How Arjun Singh’s HRD trashed PM’s education reform roadmap

The NKC’s November 2006 report had outlined the deep shortcomings of the existing system. “There is,in fact,a quiet crisis in higher education in India that runs deep…It is clear that the system of higher education in India faces serious challenges. And it needs systemic overhaul,so that we can educate much larger numbers without diluting academic standards,” the report said.

Appointments & Autonomy

Among its suggestions to effect a “systemic overhaul” in universities,the Commission opined that the appointments of vice-chancellors (VCs) should be free from any direct or indirect Government intervention; instead,said the NKC,the appointments should be based on a search process and peer judgment. It added that a six-year term for VCs should be implemented across varsities to facilitate institutional autonomy. The VC,the NKC went on to say,should be allowed to operate like a CEO with the authority and flexibility to govern with the advice and consent of executive councils.

The HRD Ministry clearly does not agree. Most recently,the Central Universities Bill,2008,which was promulgated as an ordinance last week,stuck to the status quo and outlineed that the VCs to the new central universities would be appointed by the Visitor — the President. The NKC has registered its protest,calling the HRD Ministry’s move “a danger to autonomy and excellence in higher education,” but the Government has not paid much attention.

Even as the NKC presses for minimal Government intervention,the Ministry is preparing to tighten its control on the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs),with the Bhargava Committee backing a pan-IIM board headed by the Secretary,HRD Ministry. Appointments remain political — while the selection committee chose to give an extension to Prof Devi Singh as director IIM Lucknow,HRD Minister Arjun Singh dug in his heels to back his candidate Prof D K Bandhopadhyay,even as the Cabinet Secretary questioned the move.

The government was once again on the receiving end last month when the Madras High Court set aside the appointment of IIT Madras’s director,as it was not routed by the ministry through the IIT Council. The Council,which had not met since September 2003,was hurriedly summoned for a meet to belatedly ratify all IIT directors’ appointments to avoid any legal complications. But while appointments at IITs and IIMs still get some attention,those for universities are dictated by the ministry.

Single Regulator

Another recommendation of the NKC with far-reaching implications is the creation of a single regulatory body,the Independent Regulatory Authority for Higher Education (IRAHE) that would facilitate setting up varsities. The idea is to replace “the present system which is over-regulated but under governed” and do away with multiple regulators. The NKC has also called for rationalising the role of the University Grants Commission (UGC) to only disbursement of funds,abolition of the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and to enable IRAHE to set the criteria and decide on license to award degrees.

The ministry,once again,differs and has argued against the NKC’s single regulatory agency,saying that the current bodies are “different in scope and activity”. Instead,it called for adding yet another bureaucratic layer to the existing system in the form of a National Commission on Higher Education,which will be an over-arching body to coordinate the regulatory organisations. The HRD Ministry had even circulated a Cabinet note to the ministries concerned with higher education — Health and Agriculture — for their views on the matter barely six months after the NKC recommendation came. The ministry proposed that the commission should be established through an Act of legislation,mirroring the suggestion of the NKC that the IRAHE be established through an Act of Parliament.

The HRD Ministry further complicated the issue by setting up yet another UGC committee to look into restructuring and rejuvenating higher education,an exercise that reflects its lack of regard for the NKC’s recommendation. The interim report of this UGC committee has also suggested a Higher Education Commission and scrapping AICTE,but has stopped short of clipping the UGC’s wings. While the ministry is unlikely to adopt the regulatory reform proposed by NKC,what it makes of the UGC committee report is still to be seen. Top officials,meanwhile,claim that the NKC’s recommendations would have met a better fate had the PM’s panel formulated these in consultation with the ministry.

“How can proposals like IRAHE be implemented in isolation,without taking into account the existence of UGC and so on? The Commission should have examined the way UGC or AICTE can be worked upon rather than just telling us to wind up these institutions”,said a top official in the HRD Ministry.

An NKC member gave his slant on the matter under condition of anonymity. “Who is actually demanding academic reform? Whose constituency is academic reform? The fact is that there is very,very little push for reform within the political and academic community alike. None of the 350 VCs or for that matter teachers’ associations call for reforms in the system. Education is highly politicised with almost all heavyweights across party lines running educational institutes or parked on the boards of institutes,hence the resistance for reform from that quarter. So much so that even politicians who are otherwise votaries of liberal economic policies are highly resistant to academic reforms. While the HRD Ministry may have not facilitated any progress on reforms,it is the overall Government machinery which has chosen not to take any action in this direction.”