Management institutes across the country are up in arms over recent guidelines issued by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) governing the post graduate diploma in management. The Education Promotion Society of India (EPSI) and Association of Indian Management Schools have approached the Supreme Court seeking reprieve from the current guidelines. H Chaturvedi, director of Noida-based Birla Institute of Management and Technology and EPSI president, tells Kalpana Pathak that in the name of revamping management education, AICTE is harassing the better B-schools and letting the non-performing ones off scot-free. Excerpts:
AICTE argues these guidelines are designed to improve management education. But you have gone to court. Wasn’t there a middle way over this?
When we met Kapil Sibal two years ago, he told us that whatever our prime minister did for the Indian economy, he will do for the education sector. But it’s disappointing to see what his ministry is doing. These new guidelines will take management education back to the year 1992 when India introduced postgraduate diploma in management (PGDM) programmes. The success of Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) was responsible for this. In the age of liberalisation, we seem to be going backward. There can’t be a diktat on admissions and fees and curricula. Our view is that AICTE has not followed proper procedure in drafting these guidelines. It has not consulted the stakeholders before framing the guidelines. We have proof that these notifications were not properly drafted. When we raised this point with the AICTE chairman, he did not respond. Now we will produce the proof in the court.
But why can’t B-schools follow a common admission date as AICTE has suggested?
Over a decade ago, the ministry of human resource development (MHRD) approved five tests for management institutes: the common admission test (CAT) conducted by the IIMs; the management aptitude test (MAT); the joint management entrance test conducted by the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) for admission to their management schools; the AIMS test for management admission (ATMA) and the Xavier Admission Test (XAT) conducted by Jamshedpur-based Xavier Labour Relations Institute. All these exams follow a different schedule. AICTE says admissions to the programmes should not start before March 31 of the academic year. It has ignored the fact that most universities have their final examination in April. CAT is conducted around October and the results are declared in January. We are of the view that group discussion (GD) and personal interviews (PIs) should be conducted by February.
AICTE has also said the GD and PI should be conducted by the state governments. Delegating admissions to the state governments, which will certainly find this idea attractive, will breed corruption. We already have so much corruption at the national level. If you want to reform a sector you look at how to make it better, not worse. AICTE is changing the guidelines and norms every week. You can speak to engineering colleges for which AICTE has changed the norms three times in the last three years.
AICTE argues that a common admission date will ensure that seats at B-schools do not go vacant.
The problem with AICTE is that it does not do its homework. It has created excess supply without paying attention to demand. For instance, in 2008, it created 100,000 new management seats when there was no need. Last year, around 60,000 seats, or 30 per cent of the available 200,000 management seats, went vacant. This year 80,000 new seats have been created. Though the economy is booming and the job market is positive, many seats will go vacant again. We expect no takers for over 70,000 seats this year. These vacancies occur because students do not want to risk their career if they do not get admission in a good B-school.
Also, while giving out licences, AICTE does not pay attention to the location of the institute. B-schools can’t flourish in the countryside or where there are no industries. But you will find them in every possible location. In the last 20 years, AICTE has increased the number of B-schools from 1,500 to 3,000.
You mean institutes at locations other than the major cities are not performing well?
I will explain it like this. If an IIM is set up in places like Ranchi or Rohtak, and operates without faculty members, no one questions that. But had it been one among us, we would have been issued a warning letter about penalties. This is a ridiculous way of functioning. If you look at the quality of the MBA that the universities and their affiliated colleges in our country offer, you will be surprised by the lack of infrastructure. But the University Grants Commission (UGC) is not monitoring them. Many of them are ill-run. No one bothers to review B-schools at universities where students do not even find a decent job.
But AICTE says B-schools involved in malpractices are behind the court case.
We are not criminals. We are serving the country by creating educated manpower working across the world. The B-schools involved here include reputed names like SP Jain Institute of Management and Research, Xavier Labour Relations Institute, Institute of Management Technology, Management Development Institute and so on. These are reputed institutes not only in India but also abroad where they have set up international campuses. We are not disputing the fact that there are some institutions that are not of good quality. But they have flourished under AICTE’s rule. Why does AICTE not close them down? Besides, the government may soon allow foreign universities and B-schools in the country, shouldn’t it ensure a level-playing field? If you will grant international B-schools autonomy and allow them to fix their own fees, admissions and curricula why can’t you allow Indian B-schools to do the same? There are at least 50 B-schools in the country that can be helped to become world class. But no one is paying attention to that issue. AICTE has not discussed this with any industry body. They cannot punish good institutes in order to crack down on the erring ones. They are no one to decide the future of management education.
Would a court case not impact admissions this year?
So far there has been no effect on the admissions. We have received reports that there is 70 to 85 per cent turnout in good schools for GD/PI. Students do not go by what AICTE says. They always look for quality.
What if the AICTE’s stance is upheld by the court?
We will not do anything that will go against the law. We are keeping our options open. After the Supreme Court’s verdict, the B-schools will sit together and decide the future course of action.
