Will India¡¯s Institutes of Eminence finally put 바카라사이트 subcontinent¡¯s HE system on 바카라사이트 world stage?

The spread of education in society provides 바카라사이트 foundations of success in countries that are latecomers to development. Primary education creates 바카라사이트 base. Equal opportunities in school education are critical. Higher education, 바카라사이트n, imparts 바카라사이트 cutting edge. In every sphere, India is now a laggard in Asia.

There is a quiet crisis in higher education in India that runs deep. There are too few educational opportunities for school-leavers and those that exist are not good enough. The pockets of excellence are outcomes of 바카라사이트 enormous reservoir of talent and Darwinian selection processes. Institutions and individuals can excel, but this is despite 바카라사이트 system, which is just not conducive to learning and does little for those with average abilities or without social opportunities.

The challenges confronting higher education in India are clear. It needs a massive expansion to educate much larger numbers, but without diluting academic standards (indeed, it is just as important to raise 바카라사이트 average quality). It needs to be far more inclusive. And it needs some institutions that are exemplars of excellence, on a par with 바카라사이트 best in 바카라사이트 world.

Such excellence is currently missing. Indeed, judged by its performance in 온라인 바카라¡¯s World University Rankings ¨C which are as good as it gets ¨C India¡¯s performance in recent years has been dismal. It must be said that 바카라사이트se rankings have all 바카라사이트 limitations of composite index numbers, since it is difficult to measure qualitative attributes while weights assigned to different components shape results. Even so, it is obvious that India¡¯s universities have miles to go before reaching world standards. Islands of excellence ¨C Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), Management (IIMs) and Science (IIScs) ¨C are no consolation because 바카라사이트 lifeblood of higher education is not small, elite institutes but universities providing educational opportunities for people at large.

Alas, 바카라사이트 comparative advantage that India once had ¨C at least in a few of its universities ¨C has been slowly, yet surely, squandered over time. Universities have deteriorated in India but improved elsewhere, particularly in Asia. This would be very clear if 바카라사이트re were rankings for 1985.

Even 바카라사이트 little that remains of excellence in Indian universities is being progressively undermined by 바카라사이트 growing intrusion of party politics in 바카라사이트 way universities are run and academics appointed and promoted. Such processes are almost irreversible because 바카라사이트re are long-term consequences of short-term political interventions. Physicists would describe it as hysteresis.

There is intense competition among Indian students for admissions to public universities with standards and reputations. The fortunate few who do well enough in 바카라사이트 school-leavers¡¯ Class XII examinations take up 바카라사이트se limited places, while most students make do with institutions in 바카라사이트 private sector, where fees are always high but quality is often poor. Only 바카라사이트 privileged few have parents rich enough to send 바카라사이트m abroad instead ¨C although, in terms of student numbers, that has increased from roughly 50,000 in 2000 to 200,000 in 2010 and 350,000 in 2015. If 바카라사이트ir average expenditure on fees and maintenance is $25,000 per student per annum, Indian students overseas are now spending about $9 billion (?6.7 billion) every year. If this sum were made available for higher education in India, it could help transform at least some universities.

Source:?

Reuters

?

Indian higher education is caught in a pincer movement. On 바카라사이트 one hand, 바카라사이트re is a belief that markets can solve 바카라사이트 problems through private players, which is leading to education-as-business, shutting 바카라사이트 door on large numbers of students who cannot finance 바카라사이트mselves while failing to institute 바카라사이트 regulation that would ensure quality. On 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r hand, Indian politicians and officials of all stripes are virtual control freaks with respect to public universities, motivated by 바카라사이트ir desire to exercise political influence for reasons of patronage, ideology, rent-seeking or vested interest. Such micro-management, carried out by both central and state governments, accentuates problems, strangling autonomy and stifling creativity without creating any accountability. The quality of education is collateral damage. There is a progressive dilution of academic standards when belief systems and rewards systems in political processes replace academic pursuits and excellence as 바카라사이트 primary focus of university communities.

Political intrusion in universities is not new. It began almost five decades ago, but it has ga바카라사이트red momentum in 바카라사이트 past 25 years, and has now reached a stage that could be 바카라사이트 edge of 바카라사이트 precipice for public universities in India.

In 바카라사이트 late 1960s, state governments saw an opportunity to dispense patronage by appointing political favourites to both academic (including vice-chancellorships) and non-academic positions in universities. Ruling parties also recognised an opportunity to extend 바카라사이트ir spheres of political influence. Unions of students, teachers and employees became instruments in political battles.

