Let’s not micro-manage education

First, expansion. NKC has recommended that the higher education system needs a massive expansion of opportunities by providing additional 1,500 new universities for enabling India to achieve a gross enrolment ratio of at least 15 per cent by 2015. This would no doubt entail Government funding of at least 1.5 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) out of the total proposed 6 per cent of the GDP for education. It also visualised that the fee structure can be progressively enhanced to meet not the current meager 2 per cent but say 20 per cent of the total expenditure by the universities. The UGC must also change their funding norms, which can facilitate this process.

As far as expansion of higher education is concerned, the budgetary commitments are inadequate, and no concerted effort seems to have been made to diversify the sources of financing that can complement the increase in public expenditure.

According to the Ernst & Young-EDGE 2008 report on “Globalising Higher Education in India”, the overall allocation for the higher education sector is only 0.37 per cent of the GDP. To achieve the increase in Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) to 15 per cent, the expenditure on higher education would have to rise from 0.65 per cent of the GDP in the first year to 1.06 per cent during XIth Plan itself. The UGC estimates vary from Rs 47,000 crore to Rs 74,000 crore, based on two alternative norms.

Second, reforming the existing universities by setting up of an Independent Regulatory Authority for Higher Education (IRAHE). This independent body with a chairman and members with expertise and domain knowledge would be responsible to oversee the accreditation agency for the visualised expansion, suggest a more contemporary curricula, as well as policies for retention and attraction of high quality faculty. An appropriate fee structure suggested by an independent body would have credibility. Regrettably, this important recommendation lies in limbo. The HRD Ministry is unwilling to give up its old mindset of micro managing the education sector, driven by patronage than by excellence. Appointing just another committee to go through this key recommendation is postponing crucial decisions.

The NKC had also suggested redefining the role of existing NCERT as well as that of the UGC. Clearly, in the prevalent mindset vested lobbies and a propensity for status quo blocks even minimum changes to achieve modest objectives.

The third issue relates to autonomy. Existing institutes of excellence like IIT and IIM, which are funded by the Government, have far too much interference in their day-to-day functioning and on policy issues like emolument structure, determination of fees, partnership with foreign universities. We need flexibility and freedom to promote an environment of learning and innovation.

Fourth, balancing equity with efficiency is no doubt critical, given our social fabric. The National Scholarship Schemes seek to combine social necessities like reservations with meritocracy in harmonising what prima facie may look as conflicting objectives. The implementation of the quota system based on the Supreme Court ruling is only one aspect of many of these more endemic and serious issues of reforming our higher education.

Fifth, the Bill for setting up of international universities has eluded consensus, but in the meantime other countries and competitive destinations have gone ahead. It is very expensive for meritorious Indian students to study in the centres of excellence in the United States. Many such universities have set up footprints in other emerging markets; INSEAD and Wharton have well functioning universities in Singapore. Meritorious Indian students who can’t afford the cost of a Harvard or Stanford find Singapore increasingly within their reach. To deny ourselves the opportunity which would enable foreign universities to set up footprint elsewhere mitigate only against the less affluent students.

While we examine the International Universities Bill we must not allow our identity to be lost. The seeking of advantages of demographic differential entails open mindedness. Reforming the higher education system can brook no further delay.