A Review of Proposed Reforms Aligned with the National Education Policy 2020
A
Review of Proposed Reforms Aligned with the National Education Policy 2020
(khritish@teachers.org)
Abstract: The
National Education Policy 2020 aims to improve how Indian universities and
colleges are evaluated, accredited, and ranked. This review article looks at
the proposed changes to align the current systems with the new policy's goals
of making the processes simpler, more trustworthy, objective, and streamlined.
Right now, not
many Indian universities participate in accreditation and ranking exercises.
The processes are often complicated, with too much subjective assessment and
not enough focus on actually measuring student learning outcomes.
The article
reviews recommendations from various committees on increasing participation,
simplifying processes, focusing on real educational outcomes, better
coordination between accreditation and ranking, building expertise, improving
data management, considering the diversity of institutions, and following
global best practices.
The review
identifies gaps like low participation, overly complex procedures, lack of
outcome-based assessment, insufficient expertise, and lack of transparency. It
provides suggestions like simplifying processes, developing frameworks to
assess learning outcomes, integrating accreditation and ranking, creating
incentives for participation, and making accreditation mandatory for certain
programs.
By fixing these
issues and implementing the recommendations, Indian authorities can strengthen
university accreditation and ranking systems. This will promote a culture of
continuous improvement and make Indian universities more globally competitive.
Keywords:
University accreditation, National Education Policy 2020, University rankings,
Educational quality assurance, Assessing learning outcomes.
INTRODUCTION
The National Education Policy 2020
(NEP 2020) marked a significant milestone in the Indian education system,
aiming to transform and revitalize the higher education landscape. One of the
key objectives outlined in the policy is to strengthen the assessment,
accreditation, and ranking processes for higher education institutions (HEIs)
in the country. Recognizing the importance of these processes in ensuring
quality, transparency, and accountability, the NEP 2020 envisions the
establishment of a National Accreditation Council (NAC) as a
"meta-accrediting body" under the proposed Higher Education
Commission of India (HECI).
Currently, multiple agencies within
the ambit of the Government of India are mandated for periodic approvals,
assessment, accreditation, and ranking of HEIs. These include the National
Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), the National Board of Accreditation
(NBA), the All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE), and the National
Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF). While these agencies have played a
crucial role in ensuring quality standards, there have been concerns regarding
the low level of willingness of HEIs to volunteer for the assessment and
accreditation processes, the cumbersome information requirements, overarching
subjective processes, and inconsistencies between assessments by different
agencies.
In response to these challenges,
the Ministry of Education, the University Grants Commission (UGC), and other
stakeholders have undertaken extensive deliberations and consultations to
strengthen the assessment, accreditation, and ranking systems. This review
article examines the proposed transformative reforms aimed at aligning the
existing processes with the vision of the NEP 2020, promoting a simple,
trust-based, credible, objective, and rationalized approach to higher education
accreditation and ranking.
Research Objectives:
i.
Review
the current accreditation, assessment and ranking processes for Indian
universities and colleges.
ii.
Examine
the proposed reforms to align these processes with the new National Education
Policy 2020.
iii.
Analyze
recommendations from committees on improving the accreditation and ranking
systems.
iv.
Identify
challenges like low participation, complex procedures, lack of outcome-based
assessment.
v.
Provide
suggestions like simplifying processes, developing outcome-based frameworks,
integrating systems, creating incentives, and following global best practices.
vi.
Explore
strategies to promote continuous improvement and global competitiveness of
Indian universities through reformed accreditation and ranking.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This review article is based on an
analysis of the proposed reforms outlined in the reports and recommendations of
various committees constituted by the Ministry of Education, the University
Grants Commission (UGC), and the Chairman of the Executive Committee of NAAC.
The research design employed a qualitative approach, involving a thorough
examination of the relevant documents and reports.
1)
Research
Tools Used: The primary research tools utilized in this study include:
a)
Document
Analysis: Comprehensive analysis of the reports and recommendations from the
following committees:
i.
Committee-1
of UGC, chaired by Prof. Bhushan Patwardhan
ii.
Committee-2
of UGC, chaired by Prof. Surendra Prasad
iii.
Committee-3
of UGC, chaired by Prof. M.K. Sridhar
iv.
Audit
Committee of the Chairman EC-NAAC, chaired by Prof. J.P. Joorel
b)
Literature
Review: A comprehensive review of relevant academic literature, research
studies, and publications related to higher education accreditation, ranking,
and the implementation of the National Education Policy 2020.