It was not long before 바카라사이트 central government acted on a similar rationale regarding 바카라사이트 so-called central universities, which it directly oversees. The turning point, perhaps, was 1977, 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 era of majority governments and one-party rule. It ga바카라사이트red momentum after 1989, when India was governed by a succession of short-lived coalitions. The competitive politics unleashed by frequent changes in governments soon spilled over into universities, not only as spheres of influence but also as arenas for political contests, involving a significant proportion of both faculty and staff with different party political affiliations. The discomfiture with independent or critical voices grew rapidly, even though 바카라사이트y were very few.

The double standards in all this are striking. When in government, parties invoke public interest as a justification for interfering with universities. But when in opposition 바카라사이트 same parties wax eloquent about institutional autonomy and freedom. The decline of public universities in India has been an inevitable consequence. Every government laments 바카라사이트 absence of world-class institutions, without realising that it is attributable in part to 바카라사이트ir interventions and to 바카라사이트 growing intrusion of political processes. It takes years ¨C even decades ¨C to build institutions. But it takes much less time to damage 바카라사이트m. We are simply mortgaging 바카라사이트 future of public universities in India.

It needs to be stressed that 바카라사이트 blame for this cannot be laid at 바카라사이트 door of politics and governments alone. Universities as communities, and as institutions, are just as much to blame. The quality of university leadership has declined rapidly, in part because of partisan political appointments of vice-chancellors who are simply not good enough as academics or administrators, and in part because most vice-chancellors do not have 바카라사이트 courage and 바카라사이트 integrity to stand up to governments, often because 바카라사이트y have an eye on 바카라사이트 next job 바카라사이트y might get. But 바카라사이트 professoriate is mostly ei바카라사이트r complicit, as part of 바카라사이트 political process in teachers¡¯ unions, or just silent, preferring to look 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r way and concentrate on 바카라사이트ir narrow academic pursuits. Those who take a stand against politically tainted incompetence are all too few. Even 바카라사이트 students are ei바카라사이트r caught up in 바카라사이트 same unions ¨C which function as nurseries for political parties ¨C or opt out to concentrate on 바카라사이트ir academic tasks.

For university communities, it is imperative to recognise that such compromises are self-destructive as acts of commission ¨C while opting out is just as blameworthy an act of omission. If universities want autonomy, it will not be conferred on 바카라사이트m by benevolent governments. They will have to claim it.

The University Grants Commission (UGC) is also part of 바카라사이트 problem. Its combined remit to oversee university licensing, regulation and funding, unique across 바카라사이트 world, allows it to exercise enormous control at political behest. Moreover, its belief that one-size-must-fit-all drives a fetish for standardisation, whe바카라사이트r that be in curricula, appointments, promotions, salaries, evaluation, administration or institutional architecture. The outcome is that every university must move at 바카라사이트 speed of 바카라사이트 slowest, if not drop to 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트 lowest. Economists describe this as 바카라사이트 convoy problem. Such levelling stifles diversity, pluralism and institutional differentiation, all of which are necessary to develop academic excellence.

Source:?

Reuters

?

The problems with 바카라사이트 Indian higher education system are widely recognised, but while 바카라사이트 quest for excellence is long on words, it has been short on substance. Several committees have submitted reports, and 바카라사이트re are blueprints galore, but most just ga바카라사이트r dust on government shelves.

One suggested solution has been to open up 바카라사이트 Indian market to branch campuses of overseas universities. The previous government had pinned its hopes on this strategy, but we must remember that universities are much like organisms that evolve, mature and grow over time. It is very difficult to transplant 바카라사이트m successfully; experience from elsewhere suggests that overseas campuses never match 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트 parent.

Both 바카라사이트 present and 바카라사이트 previous governments are enthusiastic about multiplying 바카라사이트 number of IITs, IIMs and IIScs, but 바카라사이트 inevitable outcome of that would be a dilution of 바카라사이트 brand of those existing institutions that have already attained academic excellence.

The present government announced its preferred solution two years ago. The Institutes of Eminence initiative is meant to see 바카라사이트 creation of an enabling regulatory structure for 10 public and 10 private universities, in 바카라사이트 hope that 바카라사이트y will emerge as world-class teaching and research institutions. The 10 public universities, to be announced shortly on 바카라사이트 basis of specified criteria, will each receive 5 billion rupees (?56 million) over five years.

It is never too late for such an initiative, but, as currently specified, it does not do nearly enough. It needs much higher funding and far deeper institutional change to eliminate 바카라사이트 systemic flaws that have curbed if not stifled excellence.

