A GoI panel is in its final stages to select 20 national higher education institutions that can compete with the best in the world. The civil servants and academics who are its members have been reviewing 114 applications, 71 from public institutions and 43 from private entities.
Soon, GoI will announce the ‘final 20’ institutions that will be given unprecedented administrative and academic autonomy, and freedom from the rigid regulatory mechanism of the University Grants Commission (UGC). So, the applications will need to be treated judiciously, and the assessment process has to be transparent and objective as far as possible.
A constructive first step would be to appoint two panels of expert examiners — one for public sector applicants, another for private ones. These panels should assess the feasibility of the detailed plans submitted, and look at past and current performance, and the milestones proposed for the institution.
The clarity of the purpose of these institutions will need to be judged. The stability and capability of the leadership should also be considered, including the availability of successors to ensure continuity of mission.
To maximise the value of these efforts, the panel of experts should share a brief report with all applicant institutions and give them the opportunity to respond. This has an element of procedural fairness. But, more importantly, it encourages the institution to be self-reflective, which, in turn, can lead to improvement regardless of the outcome of the application.
After a defined period of, perhaps, two weeks, the two panels could consider any responses, finalise their deliberations, and recommend a list of institutions to the committee they feel reflect the strongest applicants.
There should be no more than, say, 20 finalists in each of the two categories. Ideally, representatives of the committee should visit every finalist, since organisational culture is difficult to assess only from a written proposal. The visits will also give the institutions an opportunity to showcase their strengths, be candid about their weaknesses, and involve students, faculty, alumni, and community and industry partners.
The final step is the hard part: winnowing the semi-finalists to 20, or less if there are insufficient high-quality candidates. One temptation will be geography, an excuse often disguised as ‘regional balance’ and ‘access to airports’. Cambridge and Stanford are not close to Heathrow or Los Angeles International Airport. Talent attracts talent regardless of location and India has much of it.
Another temptation to be avoided is to remain confined to the sciences and technologies. Narrowing the curriculum can be as foolish as investing only in the icebox and steam engine. Multi-disciplinary knowledge and cross-disciplinary studies provide solutions to problems.
There is no denying the success of a few very tightly disciplinary focused institutions, such as the Juilliard School of performing arts in New York. There are, indeed, places for such institutions in a strong higher education sector. But, overall, India will be served best by a diverse set of eminent institutions, some comprehensive, some specialised, some research-oriented, and some celebrating community service and teaching.
The examiners’ reports and committee visits are fuel to the processes of self-reflection and self-improvement. Yes, these steps will take time.
But so does the randomised testing of new health regime. And, in this case, the benefits are wider-reaching when measured in intellectual, human and social capital, and the opportunities offered to young Indians.
If and when it succeeds, the ‘eminent institutions’ strategy will offer talented people from all over more choices, more intellectual pathways, and more chances to create new knowledge. They won’t be dependent on visa and quota decisions, but have access to the highest-quality learning at home.
Ruby is senior scholar, Alliance for Higher Education and Democracy, University of Pennsylvania, US, Kumar is chairperson, Centre for Governance and Public Policy, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai, and Hartley is associate dean, Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania, US
ConversionConversion EmoticonEmoticon