We are proud of having the single largest system of higher education institutions in the world. But how many of us have really pondered that decade after decade, India has not been able to dominate in the world ranking. We can surely celebrate for remarkable performance of IIT Bombay in the world ranking but at the same time we should seriously introspect on overall performance of our institutions in world and other rankings.
On June 27, the QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) World University Rankings’ 20th edition was released. Notably, an Indian institution, IIT Bombay, made it into the top 150 in the ranking after eight years. The Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Bombay, which rose from its prior position of 172 to 149 on the list, accomplished the extraordinary feat. IIT Delhi came at 197, which was 174th in 2023.
IITs’ performance in QS World University Rankings 2024: A total of 11 IITs featured in the list – Bombay, Delhi, Kharagpur, Kanpur, Madras, Guwahati, Roorkee, Indore, BHU, Hyderabad and Bhubaneswar. Also, 45 Indian institutes are among the 2,900 institutions of higher learning in QS World University Rankings 2024. This makes India the seventh-most represented country in the ranking.
“IIT-B emerges as the new torchbearer for Indian higher education. IIT Bombay’s impressive trajectory of consistent improvements in research quality and reputation has facilitated its rise to prominence. Over the past five years, it has propelled its employer reputation ranking from 102nd to 69th and improved its Citations per Faculty rank from 226th to 133rd. However, the institution’s internationalisation metrics still require enhancement to fully realise its potential as a globally diverse institution,” the official statement released by QS World Ranking said.
Dr. Furqan Qamar, who is presently Professor of Management at the Centre for Management Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, who has also served as Secretary General of the Association of Indian Universities (AIU), the largest and one of the oldest network of universities in the world. He was Vice Chancellor of the University of Rajasthan and the Central University of Himachal Pradesh and also served as Advisor (Education) in the Planning Commission of India. He said, “Indian higher educational institutions have gradually improved their rankings in QS. IIT Bombay is now reckoned among the top 150 in the world. IITs are leading the pack but the universities have not improved their rankings as much. The numbers ranked among the top 200 is abysmally low. This should certainly worry the policy planners and higher education regulators.”
Dr Qamar added, “We are the single largest system of higher education institutions in the world. How come that we do not dominate in the world ranking, not even the BRICS and Asia ranking. I am also worried about the higher education institutions getting increasingly trapped in the rut of the ranking. The premium for fudging and manipulating data has increased. The subjective dimensions of the ranking canfurther such trends. Rankings should be used as a means and instruments for assessing where an institution stands on quality parameters and use those to further improve quality. Ranking for the sake of ranking is more disastrous than no ranking.”
While sharing his perspective on QS ranking, Prof. M.M. Ansari, former UGC Member, said that the connection between relative ranks of HEIs and overall performance of institutions in terms of quality of teaching and research is highly debateable.
First, QS ranking of HEIs is based on quantifiable teaching and research parameters and related indicators namely qualified academic faculty, R&D infrastructure, interface with industry and business organisations, foreign students and teachers. The weights are assigned to these parameters on normative considerations, rather than objective assessment of university outputs for meeting the accepted objectives of HEIs.
HEIs, directly funded by the Central government/UGC, namely IITs/IIMs and Central Universities, which cater to less than ten percent of the total enrolment in higher education, have relatively superior infrastructure – academic and physical facilities, as compared to private and state universities and colleges. Central funded institutions, like IITs/CUs naturally get easily ranked higher by accreditation bodies.
A significant majority of HEIs suffer from both shortages of academic staff, to the extent of 30 to 50 percent of sanctioned/ required teaching posts and learning resources that are critical for quality teaching and research. Quality of relevant education and research is therefore abysmally low in a majority of HEIs. They therefore fail to score on relevant parameters to make on the ranks.
Second, lack of transparency in management of HEIs is largely covered up under the Ranks provided by accreditation bodies. As known, such bodies are functioning as commercial entities, which hide more than what they reveal to the users of national/ global rankings of HEIs. For instance, very little is known about an HEIs efforts to provide entrepreneurial education and training and the extent to which an institution is engaged in promoting interface with industry and business organisations, which are considered critical for providing competent manpower for the knowledge and technology propelled economy.
A significant majority of graduates with technical and professional degrees are assessed to be unemployables in the globalised economy owing to lack of relevance or quality of education. University ranking reveals very little about such aspects of institutional activities.
Prof Ansari added, “Sadly, most institutions, including CUs, today suffer from shortages of qualified teachers to the extent of 30-50 percent and some universities/ colleges are managing with ad-hoc teachers, who are paid half of the approved salaries and may not be duly qualified to take up teaching and research programmes. Quality of academic functions is thus compromised. Grading/ ranking of institutions do not reveal all this.
“Research output is an important element that contributes to the grading system. Unfortunately, a major segment of India’s higher educational system is college based as more than 85 percent students are studying in affiliated colleges which lack in research infrastructure and motivation to carry out R&D activities. And, for carrying out worthwhile academic and applied research they have to have connections with industry and business houses which is almost negligible. Unfortunately, the University and College systems are working in isolation from what goes on in industries and business houses. For this reason, HEIs do not attract foreign students due to unacceptably low quality of relevant education. Nearly eight lakhs students migrate every year to other countries for quality education and jobs, which also results in siphoning huge resources to other countries.”
On the authenticity of ranking, Prof. Ansari said, “The organisations which are conducting the rankings are operating as commercial entities. For almost all private universities, educational activities are commercial ventures. Even Central/ state universities are offering courses on self-financed basis. EIs get the services on paid basis. Proverbial saying is: One who pays calls for the tune. Even financial institutions are also graded yet they go bankrupt. Likewise, HEIs are also graded/ ranked which must be taken cautiously. Unless HEIs are provided adequate resources, as assured under NEP 2020, for developing research infrastructure and recruiting competent staff, performance and accountability of institutions cannot be improved to enable them to compare favourably with the world-class institutions.”
On the ranking and its relation with quality education, Dr. Mohd Tariq Intezar, Head, Academic & Professional Development Centre, GD Goenka University, Gurugram (Haryana), said, “Rankings can provide a trend but it should not be a deciding factor on first go. Rankings are always debatable based overall changed environmental, various different parameters decided each year and different weightages for different year, etc. Hence one should take overall averages for at least 3-4 years on parameter important for each individual. New rankings for any entry should be crossverified by different ways. Moreover, Ranking does not truly depict the quality of education. Good ranking is welcome but we should focus more upon quality education.”
Dr.Intezar added, “What I meant by quality education is that each and every student should have access to modern technology with excellent faculties and best of technical know-how. Learning should result in employability with satisfaction. Most of the educational institutions particularly in India are degree oriented rather than quality oriented. There are some areas which I personally believe should be addressed immediately. 1. Quality of faculty. 2. Teaching learning atmosphere. 3. Research know-how. 4. Access to technology at a low cost. 5. Continuous mentorship (both internal and external). 6. Compulsory internship. 7. Job oriented approach.”