go to new IITs and provide leadership and excellence has worked well. The IIT Act, 1961, and the well–defined process of selection of directors have insulated these institutions from mediocrity. The AIIMS in states should follow the same institutional architecture. The IIT Act should become the basis for a similar management ethos for Central and state institutions, both public and private. Flexibility in curriculum design and transparency in selection of teachers are the only way forward.
  

Fourth, we cannot compromise on the process of selection. While there are search-cum-selection committees, other considerations often triumph. Excellence cannot be ensured only with funds; an outstanding principal/director makes all the difference. The pursuit of evidence-based research and knowledge requires debates and dissent. Let a hundred flowers bloom!

Fifth, we cannot afford to continue with the BA, BSc, BCom fixation without simultaneously offering a certificate vocational programme or internship/ apprenticeship wherever viable. The mainstream courses have to become employable.  A career development office is needed in each institution for internships, and for academia–industry interface.  
 

Sixth, skill thrust and its equivalence with formal courses is immediately needed. Let two worlds not exist in isolation. ITIs, polytechnics, universities all have to learn from each other and stay updated in what they offer. Apprenticeships with industry could pave the way for higher-order employment and incomes. 
 

Seventh, teachers and health workers are needed nationally and globally. There are regions like Jharkhand with an outstanding tradition of caregivers. More nursing institutions will improve the lives and livelihoods of people. Allied health professionals and teacher development have to be a focus. 
 

Eighth, NET qualified employment has to be enforced in all colleges as students cannot afford mediocrity. There is also a need to rope in professors of practice who can bring valuable workplace sector knowledge.
 

Ninth, regulation is important but it should not obstruct excellence. Technology provides for a light but tight approach. We must encourage autonomy with responsibility.  Autonomous quality and standard-setting bodies are needed.
 

Tenth, piecemeal solutions will take us nowhere if we do not address the core challenges. Technology is a means but not an end in itself. While we need to expand technology-enabled learning, it should not be at the cost of teachers. Technology is an enabler and facilitator, especially in a situation where good teachers are difficult to come by. Technology for enhancing teacher capability has to be integral to the approach. 
 

The vulnerable social groups and women still lag behind in access to higher education. All efforts that improve their participation must be strengthened. Employment and education are linked and have to be at the centre of reforms. Easing the twinning arrangement norms between foreign universities and national institutions is the best way to offer excellence and exposure to India’s students.

The writer is a retired civil servant. The views are personal