The NEP: The Indian Ethos
THE NEW EDUCATION POLICY
(NEP) has been long been awaited. The draft released last year was greet- ed with aplomb as a long-awaited for- ward-looking policy that had respond- ed to the needs of the day in India. It also provided a direction for education in this country. It’s an acknowledged fact that had we not announced it at the earliest, India would have risked losing the possi bility of transforming our vast population into a globally employable workforce and India into an education hub. At no other point in history has the opportunity to improve the lives of an average Indian through education been as significant as it is today. That’s because society acknowledges it as an engine to improve the average individual’s living standards. Even though the last two decades have witnessed an exponential growth in the higher education system, the issue of access still persists even with the increase in the gross enrolment ratio (GER) to 25.3 per cent. There are still large groups of people who are eligible, but are not able to access higher education institutions, either because of discrimination, distance or cost. For example, GER is higher for males than for females. The south and west regions show higher than the national average GER. This has skewed the demand for higher education towards the west and the south.
Since not all can afford to study out of their home state or city, a significant proportion of eligible students either join low-grade institutions in their region or simply drop out. Cost of higher education, especially professional education, has also rapidly gone up in the last decade.
The current system does not permit an individual to work and acquire a degree or diploma simultaneously even when companies offer the opportunity to young people to work and simultaneously acquire qualifications at a degree level from a premier university. Hence for an eligible student who cannot afford the high cost, it’s a Hobson’s choice of either studying on a loan in a good institution or simply accepting the low-quality option. The latter has no connect with industry and hence, its graduates’ employability is doubtful.
“Technology can also help reduce the cost of education and make good quality education available to those eligible but unable to afford on-campus education”
Another reason for an urgent policy announcement is to improve the quality of our higher education sys- tem and make it an excellent and globally competitive system. Such a system will for sure help Indian youth; equally, it will attract a large population from the world which cannot afford the US cost of education. Benefits of global diversity in higher education will only create a better learning environment and a more tolerant world. Hence the NEP and in its absence, executive decisions should attend to the following issues on a priority:
Technology for Improving Access
The government recently announced that universities ranked in the National Institutional Ranking Frame- work (NIRF) in the top 100 or as Category 1 would be able to offer online courses. This is a welcome decision, but the government needs to remove the jurisdictional restrictions. Today institutions cannot offer courses out of their home state. This defeats the purpose of providing quality education to one and all, irrespective of their geographical location. In a world driven by the internet, mobile internet geography and time have become redundant. In such circumstances, the government needs to deliberate on the rationale of institutional jurisdiction.
Technology can also help reduce the cost of education and make good quality education available to those eligible but unable to af- ford on-campus education.
There is also an urgency to make it possible for universities to un- bundle their programme through credits. If the credits are stackable and students are permitted to earnthem over a period either through campus-based education or online education, the credits will get more students to come in. They will now pay per credit earned and finally for the degree. It should also be possible for the university to give credit for work experience. This will require a significant change in the UGC definition of programmeand degree in terms of credits and duration. Today UGC, for example, defines duration in terms of years for each degree or diploma.
A wider range of programmes responding to the environment is the need of the hour. These need not necessarily be vanilla type engineering or management or business programmes. Short term and long-term programmes in artificial intelligence, cyber security, forensics, data sciences and analytics, liberal arts, design and vocational programmes in new emerging areas of IT-enabled services, film production and paramedical sciences should now get created. One of the reasons for students going abroad for higher education is the wider choice and flexibility they get in programme selection. Universities should have the liberty to launch such innovative programmes. It should be possible for the student to curate his programme, depending on his life choices. Equally, it should be possible for the student to change his choice of programme midway. For example, engineering students should be able to give it up midway to pursue an economics degree or an entrepreneurship degree. Credits earned should be evaluated and those relevant should be allowed to be retained. Affordability, scale and quality can go together.
