|
"Sri T Ramesh U Pai Memorial Lecture" |
By Prof. N. R. Shetty,
President, Indian Society for Technical Education,
New Delhi
and
Former Vice Chancellor, Bangalore University,
Bangalore. |
|
26-01-2008 |
| New Trends in Higher Education |
| |
| Introduction |
| |
The spread of education in society is at the foundation of success in countries that are latecomers to development. In the quest for development, primary education is absolutely essential because it creates the base. But higher education is just as important, for it provides the cutting edge. And Universities are the life-blood of higher education, institutions such as Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs), are valuable complements but cannot be substitutes for universities which provide educational opportunities for people at large.
There can be no doubt that higher education has made a significant contribution to economic development, social progress and political democracy in independent India. It is a source of dynamism for the economy. It has created social opportunities for people. It has fostered the vibrant democracy in our polity. It has provided a beginning for the creation of a knowledge society. But it would be a mistake to focus on its strengths alone. It has weaknesses that are a cause for serious concern.
There is, in fact, a quite crisis in higher education in India that runs deep. It is not yet discernible simply because there are pockets of excellence, an enormous reservoir of talented young people and an intense competition in the admissions process. And, in some important spheres, we continue to reap the benefits of what was sown in higher education 50 years ago by the founding fathers of the Republic. The reality is that we have miles to go. The proportion of our population, in the age group 18-24, that enters the world of higher education is around 7 percent, which is only one-half the average for Asia. The opportunities for higher education, in terms of the number of places in universities, are simply not enough in relation to our needs. What is more, the quality of higher education in most of our universities requires substantial improvement.
It is clear that the system of higher education in India faces challenges. It needs a systematic overhaul, so that we can educate much larger numbers without diluting academic standards. This is imperative because the transformation of economy and society in the 21st century would depend, in significant part, on the spread and the quality of education among our people, particularly in the sphere of higher education. It is only the inclusive society that can provide the foundations for a knowledge society.
The challenges that confront higher education in India are clear. It needs a massive expansion of opportunities for higher education, to 1500 universities nationwide, that would enable India to attain a gross enrolment ratio of at least 15 percent by 2015. It is just as important to raise the average quality of higher education in every sphere. At the same time, it is essential to create institutions that are exemplars of excellence at par with the best in the world. In the pursuit of these objectives, providing people with access to higher education in a society inclusive manner is imperative. The realization of these objectives, combined with access, would not only develop the skills and capabilities we need for the economy but would also help transform India into a knowledge economy and society.
It is to be recognized that a meaningful reform of the higher education system, with a long-term perspective is both complex and difficult. Yet, it is imperative. And we may suggest the following building blocks in this endeavour. First, it is essential to reform existing public universities and undergraduate colleges. Second, it is necessary to overhaul the entire regulatory structure governing higher education. Third, every possible source of financing investment in higher education needs to be explored. Fourth, it is important to think about pro-active strategies for enhancement of quality in higher education. Fifth, the time has come to create new institutions in the form of National Universities that would become role models as centres of academic excellence. Sixth, the higher education system must be so designed that it provides access to marginalized and excluded groups.
The objectives of reform and change in our higher education system must be expansion, excellence and inclusion.
|
| 1.Universities |
Universities perform a critical role in an economy and society. They create knowledge. They impart knowledge. And they disseminate knowledge. Universities must be flexible, innovative and creative. They must be able to attract the best talent whether teachers or students. They must have the ability to compete and the motivation to excel. We cannot even contemplate a transformation of our higher education system without reform in our existing universities.
There is, however, a serious cause for concerns about universities in India. The number of places for students at universities is simply inadequate. The quality of education at most universities leaves much to be desired. The gap between our universities and those in the outside world has widened. And none of our universities rank among the best, say the top fifty, in the world. The symptoms are clearly visible, even if we do not wish to diagnose what ails our universities. Of course, every problem does not exist everywhere. And there are exceptions. But the following problems are common enough to be a cause for concern. First, curricula, which have remained almost unchanged for decades, have not kept pace with the times, let alone with the extending frontiers of knowledge. Second, learning and creativity are at a discount in a system of assessment that places a premium on memory rather than understanding. Third, the milieu is not conductive to anything beyond the class room, for it is caught in a 9.30 to 1.30 syndrome. Fourth, the academic calendar is no longer sacrosanct for classes or for examinations, as there are slippages in schedules so much so that, at several places, classes in the timetable are not held and results are often declared with a time-lag of 6 to 12 months. Fifth, the infrastructure is not only inadequate but also on the verge of collapse. Sixth, the boundaries between disciplines have become dividing walls that constitute barriers to entry for new disciplines or new courses, while knowledge is developing most rapidly at the intersection of disciplines. Seventh, the importance attached to research has eroded steadily overtime. Eight, the volume of research in terms of frequency of publication and the quality of research reflected in the frequency of citation or the place of publication, on balance, is simply not what it used to be. Ninth, as in most public institutions, there is little accountability, because there are no rewards for performance and no penalties for non-performance. Tenth, structures of governance put in place fifty years ago are not responsive to changing times and circumstances but the system is readily subverted by vested interests.
It is difficult enough to provide a complete diagnosis of what ails our universities. It is even more difficult, if not impossible, to outline a set of prescriptions for our universities. Nevertheless, it is clear that a reform of existing institutions must be an integral part of our endeavour to transform higher education. We recognize that this is easier said than done. Even so, we believe that reforms in the following spheres, along the lines suggested are not only possible but would also make a difference.
Number ands Size:
India has about 350 universities. This number is simply not enough with reference to our needs in higher education, or in comparison with China which has authorized the creation of 1250 new universities in the last three years. Yet, some of our universities are much too large, for ensuring academic standards and providing good governance. We need to create more appropriately scaled and more nimble universities. The moral of the story is not only what we need a much larger number of universities, say 1500 nationwide by 2015, but also that we need smaller universities which are responsive to change and easier to manage.
Curriculum:
The syllabi of courses in universities, which remain unchanged for decades, need to be upgraded constantly and revised frequently. The laws of inertia reinforced by resistance to change must be overcome. Universities should be required to revise or restructure curricula at least once in three years. These revisions must be subjected to outside peer review before implementation. The process for such revisions should be streamlined and decentralized with more autonomy for teachers, through a change in statutes wherever necessary. For existing systems often acts as major impediments to a timely or speedy revision of curricula. There should be some mode of censure for departments or universities that do not upgrade their courses regularly. It needs to be recognized that it is very difficult to introduce new courses or innovative courses in universities because of departmental divides. Appropriate institutional mechanisms should be put in place to resolve this problem.
Assessment:
The nature of annual examinations at universities in India often stifles the teaching-learning process because they reward selective and uncritical learning. There is an acute need to reform this examination system so that it tests understanding rather than memory. Analytical abilities and creative thinking should be at a premium. Learning by note should be at a discount. Such reform would become more feasible with decentralized examination and smaller universities. But assessment cannot and should not be based on examinations alone. There is a clear need for continuous internal assessment which empowers teachers and students alike, just as it breathes life back into the teaching –learning process. Such internal assessment would also foster the analytical and creative abilities of students which are often a casualty in university-administered annual examinations. To begin with, internal assessment count have a weight of 25 percent in the total but this should be raised to 50 percent over time.
Course Credits:
The present system is characterized by too many rigidities and too few choices for students. Universities that are smaller, or run semester-based systems, are obviously more flexible. Even in large universities, however, it is necessary to introduce greater diversity and more flexibility in course structures. This would be the beginning of a transition to a course credit system, where degrees are granted on the basis of completing a requisite number of credits from different courses. Every student should be required to earn a minimum number of credits in his/her chosen discipline but should have the freedom to earn the rest from courses in other disciplines. It is essential to provide students with choice instead of keeping them captive.
