UGC Versus States
Context: The legal battle between University Grants Commission (UGC) and Maharashtra over the conduct of college exams has exposed the fraught nature of Centre-state relations in the area of higher education.
UGC’s argument against the cancellation of Exams by states
- Dilution of Standards: Since fresh graduates are losing job appointments simply because they cannot furnish a final degree certificate.
- Encroachment on the Union List: Entry 66 empowers the Centre to regulate and determine the standards in institutions of higher education, research and technical domain.
- It has been repeatedly used by the Centre to shape the contours of policy and governance.
- Basic of the UGC Act 1956, that led to UGC-NET – a qualifying exam for college teachers.
- IIT Act of 1961 led to the JEE and eventually GATE.
- 2016 amendment to the Indian Medical Council Act 1956 instituted NEET.
Issues with the standardisation of Indian Education System
- Excessive bureaucratic national system of accreditation:
- No link with the societal goals.
- Worthless research not aligned towards tangible outcomes.
- Unclear Policy Purpose: The New Education Policy (NEP) claims to enable personal accomplishments and enlightenment, and productive contribution to society falls short on implementation.
- Adverse impact on the development of youth: With the competitive exams like JEE, NEET and GATE becoming the de-facto standards for education, youth remains at a disadvantage.
- It encourages coaching culture and intervenes in the state’s ability to provide doctors and engineers from the local population.
- Distort the meaning and practice of science.
- Failure in performing institutional duty: The MHRD or the UGC have failed in setting standards in higher education that requires societal connect with training and research.
- The NEP continues to live in the same exalted evidence-free world of national curricula and nationalised testing’.
- Fractured Curricula:
- Missing Content: For, E.g. the District Economic Plan, a document which is regularly prepared by state governments is missing from Economic syllabus.
- Forbids regional content: For, E.g. While Sociology talks about Marx and Weber, it ignores key development programmes like MGNREGA.
- The national curriculum for civil engineering is the same for Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra
- Dominated by Centre: While the Centre decides the curricula, the teachers and their salaries. The states pay.
- For, E.g. Maharashtra’s innovative programme, Unnat Maharashtra Abhiyan, linking colleges with district administration was refused support by the MHRD.
- Disconnected Standardisation: without a link between curricula and teachers with the real world leads to real dilution of standards.
- Issues with the autonomous institutions (IITs and IISER): Most regulations of the UGC or MHRD do not apply to them; soak up most of the funds and prestige, and yet their output is not commensurate.
Way Forward
- The UGC should perform its duties: The courts should point out that a constitutional right comes with duties.
- Setting aside the issue of encroachment and dealing with the questions of necessity if holding the exams during the pandemic and related issues.
- Achieving Excellence through Relevance: States should create an educational system through the determination of standards and training for our youth aimed towards serving the community.
Other related articles
UGC needs to revisit its guidelines on final-year examinations immediately
Related Articles
