Higher Education Revolution
The following set of reforms would make Indian universities world
class
Going by media reports, the government is now actively working on a major overhaul of the regulatory
system in higher education. This reform has been long overdue and, after the passage of the landmark
National Medical Commission Act, the natural next step.
The current context for the reform is set by the draft National Education Policy (NEP). While NEP is to be
applauded for its recommendation of full autonomy to higher education institutions (HEIs) in areas such as
administration, teaching, research, curriculum setting and foreign collaboration, the regulatory and
institutional structures it has proposed are much too complex and unwieldy to yield the desired outcome.
The government will do well by considering a simpler, more flexible architecture suitable for the 21st
century.
A review of systems governing higher education in the United States, United Kingdom and China, which
have been most successful in delivering quality education and research, suggests that the new system be
designed to promote rather than regulate education. To make this intent explicit, the government must
designate the successor institution to the University Grants Commission (UGC) the Higher Education
Promotion Commission (HEPC). In turn, HEPC should be designed such that it cannot resurrect the
Inspector Raj of the UGC regime. I provide, in my forthcoming book, additional details on the proposals
that follow.
The chairperson and members of HEPC should be selected from amongst the most eminent persons of
unimpeachable integrity. They must come from diverse academic disciplines. The commission should be
assisted by three bodies: (i) Advisory Council; (ii) Office of Registration of HEIs; and (iii) Committee for
Quality Assessment. The Advisory Council should include as members scholars from different fields and
representatives of the states. Its job would be to sensitise the commission to issues relevant to education in
different fields and states.
The Office of Registration would maintain the Register of HEIs. Guided by the commission, it would
develop a classification that categorises HEIs into those that are fully autonomous, partially autonomous,
degree granting, non-degree granting, private, public, foreign-owned and of national importance.
The commission would formulate transparent criteria for entry of new HEIs of domestic as well as foreign
origin into the register. It would take the decision to grant or deny entry to an HEI applicant in a timebound manner. It would also formulate transparent criteria for the existing HEIs to maintain entry into the
register. These criteria will be based principally on outcomes and not inputs. Enforcement would be
entirely through a clear statement by each HEI on its website that it satisfies the criteria stipulated by
HEPC. Any false claims would attract punitive action.
Degree granting power would be vested in HEPC and implemented through the Office of Registration. The
commission would develop transparent criteria under which an HEI is empowered to grant degrees. It will
be free to confer such power on both universities and colleges allowing the more distinguished ones among the latter to develop their own brand names and even transform themselves into universities. The
commission would also specify criteria under which an HEI will be granted power to authorise other HEIs
to confer degrees on its behalf. This power would be available to both public and private universities.
Furthermore, the commission would develop criteria that would qualify an HEI to use ‘university’ in its
title. These criteria would offer paths to set up an institution directly as a university as well as to convert
an existing HEI into a university.
The Committee for Quality Assessment would develop criteria for rating different categories of
institutions. With its help, the commission will identify and designate outside agencies to rate different
categories of HEIs. It will be important to identify multiple agencies to carry out assessment so that they
can rapidly cover all HEIs.
HEIs with full autonomy will be entirely free to develop their own curriculums and choose textbooks and
readings. HEIs with less than full autonomy would follow the curriculums and textbooks of one or more
HEIs with full autonomy. They would be required to identify the source institutions of their curriculums on
their websites.
A separate, independent committee that is at arm’s length from the government would allocate government
funds for education and facilities (but not research except that relating to pedagogy). The criteria for such
disbursements would give considerable weight to the quality of institutions as assessed by agencies
designated by the commission. The eventual goal should be to allow private and public HEIs to compete
for these funds on equal footing based on the quality of education.
Finally, it is critical to forge a path to ending the current separation between research at independent
councils and teaching in HEIs. India needs to integrate the councils into HEIs and incentivise research at
the latter in a major way via funding and reduced teaching.
This requires the creation of a National Research and Innovation Foundation with a large sum of funds at
its disposal. The foundation would offer project based research grants through a peer review process. It
will have to pay particular attention to research in social sciences and arts and humanities, areas in which
India has lost much ground to other countries, especially China, in the past two decades.
The writer is Professor of Economics at Columbia University
Source: Times of India, 6/03/2020