 "Parimal H Vyas")
Located in the cultural and education hub of Gujarat, Vadodara's Maharaja Sayaji University (MSU) is spread across 278 acres. The university is well acknowledged for its outstanding fine arts programme. Funded by the Gujarat government, it has 43,000 students - almost as many as in the University of Delhi - with 94 departments, 13 faculties and three constant colleges. It has a Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and an Oriental Institute that preserves, analyses and studies rare manuscripts. Parimal H Vyas, acting vice chancellor of the university, speaks to Anjuli Bhargava on the state of higher education in India and the reforms he thinks are required. Edited excerpts:
What are some of the important changes needed to improve the higher education sector?
I would like to see teachers made more accountable. 100 per cent job security for government and teaching staff in universities and colleges is not desirable. We need to review the performance of teachers constantly. Once we appoint a permanent teacher, there is assured job security and if the person stops contributing - say, apart from only taking classes - we really don't have any mechanism to monitor or to compel him to undertake research work. We must pay teachers better but we must link pay to performance. This single factor has adversely affected the quality of teaching in our country significantly.
Why just a professor; even a vice-chancellor must be rated and his work reviewed. The annual performance review advocated by the UGC (University Grants Commission) is a good step but there is a lot of resistance to this.
You can create classrooms, colleges and universities, but it takes 30 years for someone to become a professor. This human resource we cannot create overnight. The soul of higher education is the student, but the body is the teacher. Unfortunately, we have not been able to motivate the teacher to the extent required.
Second, we tend to over-emphasise teaching in a classroom. We need to make a student learn things by doing those. The examination system needs reform to that extent. Too much emphasis is laid on the academic curriculum; it is not student-centric. Worse, there is too much spoon-feeding. Parents come with students to decide their electives. I really don't understand why this happens.
What about the use of technology at the college level?
That has to begin right at the primary level. We need to take mothers more on board in everything to do with education. If a child goes to school, the first thing a mother does when the child comes home is open his diary and look at the remarks of the teacher. I think if we can involve the mother in the whole process, it will help. The teacher alone cannot do it. The integration between housewives and schools is not happening. In terms of feedback and involving the mother and inculcating the use, benefits of technology right from the school level is necessary.
Look at the banking sector and the way it has adopted technology. We have managed it in communications and entertainment, to an extent. My question is why have we have not managed this with education? We have been using some devices, gadgets and technology but we have not been able to make it widespread. Just using computers, conducting an interview on Skype and doing an odd video-conference is not enough. The culture has to change and the teachers have to lead that change. Only then can this spread among students.
At MSU, we are also facing a problem in finding the right candidates to fill teacher positions for reserved categories. That is a challenge.
What do you think of the surge in private universities? Should education be not-for-profit?
Profit is not a dirty word to me. In our country, higher education has been made a luxury. I think the entry of private players has helped change that a bit. We have opened up.
But excessive liberalisation has happened. You find universities designing and offering courses based on commercial considerations. This has affected the system adversely. Even teachers are looking more at their own research and personal growth, and not focusing enough on their primary responsibility of engaging the student.
How should we appoint and motivate teachers?
Ideally, for a five-year term, on a contractual basis, but continuously monitored.
If I design a good course and I teach it and hold my student's interest, I should be rewarded. But we have a standardised pay structure and that is not helping matters. We follow a time-bound career advancement scheme. Why?
From teachers, we expect three things - teaching, research and extension (participation in wider activities, projects and so on). Ideally, they have to ideally do all three. But that is rare.
Once a teacher is confirmed, it is hard to remove him/her. My real worry is there are teachers who aren't aspiring for promotions; they are content to just let things be.
Also, teachers often think it is a light job, for a few hours a day, with lots of holidays during summers and winters. I am sorry. This is a 24-hour job. I often tell students that I am only free when I am taking a class. As soon as it is over, I have to prepare for the next class. Taking a post-graduate class is not only something you do; it needs a kind of mental preparation if you want to do any justice to it.
I don't know if we can remove some of the bureaucratic constraints we have. For instance, why should projects only be given to permanent teachers? Sometimes, temporary teachers are more eager and enthusiastic and might deserve the funds for a project more than a permanent teacher.
