Ashok Kumar Das
As a government initiative and due to its evolving history, the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) ranking of higher education It is expected to be used as a benchmark for higher education institutions (HEIs) in India. More importantly, it will help them receive adequate research funding, expand their international reach, attract better faculty and establish their academic leadership. OdishaTherefore, this needs to be taken very seriously.
In Odisha State public universities and colleges, central institutions and private institutions. However, most of the meritorious but socially and economically disadvantaged students of the state are handled by the state public universities and colleges. While many of these higher education institutions have stellar academic records, they are completely dependent on the state for funding and are beset by lack of adequate faculty, learning and civic infrastructure, digital infra, research laboratories, sophisticated equipment, oppressive nature of age-old rules of operation as well as extremely slow pace of modernisation. Hence, though fundamentally these higher education institutions are academically strong with dedicated faculty, they are unable to score well in some of the important parameters of NIRF.
For a state that justifiably takes immense pride in its Odia identity, the performance of our state’s public higher education institutions has been dismal, especially when compared with Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or Karnataka. In fact, every year when the NIRF rankings are released by the Ministry of Education, senior academics and academic administrators are lambasted in the state’s power corridors, mass media and electronic media with an accusatory question: why are our higher education institutions not in the NIRF? Even the general public often wonders why our state’s public institutions, which have produced so many stalwarts in the past, are failing to live up to the modern standard of quality higher education.
After a month, when the media frenzy subsides, the matter is forgotten until it surfaces the next year. Amidst all this, good academics continue to struggle to keep the process of knowledge creation and dissemination alive. I believe the time has come to come up with a practical blueprint to address the shortcomings of the ranking process and make a leap forward in the modern understanding of quality in higher education. We must all allow and support our universities to create and execute their institutional development plans. (IDP). Quality excellence is never instantaneous; it requires hard work over a reasonable period of time, total dedication, absolute clarity of vision and unstinted state support in funding and execution.
The NIRF ranking is based on five parameters, including teaching learning resources (TLR), a high-value criterion (30 per cent weightage for universities and 40 per cent for colleges). For our institutions, the scores are relatively low in faculty-student ratio (desirable 10-20), expenditure per student per year mainly recurring expenditure, and adherence to key aspects of NEP along with online education. Our institution has a good number of students, but the number of faculty, whether existing or sanctioned, is much lower than the NIRF metrics. Serious introspection and corrective measures are required to bridge this gap.
Odisha’s higher education institutions have fared poorly in the Research and Professional Practice (RPP) category. However, Odisha’s universities today have a growing research ecosystem through state-based funding and research centres of excellence. Even patents are being filed, and in the next one or two years, our scores in this will match the best state universities in India. In the third category, Graduation Outcome (GO), Odisha’s institutions score well in graduation exam results, but scores in average salary, PhD output and placements remain a big issue for all general universities. Unfortunately a lot of data is lost because the digitisation of our student life cycle is far behind other state universities.
Many state public universities, including Odisha, score poorly in Outreach and Inclusivity (OI). Focused efforts need to be made in these two areas. The last metric, Peer Perception (PP), is very intriguing. Personally, I feel this particular metric is elitist and biased against state public institutions. As per my knowledge, peers and employers across the country are provided with a format for ranking higher education institutions in various categories in order of merit from 1 to 10. In practice, this naturally biases the responses in favour of nationally reputed institutions and some prestigious state higher education institutions.
Based on the available data, I think at least five to seven state public universities today have the potential to be in the top 100 list of institutions in the NIRF university category, and at least three of these have the potential to be in the top 100 in the overall category. At least four to five of the colleges have the potential to be in the top 100 ranked colleges. This will require proper planning, strong state support, clear objectives and deliverables.
The starting point for each of these higher education institutions to reach the said level should be a 5-10 year Institution Development Plan (IDP). The IDP should set out the objectives, deliverables, timelines and budget to reach the top 25 in the NIRF list. The state, in turn, needs to provide facilitation and support in terms of funding, proper policy guidelines, faculty appointment, selection of good academic leaders as Vice Chancellors, adequate research funding, international support and placement facilities.
Perhaps a four-year timeline could be set for these universities and colleges to reach the top 100 in their national categories. I believe this is within the realm of possibilities and would be a true showcase of Odia identity.
suggestions for improvement:
• Universities should make concerted efforts to get good publications in languages, literature and humanities subjects included in reputed indexing services like Scopus and Web of Social Sciences.
• Every university in the state is required to set up a multidisciplinary research centre on sustainable development, resilience to climate change, food and water security, as well as biodiversity management.
• Develop state-wide internship-placement platforms, mentoring channels and job-oriented skill training through expert group outsourcing. Separate funds may be budgeted for placement exercises.
• Every university should have a student life cycle tracking facility for at least one year after the student passes out. After graduation, dropouts should be empowered to access employment and/or entrepreneurship training channels.
• The doctoral programme should be improved in both quality as well as quantity. A strict timeline of 4-5 years should be maintained.
• Opening up the PG admission process to students from other states, possibly by becoming part of the University Grants Commission (UGC)’s common PG admission process.
• Improve hostel facilities to attract outside students. Construct international hostels. Universities should provide fee concessions to students from socio-economically disadvantaged groups from their own budgets in addition to state initiatives.
• Institutions should build a strong alumni base by involving distinguished alumni, so that they can attract famous visitors to interact with students and faculty members on campus.
• The state should provide funding to build and maintain a vibrant alumni system. Universities and colleges should develop an active and vibrant social media presence and create an active multinational research network.
