GUEST COLUMN
Onkar Singh
Kudos for the significant growth in the Indian education system since independence. As per AISHE dashboard statistics, the current gross enrolment ratio of 28.4 is catered through 1,368 universities, out of which 44 per cent are in the private sector and the remaining in the public sector. Given the demographic dividend available in India, the contribution of higher education institutions (HEIs) becomes very critical in shaping the future. Specifically, after NEP-2020, focusing upon ‘autonomy’ and ‘light but tight’ regulation, the universities have come to the center.
Under these circumstances, the manner in which universities function becomes quite critical for meeting the purpose of education to carve out the best in a person. Ideally, a university is mandated to allow its ideas to flourish and nurture scholarship in students and teachers alike while unshackling the conventions and administrative restrictions, if any. The universities are conceived on the premise of enjoying autonomy for the overall good of creating a knowledge society. Yet, there are numerous instances of autonomy being constrained by over-regulation, bureaucratic control, top management and political interference. Undoubtedly, restrictions on the autonomy of any university limit independent thinking, planning, pace of deliveries, outcome and overall functioning, and have long-term adverse impacts. Among the public and private universities, the vulnerability to lose autonomy is greater in the former than in the latter. This is because of the overarching governance and financing being with the government in case of public universities, as compared to private universities working as self-financed institutions under private promoting bodies having direct stakes. As a result, the pace of transformations in public universities could be slower than in private universities.
Administrative overhang
A look at the interventions in the universities show a regulatory framework consisting of the University Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), National Medical Commission (NMC), Pharmacy Council of India (PCI), Bar Council of India (BCI), Council of Architecture (CoA) and a number of other entities at Centre/State. The regulators call for a lot of compliance, data and paperwork, which pushes the education quality concerns to the backseat. Head of institutions spend reasonable time in negotiating compliances, approvals, audits, accreditation, ranking, reports, etc. The administrative tasks eat up the time for thinking, determination to endure and creativity for innovations in teachers and administrative heads. This not only impedes the growth of any university but also recalibrates focus to managing non-academic pursuits instead of achieving excellence in teaching-learning-examination-evaluation.
Academic freedom
The administrative burden silently strains the teachers and changes their priorities to administrative function over teaching function to avoid any conflicts with the governance and management. Such a shift from the primary responsibilities of teaching-learning-assessment reorients their approach towards students in classrooms and laboratories. Inadequate coverage of syllabus, lesser rigour of teaching, insufficient attention towards learners, declining individual research for self-development, meagre outreach activities, etc, are felt due to changing priorities. Over a period of time, teachers get accustomed, get quiet and do not resist to avoid any complications for themselves. However, this may not show any instant effect, but the lack of whole-hearted participation of teachers in furthering the purpose of education through knowledge transfer, knowledge creation, innovations and creativity is lost in due course. Often seen attempts at standardisation by bringing uniformity in curriculum and syllabus across universities prevent them from designing their specially crafted content tailored to their context and strengths, while subscribing to prescribed global minimum standards. Every university must exercise autonomy in offering distinctive programmes, educational content, and programme capacity, as per the contemporary setting. Besides, the institutional/regulator-mandated narratives in classrooms kill the intellectual curiosity, leaving the academic freedom ceremonial. As a nation, our aspirations to evolve universities into world-class universities call for directly engaging students in solving real-life challenges through their creativity and innovations, imbuing high moral standards, character building and permitting fearless discussions, criticism and debates. Restricting students and teachers from free spaces for tangible and intangible experimentation in universities on account of a deficit in enablers like funds, facilities, infrastructure and resources could be detrimental to the education system.
Governance
In general, the universities are created by legislation with ample autonomy on paper, with the apex authorities like the executive council, board of management, academic council, finance committee, etc, for participative governance of the university. The composition of the referred authorities has representation of all concerned university / government officials, non-officials, and domain experts to exercise due diligence in collective decision-making. But often, the university governance gets blurred into hierarchy. Statutorily, the vice-chancellor is the academic and executive head; nevertheless, they find diluted authority because of procedural overreach and hindrances from one or more of the statutorily created university officials, State officials, etc. Bypassing apex authorities amounts to the absence of collective wisdom, and the administrative unilateralism is mostly skewed and detrimental to the university. Sometimes, the practices of seeking clearances from the offices not empowered by the act/statute in the functioning of the university destroy the core purpose of the university.
Human resource
Universities are seen struggling to get the requisite human resources for managing their academic, administrative and other affairs. Along with the unreasonable delays in appointments, the compromises made in the quality are also observed. Most importantly, delays in appointing university leadership disrupt the institution’s pace of progress and must be avoided. The breach of autonomy in recruitment on account of considerations of any kind ultimately erodes institutional credibility and deprives meritorious academics of various roles, including leadership. As a result, those entering university through certain considerations further make compromises and struggle in balancing their performance, academics, growth, merit, ethical standards, fairness, integrity, etc., and weaken the university. The universities can thrive only with competent human resources, so autonomy in merit-based, steadfast recruitments and promotions with fairness, impeccable integrity and immunity to undue influence should be ascertained by the governance.
Accountability
Irrespective of the nature of the university, whether public or private, the accountability of a university towards society is a precondition for autonomy. Public-funded universities enjoy better social perception and are under an obligation to carefully exercise autonomy and control to be transparent, responsible for outcomes, and maintain integrity. Performance assessment has to come centre stage for a perfect blend of autonomy and accountability. For this, initiatives like complete digitalisation of processes, highest priority to the quality of teaching-learning-examination, zero tolerance to unethical practices, credible assessment of teachers and taught alike, disclosures to stakeholders, feedback-based reforms, third-party audits, performance-linked funding, etc., may strengthen universities.
Way forward
It is high time for all concerned in the country to accept that the autonomy of universities is not a privilege rather it is a precondition for quality. The bureaucratic system has to recast its role as an enabler to strike a fine balance between ensuring order and sustaining autonomy for breeding original and novel thinking in universities. The power of the university’s statutory authorities, instituted by Act/Statutes, ought to be respected and not bypassed. A cue must be drawn from the ground reality that if universities function under administrative tentacles, they can only produce conformity, not creativity and competency.
Also, there is a need to strengthen the culture of trust with the conviction that the freedom of university functionaries is extremely essential to tread on the path of excellence. Moreover, if the country truly aspires to be a knowledge leader, the concern should not be towards the regulation of universities but about their ample freedom to think and perform without fear. Let us realise, infringement upon university autonomy in any form and for any reason will eventually weaken the education system and constrain the capability-building process of the present generation, so liberating universities to deliver with autonomy while being accountable to the nation’s vision and society is imperative.
(The author is vice chancellor of Veer Madho Singh Bhandari Uttarakhand Technical University; views expressed are personal)