Research:
In India we attempted to create stand-alone research Institutions, pampered with resources, in the belief that research should be moved out of universities. In the process, we forgot an essential principle. There are synergies between teaching and research that enrich each other. And it is universities which are the natural home for research. What is more, for universities, research is essential in the pursuit of academic excellence. It is time to reverse what happened in the past and make universities the hub of research once again. This would need changes in resources-allocation, reward-systems and mindsets. Substantial grants should be allocated for research. The provisions of these grants should be competitive and the criteria for these grants should be different from the usual criteria for non-plan and plan grants.
Faculty:
There must be a conscious effort to attract and retain talented faculty members. This is necessary because talented students who are potential faculty members have choices that are far more attractive in other professions in India or in the academic profession outside India. It is necessary to provide working conditions in the form of office space and research support combined with housing. But it may not be sufficient. This must be combined with some incentives and rewards for performance. There is, however, another dimension to the problem. Universities do not always choose the best in part because of native-son/daughter policies which have them to select their own former students. This tends to lower quality and foster parochialization in universities. Therefore, cross-pollination between universities should be encouraged. It may be worth introducing a ceiling, say one-half or even one-third, on the proportion of faculty members than can be hired from within the university. This would almost certainly engender greater competition and more transparency in faculty appointments.
Finances:
There is a serious resource crunch in universities which leaves them with little financial flexibility. In general, about 75 per cent of maintenance expenditure is on salaries and pensions. Of the remaining 25 percent, at least 15 percent is absorbed by pre-emptive claims such as rents, electricity, telephones and examinations. The balance, less than 10 percent, is not even enough for maintenance let alone development. Laboratories and libraries languish while buildings crumble. But that is not all. In most universities plan(investment) expenditure is less than 5 per cent of non-plan (maintenance) expenditure. Such a small proportion of investment in total expenditure can only mortgage the future. It is doing so. The time has come for some strategic thinking on the re-allocation of budgets for universities with some allocation for development grants and on needs other than salaries. The criteria for resource allocation should seek to strike a much better balance between providing for salaries/pensions and providing for maintenance/development/investment. These criteria should recognize the importance of a critical minimum to ensure standards and strategic preferences to promote excellence.
Infrastructure:
The elements of infrastructure that support the teaching-learning process, most directly, need to be monitored and upgraded on a regular basis. This means attention, particular attention, to libraries and laboratories, in addition to class rooms, sports facilities and auditoriums. It is imperative that universities provide broadband and connectivity to all students and teachers in campuses. In parallel, information technology systems should be used for admissions, administration and examinations along with other relevant web services for campus communities. And, as soon as possible, a digital infrastructure for networking universities should be put in place.
Governance:
There is an acute need for reform in the structure of governance of universities. The present system is flawed. On the one hand, it does not preserve autonomy. On the other, it does not promote accountability. The autonomy of universities is eroded by interventions from governments and intrusions from political processes. This must be stopped. At the same time, there is not enough transparency and accountability in universities. This must be fostered. It is exceedingly difficult to provide generalized prescriptions. Some steps, which would constitute an important beginning, are clear. First, the appointments of Vice-Chancellors should be based on search process and peer judgment alone. These must be freed from direct or indirect intervention on the part of governments. Once appointed, Vice Chancellors should have tenure of six years, because the existing tenure of three years in most universities and five years in central universities not long enough. Second, the size and composition of University Courts, Academic Councils, and Executive Councils slows down decision-making processes and sometimes constitutes an impediment to change. University Courts, with a size of 500 plus, which are more a ritual than substance, could be dispensed with. Large Academic Councils do not meet often. Even when they meet, decisions are slow to come. Thus, standing Committees of Academic Councils, which are representative, should be created for frequent meetings and expeditious decisions. The Vice-Chancellor should, then, function as a Chief Executive Officer who has the authority and the flexibility to govern with the advice and consent of the Executive Council which would provide checks and balances to create accountability. Third, experience suggests that implicit politicization has made governance of universities exceedingly difficult and much more susceptible to entirely non-academic interventions from outside. This problem needs to be recognized and addressed in a systematic manner not only within universities but also outside, particularly in governments, legislatures and political parties.
