NIKHIL MORO writes from Mount Pleasant, Michigan: With the Left betaal only recently shrugged off, a Parliamentary majority highly tenuous, and an energized BJP nipping at his heels, does Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have the energy to restart economic reform?
That may be anybody’s guess. But the education sector, so far immunized from WTO and GATS negotiations, is begging for a ceding of state control.
In a way it’s odd that private investment for profit should still be disallowed in education, particularly in higher education, after two decades of avowed liberalisation. Two decades is plenty of time to implement cultural safeguards. Investments by charitable trusts and religious institutions have been a trickle, and not universally appreciated.
The National Knowledge Commission seeks a nearly four-fold increase in the number of universities by 2015 for India to maintain any competitive edge. At present only about a tenth of college-age Indians are even enrolled in college; China’s comparable gross enrollment rate is two times that.
In order to increase India’s college GER to 15 per cent by 2015, the Knowledge Commission recommends that spending on higher education, which accounts for less than a sixth of the total spent in education, be doubled to at least 1.5 per cent of the GDP.
Even with limited non-government investment in higher education, nearly a third of college students are enrolled in institutions that receive no government aid.
Additionally, India is under pressure to enhance quality in the existing 350 postgraduate universities and their respective families of about 1,770 undergraduate colleges, which together constitute one of the world’s prodigious systems of higher education.
An average Indian university administers more than 100 affiliated colleges; a few universities administer as many as 400. It is akin to a poor family raising scores of demanding kids. India’s per capita spending on higher education, according to UNESCO figures, is one of the world’s lowest.
Members of the Knowledge Commission are aghast. They want some sort of “family planning” for universities – creating as many as 1500 smaller, “more nimble,” universities by 2015, each taking care of far fewer colleges and spending far more per student.
Clearly, immense investment in higher education is a need of the decade.
Where the money? The government’s resources are already straining from the unmet challenge of universal literacy: India has 380 million illiterates, more people than the populations of the United States and Canada combined.
Other than raising public bonds, inviting investments from competing private entrepreneurs may be the only sustainable solution. John Elliott of Fortune estimates that investment potential to be $40 billion per year and to increase to three times that in a decade.
So what is the government doing?
Earlier in July, Harvard-educated science minister Kapil Sibal, during a visit to Bangalore, declared his intention to invite foreign direct investment (FDI) in higher education. Not just private but foreign too. Whether Sibal was speaking for the Union cabinet is unclear, but he sure got the Communists’ goat: Three weeks later, CPM secretary Prakash Karat pulled the rug from under the government, albeit over the nuclear agreement.
(Ah, was that a grin crossing Mr. Sibal’s countenance?)
So what might be some implications of opening the sluice gates of higher education to private and foreign investment?
# Dollars/Euros would fund the pursuit of applied, high-demand, subjects (biotechnologies, informatics, telecommunications, chemical engineering, etc). Some investment would go to the humanities (law, mathematics, philosophy), a trickle to the social sciences (psychology, political science, linguistics) and whatever remains to vocational/trade subjects (aviation, metal work, information technology, etc).
# Academy-industry ties would turn more universities, to a larger extent, into petri-dishes of corporations. R&D activities would migrate from corporations to universities due to lower costs. So more active campuses, more rigorous program requirements, more robust degree programs. Result? More patents and other intellectual property, which in turn would attract even more investments, more trickle-down returns.
# A substantial spike in sources of research funding outside the social sector would result in more avenues for productive student employment, more incentives for creative faculty, a tenure system for professors based on research productivity – more reasons to pursue higher education.
# Education would be priced much higher; tuition and fees would be driven not by utopian fundamentals such as margins of profit or social need but by the inexorable demands of the market. Banks and other lenders would enter a golden age. Credit rating of individuals would blossom as an industry in itself.
# Resistance to egalitarian programs such as reservation in college seats would get stronger, more so in reservation in faculty positions: Disadvantaged backward/rural students would find motivation to be as competitive as ever.
# Universities from America and Europe, eager to expand their reach and coffers, would be able to offer high quality programs on their own terms: How about access to the portals of Columbia, MIT or Cambridge while sitting in your red-oxide verandah in Vontikoppal? There’d be a celebration of the scientific method, probably with greater emphasis on process than on concepts.