2)
Research
Procedure: The research procedure involved the following steps:
a)
Data
Collection: Gathering the relevant reports, recommendations, and stakeholder
feedback from the Ministry of Education, UGC, and other official sources.
b)
Document
Analysis: Conducting a thorough analysis of the documents, identifying the key
proposed reforms, recommendations, and rationale provided by the respective
committees.
c)
Literature
Review: Conducting a comprehensive review of academic literature and research
studies related to higher education accreditation, ranking, and the
implementation of the NEP 2020.
d)
Data
Synthesis: Synthesizing the findings from the document analysis, stakeholder
consultation analysis, and literature review to develop a comprehensive
understanding of the proposed reforms and their potential impact.
e)
Drafting
the Review Article: Structuring the review article by incorporating the
synthesized findings, including the introduction, literature review, research
methodology, results and findings, recommendations, and conclusions.
f)
Peer
Review and Revisions: Subjecting the draft review article to peer review and
making necessary revisions based on the feedback and suggestions received.
RESULTS AND FINDINGS
1)
Current
State of Accreditation and Ranking in India:
a)
Out
of 1,219 degree-awarding institutions, only 447 (36.67%) have received
accreditation from NAAC.
b)
Among
43,796 colleges, only 9,479 (21.64%) have been accredited by NAAC.
c)
NAAC
has conducted a total of 16,915 accreditations across all cycles for Higher
Education Institutions (HEIs).
d)
43
out of 55 Central Universities under the Ministry of Education have been
accredited.
e)
292,267
out of 649 programs offered by NITs have been accredited by NBA.
2)
Indian
HEIs in QS World University Ranking 2023:
a)
Indian
Institute of Science (IISc) secured the 155th position globally.
b)
Indian
Institutes of Technology (IITs) have shown consistent improvement in rankings.
c)
Notable
improvement is observed in various Indian universities, including IITs, Central
Universities (CUs), Institutes of Eminence (IoEs), and Institutions Deemed to
be Universities (IDTBUs).
d)
66
Indian institutions have been ranked across various disciplines in the QS World
University Rankings by Subjects 2023.
3)
Reports
from Related Committees:
a)
Collaboration
between NAAC, NBA, and NIRF is essential for developing the National
Accreditation Council (NAC).
b)
Emphasis
on holistic education, focusing on achieving learning outcomes across
intellectual dimensions.
c)
Accreditation
should assess outcome-based General and Specialized Education, incorporating
qualitative and quantitative parameters.
d)
Synergizing
accreditation and ranking processes to enhance the overall quality of higher
education.
e)
Establishment
of a national portal for data collection and a robust auditing mechanism.
f)
Consideration
of institutional diversity, including location and vision, in accreditation and
ranking frameworks.
g)
Implementation
of a fair grievance redressal mechanism.
4)
Global
Best Practices in Accreditation:
a)
Transparency
and compliance with strict adherence to norms.
b)
Assessment
of student learning outcomes through various means, including examination
scripts, question complexity, grading system, and student interviews.
c)
Measurement
of student and faculty satisfaction levels through anonymous surveys and
interviews.
d)
Mandatory
accreditation for awarding degrees and practicing engineering as a profession.
e)
High
level of engagement and mentoring throughout the accreditation process, from
pre-assessment to post-accreditation phases.
Discussions to research objectives:
i.
Review
of Current Processes: The document outlines the current landscape of
accreditation, assessment, and ranking of Indian higher education institutions
(HEIs). Multiple agencies like the UGC, NAAC, NBA, AICTE, and NIRF are involved
in approvals, accreditation, and rankings, resulting in a complex ecosystem. As
of September 2023, only about 37% of universities and 22% of colleges have
received NAAC accreditation, indicating low participation levels.
ii.
Proposed
Reforms and the NEP 2020: The National Education Policy 2020 envisions
transforming the regulatory system by separating functions like regulation,
accreditation, funding, and standard-setting into distinct verticals under the
proposed Higher Education Commission of India (HECI). The National
Accreditation Council (NAC) is envisioned as the meta-accrediting body
overseeing an independent ecosystem of accreditation and ranking. Key reforms
proposed include a shift towards binary accreditation, public self-disclosure,
good governance, and outcome-based assessment.
iii.
Analysis
of Committee Recommendations: The document summarizes recommendations from four
committees constituted by the UGC in 2022 to improve accreditation and ranking
systems. These include streamlining processes, developing a national data
repository, ensuring quality protocols, promoting self-assessment,
standardizing outcome evaluation, integrating institutional and program
accreditation, mentoring experts and faculty, and ultimately accrediting all
HEIs in the country.
iv.
