It's time for assessing quality

HUMAN RESOURCE Development and strategies have become a big managerial and academic achievement. Whatever may have been the compulsions of the past be it social, economic or political, designing of HR for the development of society requires breaking new ground and closing and ending firmly the old pot holes. Everybody in the system must learn to perform great deeds rather than perpetuate the rejected and out-dated thinking. The field of tertiary education which itself supports the primary and secondary education to take a firm hold, has been a neglected one for too long in our country, leading to a kind of dejection, cynicism and frustration. On top of it, the real political connection of our faculty has led to the control of the universities by the state. Everyone must realise that the purpose of primary and secondary education is mainly aimed at literacy and at creating a base for higher education. Most of them at the end of second stage are either unemployable or employable with additional training such as vocational, educational and technical training. At the same time we should realise that the toppers at this stage with a will to pursue some form of intensive mental training should become the base for higher education.

There are a few points to consider at this stage. Firstly, investment in Indian education is only about two per cent of GDP even though the Government, in principle, has expressed its intent to increase it to six per cent. Most advanced countries have been investing from eight per cent to 12 per cent. This is our greatest failure. Even within this two per cent to three per cent of GDP, higher education in India does not get its proper share. Hence, we should first realise that, in the rapidly globalising context, investment in higher education is a matter of great requirement but the only problem should be to decide on the nature, source and quantum of investment. Secondly, the most controversial `fee income' by the university ranges from 0 per cent in Germany to 10-20 per cent in USA. Where do we stand here? Thirdly, higher education provides skilled manpower and as a developing nation with a desire to be known as world power we need a lot of it. But currently only five per cent of the relevant age group enters the portals of the universities and colleges as against 70 per cent in USA and Canada. Fourthly, we should ask if we have the necessary knowledgeable and seriously motivated manpower to create the most needed futuristic man power. The teaching and research-oriented man-power for the conduct of higher education should not be for reckless distribution based on employment opportunities alone, but must have the most important element called excellence built as its core. It is said that an excellent faculty committed to serious teaching and high level research motivation is the real core of universities from which knowledge and wisdom radiate continuously. But, if the core is rotten it is high time that we must eliminate it. Collecting such a manpower is an onerous job which is only in the domain of right leadership. In order to create such a ``Faculty Environment'' with men of excellence, we need a resourceful infrastructure which cannot be created in the absence of substantial investment.

It is intensely felt by serious thinkers that the prosperity of country is directly proportional to skilled manpower and specialised human capital who are the storehouse of knowledge and are products of higher education. There is even a fear that this century may witness what is known as ``intellectual colonialism''. If this is correct we need simultaneously a large investment in higher education and a determination to attract the best of manpower for the conduct of higher education itself. Many agonisingly realise that we have been faring very bad in both the fronts. On attracting the best of manpower, I have very little to say. If a teacher is not knowledgeable what is there for a student to gain? On top of it, if he/she gets infested with crude politics and irresponsible unionism and destructive attitudes, the university faculty gets demeaned and doomed in its usefulness.

It would be much better if the support comes from the state, but without strings and in plenty. This will definitely cut into the autonomy and independence of the universities. The premises of the present scenario is based on inadequate funds from the government. Moreover, on the basis of strong advice that higher education is a non-merit subsidy, we have started diverting our funds elsewhere without realising that the very beneficiaries sitting on such judgments are themselves the products of nations where education thrives. We need public resources to augment government subsidies for higher education for the following reasons. The demand for skilled manpower from civil administration to national defence will increase substantially and the state is one of its major beneficiaries. The participation from different sections of the society ensures equity and social justice with removal of prejudices by providing upward social mobility for weaker sections of the society. Higher education provides specialised human capital and is responsible for the production of intellectuals, scholars and thinkers who could aid in planning a futuristic society. It also helps in widening the horizons of knowledge and prepares the nation to keep up its tempo of progress.

Second beneficiary is the corporate (industrial and commercial) sector to run their concerns with profit. Third is obviously the individual himself. Simple prudence dictates that all three should individually contribute to make higher education more vibrant and modern.

Under the subject of search for finance, it is necessary to note the present state of funding in UK and USA. Prior to that, let me state that the cost of higher education is totally met by the state in Germany but the percentage of academic recovery in other countries varies.

In India, 20 per cent of the income comes in the form of fees from the students, five per cent from non-government and contract receipts, 18 per cent from grants, six per cent from current use gifts and 22 per cent from other receipts. Income from endowments alone is 21 per cent. The amount of endowment itself is Rs. 46,750 crores. This data simply suggests that quite a good percentage of the benefiting students pay for their education and the professors attract grants for research, teaching and consultancy based contracts.

The alumni keep paying, when and where possible, reminding themselves of their obligation to the university that gave them the high profile life that they enjoy! Look what Harvard has recently done. They announced the first university wide fund raising campaign in its modern history of aiming to raise Rs. 8925 crores (on May 13, 1994) and pledged to fund academic initiatives of critical importance - 80 new faculty positions to improve teaching, modernised computer network and libraries, and effective collaboration to support deserving and talented students with financial aid. No doubt, they have Nobel laureates, Putlizer prize winners, presidents of the country, sought-after advisers for the Government and industry and world organisation.

The result is the creation of excellent high level academic atmosphere for nearly 17,000 to 20,000 students who are incredibly diverse but unique individuals with hall marks such as academic excellence, scientific and technological prowess, talents such as music, dance, theatre, sports, journalism, public service and a knack to tackle the worldly problems.

For our country, the main question is academic cost recovery, for the total increased budget of the universities and colleges. We must think in terms of strategies at different time levels - immediate, short term and long term. In this context, views on funding or financing the higher education section vary considerably. Being a country full of state-run universities with inadequate financial support from the state, coupled with the abhorrent practice of not increasing the fees, we are deprived of the most important element of upgrading the quality in higher education.

Just as we tried to do at the University of Madras, there should be a benevolent mix of free seats and non subsidy seats or payment seats. Such a mix gives opportunities for the good students, left behind due to variety of reasons, recovers more from paying students towards the academic costs or endowments and for improving infrastructure.

The academic cost recovery or ``fees'' in simple terms must be proportional to marketability. Furthermore, subjects such as medicine, engineering, biotechnology, IT, computer science or management, should draw more fees than basic sciences and social sciences, arts and humanities, for which the money earned from one sector could be transferred to another sector. In other words, there should be relative fee structure.

The real beneficiaries of receiving the products of higher education in a country like India are government and corporate sector (inudstry/commerce). For this very simple reason both of them must come forward to support higher education in a substantial manner. This will have qualitative and fast improvement on education in general and higher education in particular.

All banking institutions in the country make a substantial profit. They may be asked to allocate about one to two per cent of their profit for giving loans to needy students paying for education, belonging to poor and middle classes. This way, we create a group of responsible citizens for the future. Anything that is given totally free loses its charm and desired effect.

Particularly the university faculty or college teachers should direct their attention towards consultancy or contracts, as it is done in the foreign universities and in most acceptably good Indian institutions such as IITs, IISc and centres of excellence. This will lead to a sense of accountability which is largely lacking. They should search to bring in substantial amount of contracts for their own research. This would be possible only if the professors are men of excellence and character.

There are encouraging signs of alumini specially from IITs and IISc who have donated liberally because these institutions deserve it. But many universities suffer from lack of such appreciation mostly due to presence of lethargic and politically oriented leadership and lack of constructive work. A combined lead by the university faculty, students and university managers is long over due. This is possible only by a committed leadership and erudite and respected faculty members.

In addition, special care must be taken with regard to the number of students attached to any university, so that there is optimum use of infrastructure and faculty. Single faculty universities should not be encouraged at all under any condition. We need a large reform in these days of globalisation of education in areas relating to students strength, disciplines of study, affiliation and autonomy.

It is very easy to destroy anything, it is difficult to build anything new and it is even more difficult to repair a damaged system.We have to build human capital through education which has become a lost priority. Sensible men worry about our decaying university system and go to the extent of saying, ``people fall by virtue and rise by sin''.

The universities play an important role in the development of a nation's well being. In spite of all these, is it possible to redeem this continuously deteriorating ``men and material'' situation in our universities?

P. T. MANOHARAN

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : Evangelist of love
Next     : Understanding environment