Involve the States more in higher education
Every
year, India dreams of its higher educational institutions rising up to world
standards in terms of ranking, number of peer-reviewed publications, and awards
for research. It dreams of this despite reports that almost three-fourths of
the graduates emerging from these colleges and universities are adding little
value to research and innovation as a result of the poor-quality education that
they have received. The Central government’s solution to this problem is
simple: increase the number of institutions under its control, whether it is
the Indian Institutes of Technology or the medical institutes, and hope that
the quality improves. By repeatedly doing this, the Centre is limiting its role
in improving the quality of education and research given that it controls only
some hundred institutions in the country, which produce less than 1 per cent of
the total number of graduates in the country every year.
A
widening gap
On
the other hand, State universities produce over 95 per cent of the nation’s
graduates, including from the private college system through the affiliation
route. Yet they have little presence in bodies that frame policies and
decisions regarding regulation or funding. All the major decisions and
initiatives only deal with the Central institutions, with the Centre also
seeing some hope from the emerging private universities which are driven purely
by money power and political patronage. With the gap in quality of education
and research widening between the Central and State institutions, the dream of
India becoming the R&D hub of the world, of expanding the manufacturing
sector, of creating over ten million jobs annually, or becoming the knowledge
superpower is becoming harder to realise.
Ironically,
the States do not seem to realise the depth of the problem either; the most
they do is to ask the Centre to locate the next, say, IIT in their State. In this
context, it is important for the States to redefine their role in higher
education.
The
Central government’s virtual abandoning of its responsibility to improve higher
education and research in the country — and not just in institutions that are
under its wing — is a trend that is unlikely to change. The only option for the
States is to take greater charge to improve the quality of these institutions.
This
would mean that States will have to tie up closely plans on improving higher
education with economic planning and infrastructure. Engineering and managerial
education, in particular, should have a direct connection and relevance to the
State’s industrial, manufacturing and other productive activities.
There
are many ways to do this. For instance, let’s imagine an engineering college
with a museum or exhibition displaying the natural resources, energy and
ecology, industrial and agricultural products and services, and human skills
and technologies of the surrounding area within, say, a 25 km radius. A significant
part of the education and research syllabus in this college could be built
around this location, its industry and agriculture. The institution and its
programme could likewise closely address the economic and industrial context
and needs of that area. Of course, this does not mean that all concentration
must be on the local; it is possible to do this without losing sight of the
demands of the global market and the need to keep education broad-based and
liberal.
Participation
of the private sector
Where
will the States find the funds for such an initiative? One, they will have to
increase their own share, which is justified as this sector will now be one of
the drivers of the State’s industrial and economic growth. Two, the Centre
should contribute more to the State’s efforts in this sector. Three, the
private sector and the diaspora should also play a role in contributing to
education and research. State-level institutions should be enabled to access
private funding and support (including from overseas sources) in an easy
manner. A public-private partnership model could work, but it is important that
there be no imposition of a one-size-fits-all policy. Uniform rules will kill
local initiatives and energies, and should therefore be eschewed.
The
States would, of course, have to significantly improve their existing image,
especially in the area of quality teaching and research, if serious players
from the private sector (including overseas) or the diaspora have to step in.
The mode of private participation in the higher education and research sector
would also have to be quite different from what exists now, which is mostly a
education-as-business-only model.
The
onus of bringing about such a change rests on the government; industry, both
big and small; academia; intelligentsia; and the media of the State, with
strong backing from the Centre. If the States do not participate more in
decision-making in the higher education and research sector and all policies
are decided around Central institutions, not much can be done to stop the
precipitous downward slide of the nation’s higher education and research
sector.
C.N.
Krishnan is a retired professor of Anna University, Chennai.
States
have little participation and decision-making
powers in improving higher education and research in the country
Source | The Hindu | 14 September 2016
Regards
Pralhad Jadhav
Senior Manager @ Library
Khaitan & Co
Note | If anybody use these post for forwarding in any social
media coverage or covering in the Newsletter please give due credit to those
who are taking efforts for the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment