NIRF’s ranking of state-run and centrally funded higher education institutions is problematic at the general level
Ranking of Centrally funded institutions like Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), Indian Institutes of Science, National Institutes of Technology, Central Universities etc. as well as State-run Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). National Institutional Ranking Framework, or NIRF (a method adopted by the Ministry of Education, Government of India to rank institutions of higher education in India), is similar to comparing apples and oranges.
profile, institute data
NIRF outlines a methodology to rank HEIs across the country, which is based on a set of metrics for ranking HEIs, as per a core of experts established by the then Ministry of Human Resource Development (now Ministry of Education). The committee agreed. ), Indian government. The logic of comparing state universities and colleges with the Ivy League of India, for which the central government is committed to sponsor the resources and infrastructure, is inexplicable. The central government has earmarked ₹7,686 crore and ₹7,643.26 crore for IITs and central universities respectively in the Union Budget 2021.
according to a All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) 2019-20 Reportedly, there are 1,043 HEIs; Of these, 48 are Central Universities, 135 are Institutions of National Importance, one is Central Open University, 386 are State Public Universities, five are Institutions under State Legislature Acts, 14 are State Open Universities, 327 are State Private Universities, one There are state private open universities, 36 are government deemed universities, 10 are government aided deemed universities and 80 are private deemed universities.
A closer study of this data reveals that there are 184 centrally funded institutions (out of 1,043 HEIs in the country) to which the Indian government generously allocates its financial resources, while the state governments are inadequately funded by their respective state public universities. Financial assistance is provided. College. Ironically, out of total student enrollment, the state’s public universities have the largest number of undergraduate students (13,97,527), followed by the state’s open universities (9,22,944).
loss of focus
The financial health of state-sponsored higher education institutions is an open secret, with salary and pension liabilities barely managed. Therefore, give rating to such institutions face to face Centrally funded institutions have no meaning. Interestingly, no agency conducts a cost-benefit analysis of state versus centrally funded HEIs on economic indicators, such as return on investment made by the government in them. face to face Contribution of its students in nation building standards like number of students serving in rural areas, tier-2 and tier 3 cities of the country and giving relief to the common man.
While students passing out from elite institutions usually prefer to go abroad in search of higher studies and better career prospects, most of the state HEIs contribute greatly to the building of the local economy. Considering the challenges that HEIs of the state face in their day to day functioning, NIRF has only taken cognizance of the strengths of the institutions, while completely ignoring the problems and obstacles faced by them, therefore The state is not allowed a level playing field. Universities and Colleges face to face their centrally funded counterparts. It should be noted that 420 universities in India are located in rural areas. Scared resources and apathetic attitude of the states prevent such institutions from competing with centrally sponsored and strategically located higher education institutions.
ranking parameter
NIRF ranks the HEI on five parameters: teaching, learning and resources; research and professional practice; graduation results; Outreach and inclusivity, and perception. To take stock of the situation, let us first analyze two important NIRF parameters with reference to the HEI of the state. Teaching, learning and resources include metrics In other words A combined metric for faculty including student numbers, including doctoral students, faculty-student ratio with an emphasis on permanent faculty, PhD (or equivalent) qualifications and experience, and financial resources and their use. In the absence of adequate faculty, most of the states lag behind in this important NIRF parameter for HEI ranking. Continuous retirement and low recruitment has resulted in the declining number of teachers from 15,18,813 (2015-16) to 15,03,156 (2019-20), further weakening the faculty-student ratio with emphasis on permanent faculty in HEIs Is. ,
Research and professional practice include a combined metric for publications, a combined metric for the quality of publications, intellectual property rights/patents and footprint of projects, professional practice and executive development programs. Since most of the laboratories require extensive modernization to keep pace with today’s market demand, it is no surprise that state HEIs perform poorly in this parameter as compared to central institutions.
Interestingly, the share of PhD students is highest among state public universities, i.e. 29.8%, followed by institutions of national importance (23.2%), deemed universities – private (13.9%) and central universities (13.6%), whereas Funds received in comparison to state HEI centrally funded institutions are much less. Since quality research publications and the number of patents filed in state HEIs are dependent on well-equipped laboratories, modern libraries and generously funded infrastructure, it is imperative for policy makers to redirect financial allocation strategies to state HEIs. Similarly, three other parameters of NIRF also provide very little opportunity for the HEI of the state to compete with its better and easily placed competitors for ranking. Total enrollment in higher education is estimated at 38.5 million – 19.6 million boys and 18.9 million girls (female students make up 49% of total enrollment).
Where state higher education institutions struggle
Another aspect is: the state HEI is to adopt emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, machine learning, block chains, smart boards, handheld computing devices, adaptive computer testing for student development, and other forms of educational software/hardware to keep relevant. are fighting for. New Education Policy.
Therefore, when these two are put together, it is not appropriate to rank the HEI on a general scale based purely on strengths, regardless of challenges and weaknesses. The time has come for NIRF to plan a suitable mechanism to evaluate the output and performance of the institutions in the light of their constraints and the resources available to them.
Milind Kumar Sharma teaches at the Department of Production and Industrial Engineering, MBM College of Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Jai Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur (Jodhpur University). views expressed are personal
,