'UGC chairman eulogising private institutions is invidious'

UGC chairman Ved Prakash has, at a function organised recently by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) showered fulsome praise on private educational institutions. He declared that “majority of the best quality education (sic) has come through private institutions.”

Though the context in which he was speaking concerned higher education, the wording implies that his praise was for all private educational institutions. Whatever that be, his unqualified praise was wholly unwarranted. Had he been addressing a gathering in some private professional college, one could have given a charitable explanation. But he was speaking at the accreditation certificate awarding ceremony organised by NAAC.

KAAC rates educational institutions at the higher education level and used to award stars, but now gives grades using Roman alphabets. Perhaps he was keeping the grades obtained by private professional colleges in mind, and was comparing this with grades obtained by non-private—which means government or statutorily set up institutions.

But this comparison is invidious, and of the same order as the comparison of chalk with cheese. Or, to be more relevant, this is like comparing seven star hotels and budget hotels, or luxury resorts with roadside dhabas. There is absolutely no justification in indulging in such comparisons, since this act leads to self deprecation, leading ultimately to a state of mind where closing down of non-private institutions will also be justified.First the comparison itself: there are excellent educational institutions, both at school level and at higher education level. Udaipur’s Daly School, Gwalior’s Scindia school, the public school at Lovedale are only a few examples of exceptionally good schools which have made a name.

There are likewise exceptionally good colleges of general education as well as professional education. But more recently, a new-breed of institutions has come up in the field of professional education. They have huge campuses, imposing buildings. They are so powerful that they can even get the highest court in the country deliver judgement favouring them, and may be, good rating from rating agencies. 

Befooling public

While well-known institutions of excellence in the past built their reputation over the years by turning out students who made their alma mater proud, by their achievements in after student—life, the new breed of institutions befool the public by their ostentation and are pure commercial outfits. The first ‘capitation’ fee-charging professional college was started by late TMA Pai in Manipal to beat an unjust reservation system, in which caste of birth rather than merit was the consideration for getting admission. Capitation fee charged was just enough to maintain the institution and see through further development. But the scale of capitation fee, now renamed ‘donation,’ is mind-boggling.

With hideously large amounts of ‘capital’ at their disposal, these institutions are in a position to put up sprawling campuses, impressive buildings and all other paraphernalia which can dumbfound the onlooker. Whether all this translates into quality learning atmosphere is another matter. Ordinary students who come out in the merit list opt to enter one of such institutions since they have heard by word of mouth about these institutions.

Granted that some of them as per the words of Ved Prakash are imparting quality education, does it mean that non-private institutions - which means institutions run by the governments, do not have a place in the sun? Is it prudent also to berate the latter on the yardstick of quality or bench mark set by some of the outstanding private institutions?

All said and done, these private institutions cater to the very very rich section of the population, or that section, in which youngsters aspire to get into the creamy layer by investing on such education with money borrowed from some source or other. But there are vast numbers of people who eke out a living, and education does not appear to be necessity for them. In this situation, there is need for a range of institutions for catering to different sections. While nobody grudges building of condominiums in which an apartment costs more than a crore of rupees, there is need for down-to-earth houses. It is a different matter that a real welfare government caters more to the needs of these people rather than those who can splurge.

That private institutions are better than institutions in the public sector is only a myth. A few top notch institutions privately managed blind us to the hard reality. There are umpteen private institutions which are not even average, in infrastructure and quality of work. They exist not for the purpose touted out, but to serve the interests of the owners. Again, when a government undertaking falls sick and makes losses, there is hue and cry, whereas, since only a few shareholders are the affected, private undertakings go broke without a whimper of protest. How many companies are there which do not declare dividends year after year?

UGC chairman before eulogising the private institutions could have gone through the websites of his own organisation. How many private universities running for making a fast buck have not been declared ‘fake’ universities, not once, but year after year?

(The writer is a former dean of faculty of education, Baneres Hindu University)