Challenges
Identified: Several challenges in the current system are highlighted, such as
low willingness of HEIs to participate, cumbersome information requirements,
subjective processes, inconsistencies between assessments by different
agencies, lack of emphasis on learning outcomes, and a one-size-fits-all model
that does not account for institutional diversity.
v.
Suggestions
and Global Best Practices: The document proposes simplifying processes,
adopting an incentive-based and facilitation-oriented approach, studying global
best practices, streamlining documentation and verification processes,
rationalizing recognition and accreditation by multiple agencies, and focusing
on outcome-based assessment. Global best practices mentioned include
transparency, compliance, assessment of student learning outcomes, measuring
satisfaction, mandatory accreditation, and robust engagement throughout the
accreditation process.
vi.
Promoting
Continuous Improvement and Global Competitiveness: The document highlights the
need for greater participation from HEIs in accreditation and ranking exercises
to align with the nation's ambitious goals for higher education. Efforts like
the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) and improvements in the QS
World University Rankings for Indian institutions demonstrate progress towards
global competitiveness. However, the reformed accreditation and ranking systems
proposed in the NEP 2020 aim to drive continuous improvement in quality,
self-governance, and autonomy of Indian HEIs, ultimately enabling them to
achieve top global rankings.
SUGGESTIONS
1)
Increasing
Participation in Accreditation and Ranking:
a)
Encourage
more HEIs to participate in accreditation and ranking exercises through incentives,
awareness campaigns, and facilitation-oriented approaches.
b)
Adopt
a voluntary yet periodic participation model for all HEIs, aligning with the
NEP 2020's vision.
2)
Simplification
and Rationalization of Accreditation Processes:
a)
Streamline
and simplify the accreditation processes by reducing cumbersome information
requirements and subjective assessments.
b)
Develop
standardized formats for self-assessment reports and protocols for evaluating
education delivery and outcomes.
c)
Adopt
a binary accreditation decision system, aligning with international standards
and best practices.
d)
Integrate
institutional and program-based accreditation processes for a holistic
assessment.
3)
Emphasis
on Outcomes and Holistic Education:
a)
Shift
the focus of accreditation towards assessing learning outcomes and holistic
education across intellectual dimensions.
b)
Incorporate
qualitative and quantitative parameters in the accreditation framework to
measure General and Specialized Education outcomes.
4)
Synergy
between Accreditation and Ranking:
a)
Establish
a synergistic relationship between accreditation and ranking processes to
enhance the overall quality of higher education.
b)
Distinguish
between minimum quality standards (accreditation) and excellence (ranking)
while aligning their processes.
5)
Capacity
Building and Mentoring:
a)
Develop
quality protocols for the selection and deployment of accreditation experts to
prevent system distortions.
b)
Implement
mentoring programs for accreditation experts and faculty to improve education
delivery and the accreditation process.
6)
Transparent
and Robust Data Management:
a)
Establish
a national portal for data collection and a reliable unique data repository for
HEIs' information.
b)
Implement
a robust auditing mechanism to ensure data integrity and transparency.
7)
Consideration
of Institutional Diversity:
a)
Develop
accreditation and ranking frameworks that consider institutional diversity,
including location, vision, and type of university.
8)
Grievance
Redressal Mechanism:
a)
Implement
a fair and accessible grievance redressal mechanism to address concerns and
disputes related to accreditation and ranking processes.
9)
Alignment
with Global Best Practices:
a)
Adopt
best practices from advanced nations, such as transparency, compliance,
assessment of student learning outcomes, measurement of satisfaction, and
engagement throughout the accreditation process.
b)
Consider
making accreditation mandatory for awarding degrees and practicing certain
professions, in line with international norms.
By implementing these
recommendations, the accreditation and ranking systems in India can be
streamlined, strengthened, and aligned with the vision of the National
Education Policy 2020, ultimately enhancing the quality and global
competitiveness of Indian Higher Education Institutions.
Based on the findings and discussions, the following
gaps/lacks and future recommendations can be made for the authorities
Gaps/Lacks:
i.
Low
Participation in Accreditation and Ranking: The data shows that only a small
percentage of Indian Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have been accredited
or ranked, indicating a low level of participation in these processes.
ii.
Cumbersome
Processes and Subjective Assessments: The current accreditation processes are
often criticized for being cumbersome, with extensive information requirements
and subjective assessments, deterring HEIs from participating.
iii.
