Dear Students,
LAST WEEK WE ASKED: Do you think that management institutes should have a regulatory body?
BEST RESPONSE
More than 180 B-schools closed down in 2012 and many more are expected to follow suit by the end of 2013. The cause clearly is the outdated curriculum, lack of competent faculty and no development of employable skill sets, even though students pay ridiculously high fees. With a vast number of tier-2 & tier-3 management institutes all over the country, it is imperative to have a regulatory body to keep an eye on the quality of learning offered by these institutes. The regulatory body shall ensure quality of infrastructure, faculty, and a synergy between the curriculum and the industry requirements.
- Dawood Ghasletwala, Institute of Management Technology, Ghaziabad.
OTHER RESPONSES
Currently institutes are over regulated in terms of course curriculum, faculty selection, fees and general administration. Today, students are not taught what is industry relevant and required, students are not taught by industry experts but by only academicians having no industry experience, students are taught the syllabus which is very old and not updated - these things happen due to regulation and over regulation by regulatory bodies. Blanket regulation of management institutes will only worsen the above scenario and the only losers will be 'students'. UGC can be the only one authority to regulate management institutes.
- Anand A Wadadekar, SAMVIT School of Infrastructure Business, Pune.
Management institutes must have a regulatory body. Regulatory bodies help in the smooth functioning of institutes. Yearly compliances of B-schools by regulatory bodies facilitates to maintain standard.
- Rituparna Saha Ray, Fr. C. Rodrigues Institute of Management Studies, Navi Mumbai.
A regulatory body for the management institutes in India is a prerequisite going by the way the various institutes are operating, bidding bye to the standards. Regulation is the exclusive way which can urge the institutes to live up to minimal standards if not international, and deliver the needful to the students. The regulation precisely must be confined to faculty and infrastructural standards along with an eye on the fee structure and ensure it is not overdone, lest can lead to undesired consequences of curtailing the much needed administrative autonomy, which eventually ends up in harming the basic purpose.
- YVS Karthik, National Institute Of Pharmaceutical Education And Research (NIPER).
A regulatory body should have at management institution which may be helpful for the student who fill many form for entrance test to admission in different-2 institution,if there will be conduct all institution in one circumference then it will be less costly and easy for student belonging poor family.
- Jagdish Dangi, UIT-RGPV Bhopal.
The mindless expansion in the number of management institutes in this country has made the need of an independent regulator indispensible, barring a few top institutes the rest of the sector is facing huge hurdles including dearth of faculty ,lack of industrial interface and placements. This sector needs a regulator consisting of eminent educationists and global professionals who can bridge the gap in curriculum and faculty and promote alliances with global institutions so that management education in India can fulfill the role of providing quality mangers to the knowledge economy.
- Swar Grover, GNDU, Amritsar.
Regulatory body for B-schools should be there as UGC will not be able to look after every issue concerning the B-schools. Another concern is that institutes will now have a free-reign over the conduct of the MBA programs; this might lead to the mushrooming of a lot of institutes offering sub-standard MBA programs and the already declining standard of education will go down further. The AICTE guidelines at least assured a minimum standard quality of education for students which can now be compromised without a direct regulator.
- Vaishnavi Kadwe, Samvit School of Infrastructure Business, Pune.
More From This Section
There is an absolute need for a management institutes to have a regulatory body. A regulatory body, in the context of education, is an external organization that has been empowered by authority to oversee and control the educational process and outputs relevant to it. It helps in the functioning of an institutes in a legitimate way,with the presence of a regulatory body the degree of commitment towards excellence and the victory can be easily achieved.Management institutes who are on top is having the sheer presence of a regulatory body.
- Akash Jaiswal, IBS, Mumbai.
With the number of management institutions increasing every year, the quality of Indian students aspiring to become future managers is at stake. After years of hard work young aspirants get disappointed, when their college doesn't provide what they promised to, before admissions. They are put off by factors like poor quality of teaching, lack of adequate faculty or no job offer at the end. A regulatory body like AICTE is more necessary to keep track of the quality of the education in all the colleges and will help the students to make their choice with care.
