Page 265 - DEDU501_DEVELOPMENT_OF_EDUCATION_SYSTEM_ENGLISH

Unit 27: Privatization of Higher Education

colleges, “particularly those that are at some geographical distance from their parent university,” Notes
would affiliate themselves to these boards.
It is clear from these proposals that the colleges not good to be autonomous would be good to
“provide holistic education and eligibility for employment to the disadvantaged.” The colleges
located in far-flung areas, in villages, hills, townships, catering to the needs of the poor and
first generation learners, far away from the affiliating universities, would be affiliated to CBUE/
SBUE.

27.4.2 Regulation
The NKC proposes the establishment of an independent regulatory authority for higher education
(IRAHE) for two reasons. First, entry or setting up of a university through an Act of legislature
or parliament is a “formidable barrier”. Second, entry norms will be needed for private
institutions and public-private partnership. Further, it would dispense with the “multiplicity of
regulatory agencies to provide a single-window clearance.”
The Acts of the UGC, AICTE, MCI and BCI would have to be amended. The role of the UGC
would be re-defined to focus on the disbursement of grants to, and maintenance of, public
institutions in higher education. The entry regulatory functions of the AICTE, the MCI and the
BCI would be performed by the IRAHE. It will apply “exactly the same norms to public and
private institutions, just as it will apply the same norms to domestic and international
institutions.”
From these recommendations it is clear that the proposed IRAHE would be a very powerful
body performing all functions related to the institutions of higher education and it would not
distinguish between public, private and foreign institutions. It would have no public control as
it would be at “an arm’s-length from the government and independent of all stakeholders
including the concerned ministries of the government.” The IRAHE, being the “only agency” to
“accord degree granting power to higher education institutions” would also take away powers
of the state governments to set up universities and higher education institutions. Such a body
cannot be accepted and must be opposed.

The IRAHE, to be established by an Act of parliament, would be the only agency that
would be authorised for according degree granting power to higher education
institutions, for monitoring standards and settling disputes, and for licensing
accreditation agencies, public or private.

27.4.3 Financing
The Report points out that there is no system of higher education in the world that is not based
upon significant public outlays. The present support for higher education, at 0.7 per cent of
GDP, is simply not adequate. In fact, over the past decade, in real terms, there has been a
significant decline in the resources allocated for higher education, in the aggregate as also per
student. In an ideal world, government support for higher education should be at least 1.5 per
cent, if not 2 per cent of GDP, from a total of 6 per cent of GDP for education. But the government
should endeavour to reach these levels by 2012.
Having said these good things, the NKC recommends that public universities should “use their
land as a source of finance.” And, as a norm “fees should meet at least 20 per cent of the total
expenditure in universities. In addition, fees need to be adjusted every two years through price
indexation.” As a rhetoric, as all other governmental reports have said, the NKC also suggests
“needy students should be provided with a fee waiver plus scholarships to meet their costs.” It
is well known now that the allocations for the scholarships, despite recommendations by several
committees, have been going down continuously. The fee waiver and scholarship clauses are
added in every report to shut up any resistance to fee hike.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 259