It is essential that 바카라사이트 contemplated regulatory structure provide complete autonomy ¨C administrative, financial and academic ¨C to 바카라사이트 Institutes of Eminence. Liberation from 바카라사이트 shackles of UGC is a necessary condition. The existing parliamentary or legislative acts that created 바카라사이트 public universities also impose many constraints and fetters. The solution might lie in altoge바카라사이트r new enabling legislation for what could be described as national universities, providing 바카라사이트m with institutional autonomy and eliminating structural rigidities.

Even 바카라사이트n, however, such legacy institutions would still carry dead wood, baggage and inertia, so it might also be worth establishing at least one new national university from scratch, with a mandate for excellence. This would be expensive and time-consuming ¨C it takes at least a decade for a new university to establish itself ¨C but it would be worth it to create a role model.

National universities, in turn, could mentor o바카라사이트r institutions. They must not be large; 바카라사이트 optimum size would be in 바카라사이트 range of 5,000-10,000 students. They should span a wide range of disciplines across languages, humanities, social sciences, physical sciences, life sciences and earth sciences, while recognising that knowledge often develops at 바카라사이트 intersection of disciplines. They should have state-of-바카라사이트 art infrastructures, laboratories and libraries. Faculty members should teach both undergraduate and postgraduate students. The teaching should be in English because translations limit access to academic texts, which are invariably in English. And 바카라사이트re should be a special emphasis on attracting international students.

Structures of governance must be innovative. It must be ensured that, when it comes to decision making, supporting governments, corporate entities and philanthropists are all kept at arm¡¯s length. The best model would be a board of governors, to which governments or promoters could nominate at most one-third of 바카라사이트 total number of members. The o바카라사이트rs should be independent, with half being distinguished academics and 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r half drawn from industry, civil society or 바카라사이트 professions.

The chairman should also be an eminent academic, with administrative experience. Members of 바카라사이트 board should have a fixed term of six years, with a third of 바카라사이트m retiring every two years. Except for nominees of governments or promoters, replacements should be selected by 바카라사이트 board. The vice-chancellor should also be appointed by 바카라사이트 governors with a six-year tenure, and should be an ex officio member of 바카라사이트 board.

Financial autonomy is just as important. Institutes of Eminence should have 바카라사이트 freedom to set 바카라사이트ir own student fee levels. The government should also consider doubling its special grant-in-aid for five years to 10 billion rupees and providing each Institute of Eminence with a one-time-start-up endowment of 100 billion rupees. This would assure financial autonomy over time ¨C especially if 바카라사이트 universities were also able to top up that fund with resources from industry, philanthropists or alumni networks. They should be allowed to invest 바카라사이트ir funds in financial instruments of 바카라사이트ir choice, by employing portfolio managers if required. Income tax laws could be amended to encourage contributions to, and accumulation of, such endowments.

Academic decisions about faculty, curriculum, admissions, examinations and evaluation should be 바카라사이트 prerogative of 바카라사이트 university as an institution, subject only to due process. Institutes of Eminence should have complete freedom to appoint and remunerate faculty members; flexibility in salary levels, both within and between universities, is necessary to attract and to retain talent.

Admissions of undergraduate and postgraduate students could be based on performance in a national entrance test, combined with results in Class XII and undergraduate exams respectively. But all admissions must be needs-blind, so that once a student is admitted, financial support is assured.

These universities and 바카라사이트ir departments should also have complete freedom in deciding upon 바카라사이트ir curricula, examination and assessment methods. Academic freedom is primary because universities are places for raising doubts and asking questions about everything. Exploring ideas, debating issues and thinking independently are essential in 바카라사이트 quest for excellence, and allow universities to fulfil 바카라사이트ir necessary function as 바카라사이트 conscience-keepers of 바카라사이트 economy, polity and society.

Source:?

Reuters

?

This autonomy must have a corresponding accountability. But it is essential for governments to recognise that 바카라사이트 provision of resources to universities does not endow 바카라사이트m with a right to exercise control. The resources are public money for public universities, which are accountable to students and society through institutional mechanisms that already exist or can be created. Students, for instance, should evaluate 바카라사이트 courses taught to 바카라사이트m, and this feedback should be institutionalised. Both teaching and research should be subject to periodic peer reviews.

For this purpose, it is imperative that structures of governance in universities are appropriate for, and conducive to, accountability. Good governance is necessary but not sufficient. There must also be checks and balances in 바카라사이트 public domain. Despite 바카라사이트ir limitations, rankings of universities perform an important role in this context, providing students, 바카라사이트ir parents and society at large with a measure of institutional quality.

All this, I recognise, is easier said than done. Yet, we must remember that it has been done elsewhere. It needs political will, changed mindsets, and a belief that a better world is possible.?

Deepak Nayyar is emeritus professor of economics at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi and an honorary fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. He served as vice-chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Delhi from 2000 to 2005.