# Short-term disadvantages to regional aspirations such as Indian systems of medicine and therapy, the Kannada chaluvali, Indology and Eastern philosophies would be corrected over time by the higher-impact creative activities and research.
# The academic year’s pace would hasten; university schedules would move into more flexible, credit-driven semesters or quarters.
Churumuri readers might want to discuss the value additions/deletions from the above implications.
Also read: Yella not OK, guru. Nanna makkalu is not learning
Don’t gift them fish. Teach them how to fish
Can Azim Premji do what the government can’t/won’t?
“How about access to the portals of Columbia, MIT or Cambridge while sitting in your red-oxide verandah in Vontikoppal?”
you could already do so,
http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/home/home/index.htm
http://www.varsitynotes.com/
Why did the head of pratham resing from National advsory committee in sucha hurry, 6 moths or one year os not a long time in making such sweeping reforms.
NGRO thou art and NGO shal remain, wringing hands beside the body politic. If anyone can anlyse the solution ans provide answers, He/She shld be willing to get ones hand dirty.
More employable graduates.
Well paid teaching staff.
Teaching staff who actually, sometimes engage in research.
Small goals first, but FDI seems only way these can even be remotely achieved…
sounds like a nice little scam to me. scam based on a gospel. especially since all the exemplars used are those of american universities, which subsit heavily only govt. research funding agencies – even private ones like MIT and Columbia.
If I’m not wrong, most American universities sustain on their science, engineering and management schools. In these fields Profs get tenure based on their ability to attract research funds.
And research in these fields funded/seeded mostly by the NSF, the ONR, the NIH, and other grants from govt agencies. investment in research by private companies is negligible in comparison and hardly sustaining.
that is, if the govt agencies pulled the plug on research funding, then the great university system of the US would collapse. You can go ask the european professors, who when they go to conferences are mostly seen complaining about the their govt is miserly in funding their fantasies and how they envy their american counterparts. What they wont tell you is how american research is very matter of factly and rooted.
Research funds account for graduate student fees, and the latest in research facilities including the latest computers. Also, reserach funds account for related expenses like fund professor’s travel and his costs apart from incidentals incurred on research staff. to be precise, so university gives room. govt. funds computers and research equipment inside it.
Univs expenses are mostly in maintainenaning an ecosystem in which research can happen. for which private universities directly charge their students a pretty penny. state universities subsidize education for locals only. SuNY subsidies for hosa yorkers and UMich subsidies for Michigan-ru. hosa yorker in hale michigan school pays full market rate fees.
It may sound cynical but, I dare say that I don’t see much of a point in FDI in our universities. I am currently pursuing higher studies in the UK and my feeling is much different. My experience suggests that a lot of funding is not always the answer. I feel the main problem with Indian universities is the way they are being used. Hence, the solution also lies there. We view our universities as a system which which gives out human resource rather than knowledge. That is where the problem is. There is a lack of a local ecosystem which involves contributions from the industry. The industry looks to the universities just for the human resource and not technology or knowledge or best practices. I’m afraid this seems to be the trend even in management institutions.
Money is not the answer to this problem. The basics of the system has to change first. Putting in a lot of money into a faulty system is of no use.
for universities pedigree is very important bocz that can be a salespitch.
us univs have two primary pitches:
1. sports.
2. research.
3. snob value and nabob farashty.
so univs spend money on sports. which attracts a lot of students who pay pretty penny.
research is auto funded.
in america govt does not subsidize education but it underwrites research which underwrites education.
this is more expensive, but also adds more value.
so govt there funds primary education and post graduate research.
basic higher education, which adds value to employability and higher pay, you have to shell out money.
Given the number of poor households in the country, I dont think anyone from poverty-stricken houses ever studied for knowledge in India. It is only to attain certain economic and social status. (Exceptions are always there).
Even our 583-million middleclass is perhaps still studying to attain better social status, than their current “okay” social status–though there is no end to it.
This foreign investment, if it came, is coming at an auspicious time. Our stomachs are at least full and we are half as happy as we wish, from the huge economic independence brought in by the previous FDI allowance into various other sectors of the country. We all got some jobs at least.
Now we are ready to study further and do research (more of what developed economies are doing) in our yet-to-come Indo-foreign campuses. After all I can’t imagine if i had to study masters or do research in the laboratories, while I had skipped my lunch due to poverty or didnt know how to pay my son’s school bills next month.
