SPEAKING
FREELY Can
private universities lift
India? By Pushkar
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times
Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say. Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
In a previous op-ed
(India
fails test of 'knowledge economy', Asia Times
Online, November 30, 2012), I drew attention to
what can be called a "research deficit" in India's
higher education. In it, I mentioned a study by
Thomson Reuters according to which India produced
only 3.5% of the global research output in 2010
and its contribution in most disciplines -
including mathematics and computer science - was
lower than its overall average.
While
these numbers are worrisome by themselves, in a
China-envious country where India-China
comparisons adorn the
bookshelves of the growing
breed of globetrotting Indians, the overall
performance of India's higher education sector -
including the poor world rankings of its
universities - should be a cause for alarm. China
has pulled ahead in higher education despite
India's "English advantage".
A growing
number of Chinese universities are breaking into
world rankings, while the majority of Indian
institutions remain trapped in mediocrity. While
China's research output has grown significantly
over the past decade, India's has stagnated and
even declined in some disciplines.
It is
evident that India's premier public institutions -
including the several Indian Institutes of
Technology (IITs), the Indian Institutes of
Management (IIMs) and a number of other
universities and research centers directly funded
by the federal government - cannot compensate for
the low quantity/poor quality research output of
the majority of institutions run by indifferent
state governments.
Given India's gaping
research deficit, the somewhat hopeful tone of a
recent report - "Indian Higher Education: The
Twelfth Plan and Beyond" - by the government's
Planning Commission, the Federation of Indian
Chambers of Commerce and Industry and Ernst &
Young caught my attention. According to the
authors of this report, private institutions can
play an important role by creating knowledge
networks and research and innovation centers.
The word "can" is of enormous significance
here. Based on their current status, do India's
private universities show any signs that they may
be able to provide a much-needed lift to the
country's research output?
The majority of
India's private institutions are run by two sets
of entrepreneurial social groups - businesspeople
and politicians - who sense a great opportunity in
the higher education business.
It is
estimated that 5 million Indians enter the
15-to-24 age group each year. Many more,
especially women, are interested in obtaining a
college degree today than in the past. The
government, too, is keen to push the gross
enrollment ratio (GER) - currently 16% - closer to
the world average of 27% (China is at 26%). Public
institutions are in no position to meet what seems
like an ever-growing demand for higher education.
Private institutions, it seems, are helping to
reduce the capacity gap in higher education. But
there is more to the story.
While India's
laws require private universities to be non-profit
entities, it is common knowledge that nearly all
private institutions are eager and impatient
profit-seekers, offering degrees primarily in
professional streams-typically engineering and
management-where they can charge high fees and
often demand a lump sum by one name or another.
The strong nexus between business groups and
politicians (it can be difficult to tell the
difference between the two) has also meant that
the private sector remains both over-regulated and
poorly regulated.
For one, little has been
done to encourage the entry of credible private
providers that could compete with existing
institutions. Rather, the existing regulatory
framework appears to do better at keeping out
potential competitors. Essentially, as Devesh
Kapur (University of Pennsylvania) puts it, "there
are so many regulatory barriers to setting up a
college or university that it deters honest groups
but encourages those who are willing to pay
bribes."
The problem, however, is more
than just about high entry costs. According to
Pramath Sinha, the founding Dean of the Indian
School of Business (Hyderabad) and one of the key
figures behind the upcoming Ashoka University,
governments in other countries do not make it
difficult to enter the education sector but "make
it quite strict that whatever you provide is
adequately rated." In India, on the other hand,
poor regulation and monitoring of private
institutions has meant that most of them are
plagued by the all-too-familiar disease of
mediocrity since they are seldom penalized over
their quality.
Students graduating from
Lovely Professional University, Sharda University
and scores of similar institutions have not helped
alleviate India's "skills crisis". While the
country produces more than 500,000 engineers each
year, a recent study by Aspiring Minds found that
only 2.68% met the skill requirements of the IT
products sector. It also found that 92% of
engineering graduates lacked the necessary
computer programming and algorithm skills for the
sector.
Efforts have been made to improve
regulatory mechanisms in order to better monitor
the quality of private schools. Over the years,
the Indian government has set up several
committees to lay out clearer guidelines for
private institutions. However, many private
providers have, despite losing their status,
proved adept at regaining the status of
universities or have simply re-located themselves
in states willing to support them. At the same
time, other education providers with little
credibility have used their influence and
resources to enter the higher education sector.
Under the current education regime, it is
hardly surprising that few private
institutions-often described as "teaching
factories" by their detractors-are doing a good
job of teaching, let alone research. Given the
current set of incentives and disincentives, it is
hard to imagine that the private sector will play
an important role in creating knowledge networks
or research and innovation centers.
There
is also the argument that permitting the entry of
for-profit institutions will bring in credible
parties and improve the quality of private
education. Perhaps. However, we have to remember
that other than a complex set of regulatory
barriers to setting up a college or university,
the issue of monitoring quality is no less
problematic. When India has hardly done an
exemplary job at regulating the entry of shady
operators, do we really expect that it will
adequately monitor quality?
Some suggest
that India should at this stage, like China,
simply improve access to higher education and not
worry about quality. In 2000, China's GER stood at
8% and has increased more than three-fold within a
decade or so to the current rate of 26%. Online
education, Indian officials believe, can play a
big role in this regard. However, China has
simultaneously taken effective steps to improve
the quality of education. Two of its universities
- Peking University and Tsinghua University - are
in the top 50 of the QS World University Rankings.
In QS Asian University rankings, other than a few
IITs, only the University of Delhi ranks in the
top 100, while more than a dozen Chinese
universities make the list.
As India's
private universities and colleges grow in number
and absorb a larger share of the country's
students, it is evident that they are likely to
continue to play only a limited role - that of
teaching in select disciplines, mostly management
and engineering - in the foreseeable future. The
task of research and innovation, an area in which
India's performance is rather poor, will continue
to be largely undertaken at the country's public
institutions. Even in teaching, it is very
doubtful that world-class infrastructure or modern
technologies that the newer private institutions
boast about will go very far without suitably
qualified faculty. Reports show that even the IIMs
and the IITs are short of qualified faculty.
Can this change? Will the Indian
government ease the entry of higher education
institutions, be they non-profit or for-profit, so
that credible providers step in and instead
carefully monitor the quality of private
institutions? In a country which ranked 94th out
of 176 countries in Transparency International's
2012 Corruption Perception Index, and where
politicians across the aisle have high stakes in
keeping out credible competitors, it is
unrealistic to expect that much will change
anytime soon. Meanwhile, the best India can hope
for is that private institutions at least promote
the cause of teaching.
Pushkar
has a PhD in political science (McGill University)
and previously taught at the University of Goa,
Concordia University, McGill University and the
University of Ottawa.
Speaking
Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows
guest writers to have their say.Please
click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
