Preparing for a new brave world

Outdated methods of teaching and evaluation must change to equip the new-age tech-savvy students with critical thinking, writes Bhanu Prakash R.

The higher education system in India is at a crossroads. On the one hand are students who have already transcended chalk-and-talk classrooms, inflexible curricula, and linear career paths. Institutions that remain attached to past structures, obsolete assumptions, and gradually evolving reforms are found on the other side. It is no longer a mere form of detachment. It manifests in disengaged classrooms, declining employability, student restlessness, and the further undermining of belief in the value of formal degrees.

Students no longer wait until institutions change. They change themselves without guidance by studying online, being part of digital communities, engaging with world content, internalising, and experimenting. They place more emphasis on relevance and less on ritual, on the application of theory and on outcomes rather than on mere credentials.

However, in most institutions of higher learning, the learner mindset has not changed in decades. This is an academic issue as well as a systemic risk. Learning models are created to learn from the past, not the future.

The most conspicuous cracks in the system are in curriculum design. Even as the world of work is being transformed by artificial intelligence, automation, sustainability demands, and interdisciplinary functions, many higher education programs remain anchored to stagnant syllabi that can barely keep up with even the slightest changes in the world.

Systems that test memory,
not ability

Where they are updated, curriculum updates have been mostly compliance-oriented rather than vision-oriented. They are usually gradual, sluggish, and detached from the complexities of the world. In affiliated college systems, the form of institutionally bounded innovation cannot exist due to rigidity and a follow-the-leader mentality, and even autonomous colleges tend to follow conventional patterns due to a lack of custom to break, fear of breaking, or a loathing of change. Private universities are managing the progression, but only a few are able to crack the code on certain regions. This is also leading to an imbalance in demand and supply across institutions in one particular region.

This is a gap that learners can see. They relate classroom material to industry demands and soon identify the discrepancy. Consequently, formal education is just a component of the learning experience, often the least effective, and not the sole one. The degree, once at the core of skill acquisition and professional readiness, is becoming increasingly a mere formality, not a foundation.

The method of learning evaluation is also incompatible. The examination system in most higher learning institutions in India remains focused on recall, speed and conformity. Marks are still considered a measure of intelligence, whereas critical thinking, creativity, collaboration, resilience, and problem-solving are not measured extensively.

To future generations of learners, used to feedback loops, experiential learning, and constant assessment, this method is regressive and depressing. It punishes the quest to know, discourages experimentation, and fosters the notion that success lies in copying anticipated responses rather than in creating new insights.

Assessment systems need to change fundamentally in order to restore some credibility to degrees. The continual assessment, project-based learning, portfolios, live industry problems, simulations, peer learning, and reflective assessment should not be peripheral elements in academic practice but rather centrepieces.

An obsolete learning environment

Though institutions continue to struggle with what today’s learners require, the education pipeline is now disrupted by an even more disruptive generation of learners. These future students will be brought up in a world of AI-based tools, immersive technologies and hyper-personalised content. They will have adaptive, experiential, visual and goal-oriented expectations of learning.

The unpleasant fact is that the Indian higher education ecosystem is not organizationally or culturally ready for such a change. There is a lag in faculty development, pedagogy, models of governance, infrastructure, and the institution’s mindsets. Unless change is proactively implemented, the disconnect between learners’ expectations and what institutions offer will only continue to widen, not only to irrelevance but also to institutional sustainability.

Perhaps the most disturbing indicator is the decline in belief in degrees as a path to a satisfying career. Employers are becoming more concerned with skills, adaptability and mentality, rather than formal qualifications. This is something learners feel early, which is why most people perceive degrees as a transaction rather than a transformation.

It is not just an employability problem; it is a legitimacy crisis. Higher education was not supposed to be a credentialing factory. It was seen as a place where intellectual growth, ethical leadership, and contributions to society could be developed. Degrees that do not add value to the present and even the future are rendered irrelevant and untrustworthy. This is partly why we witness the failure of Engineering and MBA hype. 

Collective work and bravery

One of the most frequent institutional reflexes is to wait until the government or regulatory bodies issue orders, or regulatory changes, or interventions at the top. Although policy frameworks play a significant role, the rapid change in learner behaviour and the global workplace today makes passive waiting hazardous.

Institutional leadership and collective action are the real opportunities. Institutions of higher learning, whether affiliated, autonomous, private, or public, need to go beyond silos and start cooperating in meaningful ways. Common curriculum models, credit unions, faculty transfers, industry joint ventures, and cross-institutional innovation clusters can drive change more rapidly without exceeding regulatory limits.

Teamwork also allows the sharing of risks. When institutions learn together, fail together and develop together, experimentation becomes less disheartening.

Institutional courage is the need of the hour. Bravery to reform the curriculum to focus on skills required tomorrow instead of the outmoded disciplinary ghettos. Bravery to think of evaluation in new ways beyond grades and positions. Bravery to enable faculty to be more of learning designers and less content transmitters. And the boldness to act as equal partners in learning with learners, rather than passive recipients.

The existing bottleneck is also an opportunity. Institutions that are decisive, bold, collaborative, and learner-centric will not just survive but also contribute to the future of higher education.

The role of the higher education system in India has long been a transformational factor in the nation-building. To keep doing it, it has to realign itself with the realities of future learners and the uncertainty of the fast-changing world. The students have already passed on. Whether the institutions are prepared to stay up to date, or even to be ahead.

(The author is an educationalist)