- Mithun JB, Xavier Institute of Management and Entrepreneurship, Bangalore.
The need of regulation arises in cases involving flouting of principles or lack of unison among B-schools. None of these scenarios forms the situation at hand thereby ruling out any requirement of such regulatory body. The only exception to the aforementioned aspect is mismanagement among the lower rung B-schools. It is where the two existing governing bodies UGC and AICTE needs to cater. These regulatory agencies have to clog the unrecognized institutes and pave the way for growth of substandard B-schools. So with the presence of UGC and AICTE, another regulatory body specifically for management institutes makes no sense.
- Shivam Chhabra, Integral University, Lucknow.
Governing Bodies can play an essential role in setting the strategic direction for the school and holding its leadership to account. Setting up a regulatory body will ensure sleek working of the schools,which will undertake the initiative to structure norms for its workings,monitor their activities and will also make them accountable.
- Jatin Kashyap, Post Graduate Government College, Chandigarh.
The recent Supreme Court ruling of excluding MBA from AICTE regulatory purview will lead to mushrooming of management institutes not providing minimum standard quality of education to the students. The sorry state of faculty crunch will become more prominent due to this mushrooming which in turn will affect hiring and placements. So, ultimately students’ aspirations will get impacted. UGC which is not stringent enough, plus considering the number of institutes under UGC, it would be beneficial for them that some burden is being handled by AICTE. Otherwise it will become difficult to monitor the management institutes closely.
- Udayan Nandi, Xavier Institute of Management & Entrepreneurship, Bangalore.
Management and engineering courses have strong demand in industries but the institutions have not fared well in meeting the expectations of the market. Although the institutions may fulfill the requirement in number because there are more number of seat than aspirant in management but there is lack of quality manager So, there must be a regulatory body. It may be government agency or public authority because in US there is a public authority which is responsible for quality improvement in these field. This will make a strong bridge between demand and quality supply.
- Kumar Satyam Sundram, Shankara Institute of Technology, Jaipur.
Today a B-school has become more of a placement agency. Selection of a B-school by a student is more driven by placement rather than considering quality of education and infrastructure. So, there should be a regulatory body which gives the minimum requirement that institute should have to compile but also have to give more autonomy in deciding curriculum, making admission, deciding the overall quality of the programme and recruiting qualified faculty.
- Sushil Kore, Xavier Institute of Management & Entrepreneurship (XIME), Bangalore
Management institutes should not have a regulatory body because their presence ensures control over the institutes. Management studies are subjective and it cannot be tied down. The overall governance with respect to curriculum, recruitment of staff etc should be in the hands of institutions. There is an argument that the institutions will go on a rampage if there is no regulatory body. Therefore, an advisory role should be given to the same. Their performance will in turn reward the institutions which will step up and revive the management education which is already in shambles with no overseeing regulations.
- V. Sunil Babu, Xaviers Institute of Management and Entrepreneurship (XIME), Bangalore.
UGC is not a very stringent body and wields a very indirect kind of control over university-affiliated MBA institutes. Also, it will be difficult for UGC to monitor the management institutes closely. But a body specifically to regulate non-technical education can help ensure that some minimum standards are met in the infrastructure and certain aspects to be able to function. The quality of education is again dependent on the faculty, their experience & teaching methods.
- Mohd Avaish, Xavier Institute of Management and Entrepreneurship (XIME), Bangalore.
Your responses should reach us at edu@business-standard.com by Monday evening every week. Please ensure that your responses do not exceed 100 words. Avoid attachments and email your full name, institute's name, batch and complete mailing address. The student who gives the 'Best Response' will be awarded Rs 500.
THIS WEEK'S QUESTION: Do you think it is the right time to for working professionals to quit jobs for higher studies?