I had many a time heard the argument against scale as adversely impacting the quality of education. My experi- ence tells me that scale may not necessarily affect quality. Quality is a function of people and processes. Hence the institution should focus on these two as it grows and expands its capacity. On the other hand, the scale can help reduce cost and in turn, make education more affordable. Further the government needs to consider the ratio- nale of the formula for fees fixation for institutions when their cost and efficiency structure varies.
Beyond Quality - Excellence
Quality today is rewarded by the government in the form of graded autonomy. But going forward, higher education must pursue the age and of excellence, especially if we are to aspire to become a global hub for higher education. Excellence presupposes best in class quality of education.
“My experience in institution building is that processes, especially those bench marked with the best in class, can help develop institutions made to last”
The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) has defined it through its letter grade like A+. Some of the institutions that are today recognised as excellent, show common characteristics mentioned below:
Purpose
These institutions integrate excellence in their purpose statement. The task does not end there. It involves getting the institutional community to commit to it and make it a part of their work. These institutions breathe excellence and to an outsider, it is visible through its performance.
Even though the government has announced more than 20 institutions of eminence, they still have a long a way to go to emerge as world-class excel- lent institutions from India. There are still many others who are already recognised nationally as excellent in- stitutions. They now need to broaden their horizon to become globally best. Government support to all such institutions is needed for research, faculty appointments infrastructure and technology development.
Processes
Processes, be they teaching-learning, research, assessment or admissions, are all bench marked with the best. Unfortunately, most Indian institutions are lagging on this account. Processes in the first place are absent, thereby increasing the scope for management discretion. While one cannot deny the role of discretion in an ex- ecutive decision, it should be used more as an exception.
My experience in institution building is that processes, especially those that are bench marked with the best in class can help develop institutions that are made to last.
Performance
These institutions consistently perform at the best level. In a conversation with the Vice Chancellor of Cambridge University some years ago, we learnt that global rankings were a reality and that he felt happy when Cambridge was ranked the number one university worldwide. But what pleased him more was the number of professors from his university who received the Noble Prize in a particu- lar year. Top universities today are recognised by such awards and inventions. Similar comments were made by the Boston University President a few years ago in his conversation with me. In all these cases, government policies and institution structure have been facilitative.
Their boards and donors were encouraging. In fact, as one of the well-known philanthropists, who was also an alumnus and donor of Boston University mentioned, it was a matter of pride for him to be associated with such a world-class university.
So, the performance parameters in such universities are research outcomes in the form of inventions, patents and number of faculty research papers that were cited by others and hence, facilitated thought creation. It was the diversity in class and faculty, peer recognition of faculty and the academic environment that valued innovation rather than just compliance. Alumni that were recognised globally or nationally for their contribution, also defined the strength of these universities. Hence, the outcomes are more valued in such institutions.
India’s higher education policy needs to focus on out- comes rather than inputs. Hence for example, rather than defining faculty load in terms of teaching hours and the number of hours faculty needs to be on campus, UGC needs to define faculty performance on parameters mentioned above. The time has come when we need to redefine institutional performance parameters that re- flect both national priorities and what it takes to be the best in a global context.
Peer Recognition
As one can make out, it’s peer recognition that makes excellent institutions. Such recognition is often an out- come of performance and quality of people serving in these institutions as faculty, staff leaders like deans and university top leadership like vice-chancellor/president/ provost etc.
Charismatic leaders in faculty and administration are difficult to get, but once an institution is fortunate to have them, all efforts must be made to retain them. Often such charismatic university presidents or deans are re-elected after their term. They continue to remain at the helm, term after term, ensuring that the university or the school continues its journey on the chosen path.
The New Education Policy should not define the number of terms a vice-chancellor could have in the same university, nor should it put an age limit. These decisions should be left to the university boards who are the best judge of the leader’s performance.
The New Education Policy that has provided for such flexibility, now needs to be implemented without much delay so that rules may be framed. Financial allocations can also be made based on expectations of outcomes and a time frame can then be given to select the top 100 institutions that could emerge world-class or best in class in ten years’ time.