(The author is former vice-chairman, Odisha State Higher Education Council)
As a government initiative and due to its evolving history, the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) ranking of higher education It is expected to be used as a benchmark for higher education institutions (HEIs) in India. More importantly, it will help them receive adequate research funding, expand their international reach, attract better faculty and establish their academic leadership. OdishaTherefore, this needs to be taken very seriously.
In Odisha State public universities and colleges, central institutions and private institutions. However, most of the meritorious but socially and economically disadvantaged students of the state are handled by the state public universities and colleges. While many of these higher education institutions have stellar academic records, they are completely dependent on the state for funding and are beset by lack of adequate faculty, learning and civic infrastructure, digital infra, research laboratories, sophisticated equipment, oppressive nature of age-old rules of operation as well as extremely slow pace of modernisation. Hence, though fundamentally these higher education institutions are academically strong with dedicated faculty, they are unable to score well in some of the important parameters of NIRF.
For a state that justifiably takes immense pride in its Odia identity, the performance of our state’s public higher education institutions has been dismal, especially when compared with Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or Karnataka. In fact, every year when the NIRF rankings are released by the Ministry of Education, senior academics and academic administrators are lambasted in the state’s power corridors, mass media and electronic media with an accusatory question: why are our higher education institutions not in the NIRF? Even the general public often wonders why our state’s public institutions, which have produced so many stalwarts in the past, are failing to live up to the modern standard of quality higher education.
After a month, when the media frenzy subsides, the matter is forgotten until it surfaces the next year. Amidst all this, good academics continue to struggle to keep the process of knowledge creation and dissemination alive. I believe the time has come to come up with a practical blueprint to address the shortcomings of the ranking process and make a leap forward in the modern understanding of quality in higher education. We must all allow and support our universities to create and execute their institutional development plans. (IDP). Quality excellence is never instantaneous; it requires hard work over a reasonable period of time, total dedication, absolute clarity of vision and unstinted state support in funding and execution.
The NIRF ranking is based on five parameters, including teaching learning resources (TLR), a high-value criterion (30 per cent weightage for universities and 40 per cent for colleges). For our institutions, the scores are relatively low in faculty-student ratio (desirable 10-20), expenditure per student per year mainly recurring expenditure, and adherence to key aspects of NEP along with online education. Our institution has a good number of students, but the number of faculty, whether existing or sanctioned, is much lower than the NIRF metrics. Serious introspection and corrective measures are required to bridge this gap.
Odisha’s higher education institutions have fared poorly in the Research and Professional Practice (RPP) category. However, Odisha’s universities today have a growing research ecosystem through state-based funding and research centres of excellence. Even patents are being filed, and in the next one or two years, our scores in this will match the best state universities in India. In the third category, Graduation Outcome (GO), Odisha’s institutions score well in graduation exam results, but scores in average salary, PhD output and placements remain a big issue for all general universities. Unfortunately a lot of data is lost because the digitisation of our student life cycle is far behind other state universities.
Many state public universities, including Odisha, score poorly in Outreach and Inclusivity (OI). Focused efforts need to be made in these two areas. The last metric, Peer Perception (PP), is very intriguing. Personally, I feel this particular metric is elitist and biased against state public institutions. As per my knowledge, peers and employers across the country are provided with a format for ranking higher education institutions in various categories in order of merit from 1 to 10. In practice, this naturally biases the responses in favour of nationally reputed institutions and some prestigious state higher education institutions.
Based on the available data, I think at least five to seven state public universities today have the potential to be in the top 100 list of institutions in the NIRF university category, and at least three of these have the potential to be in the top 100 in the overall category. At least four to five of the colleges have the potential to be in the top 100 ranked colleges. This will require proper planning, strong state support, clear objectives and deliverables.
The starting point for each of these higher education institutions to reach the said level should be a 5-10 year Institution Development Plan (IDP). The IDP should set out the objectives, deliverables, timelines and budget to reach the top 25 in the NIRF list. The state, in turn, needs to provide facilitation and support in terms of funding, proper policy guidelines, faculty appointment, selection of good academic leaders as Vice Chancellors, adequate research funding, international support and placement facilities.
Perhaps a four-year timeline could be set for these universities and colleges to reach the top 100 in their national categories. I believe this is within the realm of possibilities and would be a true showcase of Odia identity.
suggestions for improvement:
• Universities should make concerted efforts to get good publications in languages, literature and humanities subjects included in reputed indexing services like Scopus and Web of Social Sciences.
• Every university in the state is required to set up a multidisciplinary research centre on sustainable development, resilience to climate change, food and water security, as well as biodiversity management.
• Develop state-wide internship-placement platforms, mentoring channels and job-oriented skill training through expert group outsourcing. Separate funds may be budgeted for placement exercises.
• Every university should have a student life cycle tracking facility for at least one year after the student passes out. After graduation, dropouts should be empowered to access employment and/or entrepreneurship training channels.
• The doctoral programme should be improved in both quality as well as quantity. A strict timeline of 4-5 years should be maintained.
• Opening up the PG admission process to students from other states, possibly by becoming part of the University Grants Commission (UGC)’s common PG admission process.
• Improve hostel facilities to attract outside students. Construct international hostels. Universities should provide fee concessions to students from socio-economically disadvantaged groups from their own budgets in addition to state initiatives.
• Institutions should build a strong alumni base by involving distinguished alumni, so that they can attract famous visitors to interact with students and faculty members on campus.
• The state should provide funding to build and maintain a vibrant alumni system. Universities and colleges should develop an active and vibrant social media presence and create an active multinational research network.
(The author is former vice-chairman, Odisha State Higher Education Council)