Lack
of Focus on Outcomes and Holistic Education: The existing accreditation systems
primarily focus on inputs and processes, with limited emphasis on assessing
learning outcomes and holistic education across intellectual dimensions.
iv.
Lack
of Integration and Synergy: There is a lack of integration and synergy between
accreditation processes (institutional and program-based) and ranking systems,
leading to potential inconsistencies and duplication of efforts.
v.
Capacity
and Expertise Constraints: The report highlights the need for capacity building
and mentoring of accreditation experts and faculty to ensure the quality and
effectiveness of the accreditation process.
vi.
Data
Management and Transparency: The absence of a robust and transparent data
management system for HEIs' information and accreditation processes is a
significant gap that needs to be addressed.
vii.
Lack
of Incentives and Recognition: The report suggests a lack of sufficient
incentives and recognition for HEIs to actively seek accreditation, which could
be a deterrent to their participation.
Future Recommendations for Authorities:
i.
Streamlining
and Simplifying Processes: Authorities should focus on streamlining and
simplifying the accreditation processes, reducing cumbersome information
requirements and subjective assessments, to encourage greater participation
from HEIs.
ii.
Outcome-based
and Holistic Assessment Framework: Develop an assessment framework that places
greater emphasis on evaluating learning outcomes and holistic education across
intellectual dimensions, incorporating qualitative and quantitative parameters.
iii.
Integration
of Accreditation and Ranking Systems: Establish a synergistic and integrated
approach to accreditation (institutional and program-based) and ranking
systems, aligning their processes and reducing duplication of efforts.
iv.
Capacity
Building and Mentoring Initiatives: Implement capacity-building and mentoring
programs for accreditation experts and faculty to enhance their expertise and
improve the quality of education delivery and accreditation processes.
v.
Robust
Data Management and Transparency: Develop a national portal and a reliable
unique data repository for HEIs' information, coupled with a robust auditing
mechanism to ensure data integrity and transparency.
vi.
Incentives
and Recognition Programs: Introduce incentives and recognition programs for
HEIs that actively participate in accreditation and ranking exercises,
fostering a culture of continuous improvement and quality enhancement.
vii.
Alignment
with Global Best Practices: Collaborate with international accreditation
agencies and adopt global best practices, such as transparency, compliance,
assessment of student learning outcomes, measurement of satisfaction, and
engagement throughout the accreditation process.
viii.
Mandatory
Accreditation for Specific Programs: Consider making accreditation mandatory
for certain programs or professions, aligning with international norms and
ensuring quality assurance in critical fields.
CONCLUSIONS
The review article highlights the
current state of accreditation and ranking of Higher Education Institutions
(HEIs) in India, including the participation levels, achievements, and
challenges faced. While progress has been made, significant gaps and areas for
improvement remain. The recommendations provided emphasize streamlining
processes, focusing on outcomes and holistic education, integrating
accreditation and ranking systems, building capacity, ensuring data
transparency, providing incentives, and aligning with global best practices.
By addressing these gaps and
implementing the recommended measures, the authorities can strengthen the
accreditation and ranking systems, fostering a culture of continuous quality
improvement and enhancing the global competitiveness of Indian HEIs. This, in
turn, will contribute to realizing the ambitious goals outlined in the National
Education Policy 2020 and propel India's higher education sector to greater
heights.
It is crucial for the authorities
to prioritize these recommendations and take decisive actions to overhaul the
existing systems, ensuring that Indian HEIs are equipped to meet the evolving
demands of the 21st century and position themselves as leading institutions on
the global stage.
REFERENCES
Ministry of Education,
Government of India. (3 Jan 2023). Annexure-2: MoE Order setting up a
Sub-Committee of Specialists.
Ministry of Education,
Government of India. (3 Nov 2022). Annexure-1: MoE Order setting up the
Committee.
Ministry of Education,
Government of India. (November 2023). Report of The Overarching Committee.
Department of Higher Education.
National Assessment and
Accreditation Council (NAAC). (2019). Quality Indicator Framework for
Assessment and Accreditation. Available at:
http://www.naac.gov.in/images/docs/Manuals/Affiliated-College-Manual-9aug18-based-on-19ju118-_.pdf.
National Assessment and
Accreditation Council (NAAC). (Year). Title of the webpage. Available at:
www.naac.gov.in.
University Grants Commission,
Government of India. (2022). Reports from Four Related Committees Constituted
in 2022.
Comments