Singh, Amrik. (2004).
Fifty years of higher education in India: The role of the
University Grants Commission. New Delhi: SAGE
Publications.
Pp. 257
$ 66.95 ISBN 076193216X
Reviewed by Shaljan Areepattamannil
Queen’s University
Kingston, Ontario
April 18, 2006
One of the topics most widely discussed in India, in public as
well as in private conversations, is the state of education.
There are achievements and failures to take note of. On the one
hand, India has emerged as a global leader in Information
Technology competence, but, on the other, there is the
embarrassing fact that the country has the largest number of
illiterate people in the world. The Constitution made a
commitment to make primary education universal by l960, but even
today it remains a distant goal. The growth of population has
resulted in a surge of children and youth looking for educational
opportunities at all levels and it is turning out to be a
pressure not easy to cope with. The resolve to make primary
education universal and compulsory is still there; it is
recognized that education at higher levels needs to be expanded
and toned up.
To say that not all is well with higher education in India
will be something of an understatement. Problems relating to
higher education - privatization and commercialization, political
interference and corruption, mismanagement and agitations,
falling standards, and irrelevance - are topics of public
discussion almost on a day-to-day basis. Is it possible to locate
some key factors that can explain the mess that higher education
in the country finds itself in? That is the question that Dr.
Singh discusses in this volume.
The prolific and unplanned expansion of higher education since
Independence is undoubtedly a major factor responsible for the
present malaise. The author points out that in the l950s and
l960s the annual rate of growth of the sector was 13 to 14 per
cent, which was about double the rate in any other country. The
floodgates of anarchy were thrown open because there was no
agency to supervise or coordinate what was going on. According to
the Constitution, education was a State subject, but the Centre
was assigned special responsibilities for higher and professional
education. The universities came under the States with the State
governments responsible for their administration and funding. The
University Grants Commission (UGC) was set up in 1956 by an Act
of Parliament with the dual responsibility to provide funds for
higher education and to determine and coordinate standards, a
strangely unique combination, according to the author, as "in no
other country of the world does the grant-giving agency have the
power to sit in judgment upon the quality of performance of a
university". That, then, was a sort of original sin.
At the level of the States, while the governments set up and
supervise the universities, there are no norms for setting up
colleges, which are the primary units for instruction. Colleges
are almost completely responsible for undergraduate education and
undergraduates constitute over 85% of the total student
enrolment. Colleges dominate postgraduate education also, and
have come to have an increasing share of it over the years. The
total enrolment in postgraduate courses was less than 20,000 in
the early 1950s, and affiliated colleges claimed about 35 per
cent. By 2000-2001 the total had moved up to over 775,000 and
the share of affiliated colleges shot up to 66 per cent. Some
affiliated colleges are, indeed, renowned postgraduate centers
with better credentials than their respective universities, but
the bulk of affiliated colleges have gone in for postgraduate
courses for well-known non-academic reasons. Consequently, the
overall quality of postgraduate education has suffered, which has
substantially undermined the doctoral program as well.
The author brings out another underlying problem relating to
higher education that does not come up for much discussion - the
existence of a number of professional bodies such as the Medical
Council of India and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research
(both set up before Independence), the All India Council for
Technical Education, the Bar Council of India and the National
Council for Teacher Education. These professional bodies, no
doubt, render legitimate and valuable services to the respective
professions. But in the sphere of higher education they lead to
two sets of problems. The first relates to their role
vis-à-vis the autonomy of universities and the second
is that of coordination of their activities, in the absence of a
National Council for Higher Education, which was once postulated
but has not so far become a reality.
Looking back over the past 50 years, Singh notes that
periodically attempts have been made to review the conditions of
higher education in the country and some worthwhile ideas have
been put forward. But vested interests and political processes,
especially in the States, have made it virtually impossible to
have them implemented. "In plain words," says the author, "the
political leaders have acted in character, so to speak. They have
mucked up the entire educational system..." He holds teachers
equally responsible for the sad state of higher education. "Were
they to participate more actively and more creatively than they
do at present in how educational institutions are run, what is
sought to be achieved and to what extent it is achieved and so
on, things would have become vastly better. The plain truth is
that it is this abdication of their role which is largely
responsible for the existing sorry state of affairs."
The book is not merely a fault-finding exercise. There are
positive recommendations also. More colleges should be made
autonomous to encourage creative experiments and to enable the
teachers to accept greater responsibility for what they do.
Postgraduate education must then be limited to university
departments and autonomous colleges that have teachers with Ph.D.
degrees. Student evaluation of teachers must be introduced soon
and be made an integral part of higher education. The UGC should
take the initiative in this regard, starting with the Central
universities, which are its special responsibilities. The
recently launched national assessment and accreditation program
should be more vigorously and continuously implemented. The
medium of instruction in colleges must become the local
languages.
In conclusion, the author looks at the higher educational
scene via the UGC, which over the past fifty years has had the
most crucial responsibility in that sphere. His assessment is
that the UGC largely failed in that responsibility partly because
the powers given to it have been inadequate and partly because of
poor internal management.
About the Reviewer
Shaljan Areepattamannil
Queen’s University, Kingston
Ontario K7L 3N6
Canada
Copyright is retained by the first or sole author,
who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment