Does UGC have to go?

The University Grants Commission (UGC) is likely to be consigned to history if the Union Government manages to push through its proposal to replace it with a Higher Education Commission of India (HECI). On June 27, the Ministry of Human Resource Development released a draft legislation to repeal the UGC Act of 1956 and has sought public opinion by July 7. According to the draft legislation, the HECI is expected to focus on setting up academic standards and ensure their implementation and will not have a grant-giving function.

The idea of a major overhaul of the way higher education is regulated has been on the cards for quite some time. When it first came up around 2006, and again in 2009, economist Sukhadeo Thorat was the chairman of the UGC. During his tenure, the National Knowledge Commission and another committee under the late Prof Yash Pal recommended restructuring the regulatory framework for higher education by merging the many different commissions and councils for various disciplines. The Yash Pal committee recommended replacing the UGC and the councils covering medicine, nursing, architecture, accountancy and other areas with a single National Commission for Higher Education and Research. However, these recommendations were not carried through, although piecemeal reforms have been taking place in different disciplines. Under Thorat, the UGC had opposed the idea of a single authority but conceded that reform was required given the rapidly expanding scale of tertiary education and the entry of private universities.

Impact on the university system

The proposed legislation, if enacted, will not achieve the degree of streamlining envisaged by the National Knowledge Commission and the Yash Pal Committee. On the other hand, it will significantly impact how the present university system is governed and funded. The proposed HECI Act stops short of setting up a single higher education regulator subsuming all regulatory bodies. The All Indian Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) will not be under the purvey of the HECI due to concerns over cadre merger and other technical issues. Both, the AICTE Act and the NCTE Act will be revised to fall in tune with the new act.

The HECI draft proposes two components of the organisation: a commission with a chairperson, vice-chairperson and members; and an advisory council. The advisory council will have the minister as chairperson and chairpersons of the state higher education councils will be ex-officio members. This could be a positive step since 70% of universities are state universities and 90% of the colleges are state colleges and, at present, states have no role in policymaking. This could result in a greater involvement of the states in policymaking and ultimately in policy implementation. The HECI will have powers to enforce compliance with the academic standards set by it and will be able to order the closure of substandard and bogus institutions. Non-compliance could result in fines or jail sentence. The proposed mandate for the HECI includes specifying learning outcomes for courses, laying down standards for teaching, assessment, research, curriculum development and teacher training. It is also expected to annually evaluate the academic performance of institutions. Most of these functions were also part of the UGC’s mandate. While awarding grants to institutions, the Commission has to see whether the colleges, teachers or students meet the stated criteria.

In essence, this boils down to specifying standards. However, at present, universities have a lot of freedom on what courses to introduce. In a diverse country like India, narrowly prescriptive norms may be counterproductive and it remains to be seen how broadly the proposed HECI will function should it replace the UGC.

No clarity

Regarding the separation of the grant-giving function from the regulatory function, it is difficult to come to a firm conclusion whether it is desirable or not. One is aware of the various malpractices that have sprung up around the grant-giving process. By shifting the onus of grant-giving to the ministry, it is not clear how it will function. Will the ministry be advised by the HECI with regards to institutional credibility? In most advanced countries, research councils perform the function of funding and, not the ministries. There is always the danger of undue political interference in academic institutions since the ministry is an administrative as well as a political body.

Finally, the draft HECI Act has very little to say regarding equity and inclusion in institutions of higher education. With the expansion of education, campuses are witnessing an increase in student diversity and academic criteria need to be sensitive to the issues of inclusion and exclusion. The HECI has not given explicit attention to this area. Even the composition of the HECI could have included guidelines so that the commission itself is more broadly representative of the various groups —
especially the marginalised.

(The author is with Azim Premji University, Bengaluru)