The demographics of the society today can certainly demand for foreign investment in education for India.
Oh ya the change will be great, but if give a chance I would still prefer studying in Harvard in Massachusetts, than in Harvard in Bangalore :) Sheer thrill excites me…Does that mean I’m economically okay?
nobody would invest in research. all research is high risk and most research is low return.
to increase research you to shoud spruce up govt agencies not line up private investors.
Nearly 4000 Indian students in Chinese universities. US/UK?Australia /singapore are all catering to the MONEYED middleclass WILLING TO INVEST. Money is there but not correct policies
Education should be tailored to the needs of the community. It should be intertwined to the society at every level.
May this nation be freed from the delusion that education is about inculcating foreign ideas or about getting “globalized” by discarding our native languages.
Higher education definitely is very important only for middle class indians, but 50% of India is still lower middle class or Poor. Primary education should be the mantra for INDIA. I absolutely commend former TN cheif minister Mr. Kamaraj who conceptualised the idea of Midday meals. BJP in karnataka should go one step ahead, provide stipend of 250-500 rupees per child per month & create mass awareness about it. No doubt corruption will eat some money, but I feel it would create a huge impact on illiteracy rate. Raising money for such a scheme may not be the actual problem:eg: Government could come up with a scheme where all salaried people in india whose income is more than 5 lacs p.a could shell out 500/- rs per month for every 2 lacs extra earned.
Most of the problems of higher education and research can be solved if the gov’t shrinks the DRDO (NAL,ADA..) behemoth into 10% of its size, make them hand those projects directly to university and colleges, thus funding their research ( and also gives a cut to the faculty). The job of DRDO like organization should be managing research, not doing it. If there is money potential qualified people will take up teaching and research..
FDI is also welcome, I don’t see it hurting anything at all… but to expect FDI to kick start research oriented academia is foolish.
As tarle mentioned serious research can be under written only by the gov’t coz a lot of times research is a money blackhole
not really. national labs have their place. there are p- number of areas of critical importance in which no private guy will put his money.
NM,
As long as retro retards like Arjun exist, there is no hope for Indian education! No amount of FDI will work because the levers are worked by the same leftist retards who will not allow any objective thinking in education!
TS, BlackLad makes a valid point! We should wind up DRDO, ADA, and may be even segments of ISRO selectively and make the system more efficient.
DB,
We should do this and that?
Indians in the US with lots of internet time on our hands?
‘X’ Guy,
Yeah. We are the same Indians with some aptitude:)
Can the government draw funding for primary and secondary education where it is much needed?
More vocationalised education at primary levels may be a good solution to
the present problems faced by India.
With demographic pattern slated to be skewed towards youth by 2020, one doesn’t need to be a visionary to realise that by 2020, migration to Tier-1 & Tier-2 cities , by high school passouts, will reach enormous numbers. With exponentially increasing demand for higher education, the pressure on existing universities will cross the breaking point.
The time to create new infrastructure & faculty is NOW. The government does not have funds to set up universities. The higher education sector in India is crying for private investment. Its unfortunate that the policy makers in government have been dilly-dallying on this for last 4 years. The WTO regulations allowing FDI in higher education was to have been in place in India beginning 2005. But for some strange reasons, the deadline keeps on getting postponed.
Private Universities of Indian origin are already in place although they are small in numbers and appear to be centered around vocational (placement oriented) courses (MBA,MCA etc.). ICFAI, AMITY etc. have been operating for the last 5 yeras under section 6F of UGC private universities act and without any grants. The model followed gives more emphasis on quantity (ICFAI passes out nearly 5000 MBA post-graduates every year. Most of them placed in the ever-hungry services sector.) than quality of pass-outs.
The priority in higher education is to satisfy the demands of large quantity of graduate students across all courses & not necessarily in vocational courses. That requires large investment in key resources like faculty & infrastructure. Unlocking this sector to FDI and freeing it from the restrictions of operating under “not-for-profit” trusts & societies will just about help us in meeting the challenges of “quantity” by 2020.
Quality of education & research is an important but secondary priority . If we can meet the challenges of quantity , by law of avreages we can expect some “quality” to emerge and take it forward from there.