2. Restructure undergraduate colleges.
The system of affiliated colleges for undergraduate education, which may have been appropriate 50 years ago, is no longer adequate or appropriate and needs to be reformed. There is an urgent need to restructure the system of undergraduate colleges affiliated to universities.
• The most obvious solution is to provide autonomy to college either as individual colleges or as clusters of colleges, on the basis of criteria, that have been stipulated. However, this would provide a solution for a limited proportion, or number of undergraduate colleges.
• Some of these affiliated colleges could be remodeled as community colleges, which could provide both vocational education and formal education.
• A Central Board of Undergraduate Education may be established, along with State Boards of Undergraduate Education, which would set curricula and conduct examinations for undergraduate colleges that choose to be affiliated with them. These Boards would separate the academic functions from the administrative functions and, at the same time, provide quality benchmarks.
• New undergraduate colleges could be established as community colleges and be affiliated with the Central Board of Undergraduate Education or State Boards of Undergraduate Education, or with some of the new universities that are established.
3. Promote enhanced quality.
The higher education system must provide for accountability to society and create accountability within. An expansion of higher education which provides students with choices and creates competition between institutions is going to be vital in enhancing accountability.
• There should be stringent information disclosure norms for all educational institutions such as their financial situation, physical assets, admissions criteria, faculty positions, academic curricula, as also their source and level of accreditation.
• Evaluation of courses and teachers by students as well as peer evaluation of teachers by teachers should be encouraged.
• There must be focus on upgrading infrastructure, improving the training of teachers and continuous assessment of syllabi and examination systems.
• It is particularly important to enhance the ICT infrastructure. Websites and web-based services would improve transparency and accountability. A portal on higher education and research would increase interaction and accessibility. A knowledge network would connect all universities and colleges for online open resources.
• It may be necessary to rethink the issue of salary differentials within and between universities along with other means of attracting and retaining talented faculty members. Such salary differentials between and within universities could be effective without being large.
• It is necessary to formulate appropriate policies for the entry of foreign institutions into India and the promotion of Indian institutions abroad, while ensuring a level playing field for foreign and domestic institutions within the country.
• The system of higher education must recognize that there is bound to be diversity and pluralism in any system of higher education, and avoid a uniform ‘one-size
fits- all’ approach. This sense of pluralism must recognize, rather than ignore or shy away from, such diversity and differentiation.
4. Ensure access for all deserving students.
Education is the fundamental mechanism for social inclusion through the creation of more opportunities. It is therefore essential to ensure that no student is denied the opportunity to participate in higher education due to financial constraints. NKC has proposed the following measures.
• Institutions of higher education should be encouraged to adopt a needs-blind admissions policy. This would make it unlawful for educational institutions to take into account any financial factor while deciding whether or not to admit a student.
• There must be a well-funded and extensive National Scholarship Scheme targeting economically underprivileged students and students from groups that are historically socially disadvantaged.
5. Affirmative action. A major aim of the higher education system must be to ensure that access to education for economically and historically socially under privileged students is enhanced in a substantially more effective manner.
• Reservations are essential, but they are only a part, and one form, of affirmative action.
• Disparities in educational attainments are related to caste and social groups but they are also strongly related to other indicators such as income, gender, region and place of residence. There us need to develop a meaningful and comprehensive framework that would address the multi-dimensionality of differences that still persist. For example, a deprivation index could be used to provide weighted scores to students and the cumulative score could be used to supplement a student’s school examination score.
Some of these recommendations proposed by NKC require action at three different levels; reforms within existing systems, changes in policies, and amendments in, or the introduction of, new statutes or legislation. The suggested changes would also be implemented at three different levels: universities, state governments and the Central Government.
It is important to recognize that there is a quiet crisis in higher education in India which runs deep. The time has come to address this crisis in a systematic and forthright manner. The changes suggested above would make real difference and constitute an important beginning. The process of reform and change is continuous. We should recognize the urgency of the situation, because India’s future depends on it. It is therefore important to act here and now.
Ref: Report of National Knowledge Commission, Government of India.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
