research in higher education in india

Reviving Higher Education in India

• Download the Report
• Download the Report in Hindi

Shamika Ravi , Shamika Ravi Former Brookings Expert, Economic Advisory Council Member to the Prime Minister and Secretary - Government of India Neelanjana Gupta , and Neelanjana Gupta Research Analyst - Brookings India @NeelanjanaGupta Puneeth Nagaraj PN Puneeth Nagaraj Visiting Scholar - Brookings India

November 27, 2019

Content from the Brookings Institution India Center is now archived . After seven years of an impactful partnership, as of September 11, 2020, Brookings India is now the Centre for Social and Economic Progress , an independent public policy institution based in India.

Reviving Higher Education in India Hindi India has seen a dramatic increase in the capacity of its higher education sector in the last two decades. Enrolment in higher education has increased four-fold since 2001. With a Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) of 26.3% ( AISHE 2018-19 ), we are close to achieving the target of 32% GER by 2020. However, many important questions such as the quality of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and employment of graduates merit further examination.

In this report, we address these questions by examining the enrolment trend and patterns; graduation and employment patterns; and the quality assurance framework for HEIs in India. We also track the policy shifts that enabled this expansion. We offer context to India’s expansion by comparing it to other countries. We also compare the growth of India’s higher education sector to that of China over the last 25 years.

Despite the increasing number of professional colleges, three-year degrees in arts, commerce and sciences remain the most popular programmes as evidenced by high enrolment rates.

• India has seen a rapid expansion in the higher education sector since 2001. There has been a dramatic rise in the number of higher education institutions (HEIs) and enrolment has increased four-fold. The Indian higher education system is now one of the largest in the world, with 51,649 institutions.
• Despite the increased access to higher education in India, challenges remain. Low employability of graduates, poor quality of teaching, weak governance, insufficient funding, and complex regulatory norms continue to plague the sector. India’s gross enrolment ratio (GER) in 2018-19 was 26.3% but still far from meeting the Ministry of Human Resource Development’s target of achieving 32% GER by 2022.
• As the government evaluates proposals to reform the University Grants Commission and implement the recently proposed Draft New Education Policy 2019, this Brookings India report takes a wider view of reforms necessary to respond to challenges facing higher education in India today. It examines the capacity of HEIs with respect to students as well as teachers; governance and accountability; funding and affordability; research and innovation; and, regulatory regime, to create a globally relevant and competitive ecosystem that can produce employable graduates and sophisticated knowledge workers.
• The exponential growth of the sector has been due to the increased demand for higher education. The higher education sector has grown across all levels and disciplines. However, broad trends and patterns in enrolment, graduation and placement suggest that access to higher education continues to remain a challenge, especially at the postgraduate level.
• Given the low proportion of students that go on to pursue postgraduate and doctoral education, a shortage of qualified teachers is a further problem that is plaguing even the best universities in India. High entry barriers, poor incentive structures, stringent tenure rules and rigid promotion practices lead to a limited supply of faculty.
• Faculty shortage, low inputs available for research and inadequate industry linkages amplify the existing limited uptake of good quality independent research in HEIs across all disciplines. We find that while countries like the United States, China and South Korea have invested in research to build a skilled, productive and flexible labour force, HEIs in India, in contrast, lack the culture of independent academic research.
• The higher education sector in India is crippled due to the lack of financial, academic and administrative autonomy granted to institutions. Overall, this has resulted in the poor quality of institutions as well as education. Under the affiliating university model, the supervisory authority for most colleges is the university or a government authority; both lack the capacity to effectively regulate their constituent colleges and hold them accountable. In contrast, autonomous HEIs are at an advantage since they have the power to constitute their own academic councils and make decisions on academic matters.
• In the last three decades, the government has taken a step back from its role as the primary funder of higher education. Union funding for government and government-aided HEIs is skewed in favour of central universities, and state governments spend a lot more than the central government on higher education. While, there is little to no data on how the higher education sector is funded, we do know that household expenditure on higher education is now the biggest source of funding. Private HEIs are funded almost entirely by student fees. Research suggests that the average tuition fee for an engineering degree from a private institution is almost twice as that of a public institution, while private HEIs account for three-fourths of all enrolments.
• Limitedassessment and accreditation capacity of the NAAC and NBA has been a significant barrier in linking the performance of an institution to autonomy and funding decisions. Thus far, NAAC has retained the exclusive power to accredit HEIs, allowing corruption and profiteering to creep into the sector.
• Several proposals, committees and draft policies in the last decade have suggested the need to revamp the University Grants Commission in order to resolve the numerous roadblocks in an over-regulated regime in the Indian higher education sector. The distribution of functions, roles and responsibilities among several agencies and providers has inhibited innovation and creativity, and led to issues with accreditation of HEIs, their autonomy and inadequate funding. Some recent measures—for instance, granting Institution of Eminence status to select HEIs, enactment of IIM Bill 2017, many proposals made under the DNEP19—demonstrate that these issues have been acknowledged and reforming the regulatory regime is non-negotiable.

ISBN 978-81-941963-4-1

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT IN INDIA

Higher Education

Ariell Bertrand, Melissa Arnold Lyon, Rebecca Jacobsen

April 18, 2024

Modupe (Mo) Olateju, Grace Cannon

April 15, 2024

Phillip Levine

April 12, 2024

• Latest Issue
• Practice Area Columns
• Comprehensive Internationalization
• Education Abroad
• International Enrollment Management
• International Students and Scholars

India’s Higher Education Landscape

Though India’s role in the international education landscape has historically been as a top sending country, its star is rising as a destination for international students. Toward that end, India’s overlapping goals of expanding access to higher education among all students in the country, keeping talented Indian students at Indian institutions, and attracting students from abroad all begin with prioritizing its higher education system.

In the last 2 years, the pandemic has compounded existing challenges in India, including those related to capacity, equity, access to resources, quality, and bureaucratic obstacles. But reform efforts to address these issues and others are taking root as India’s tertiary sector experiences a period of tremendous expansion.

One hope for meaningful reform is the National Education Policy 2020 (NEP 2020), approved by India’s central government in July 2020. But it’s too early to tell if the implementation of the NEP will succeed in moving the sector forward.

To appreciate the country’s growing role in international education, it’s important to understand the scope of India’s higher education system, as well as its various models, strengths and weaknesses, and largest obstacles.

An Overview: Large but Challenged

India’s higher education landscape is a mix of progress and challenges. Its scope is vast: 1,043 universities, 42,343 colleges, and 11,779 stand-alone institutions make it one of the largest higher education sectors in the world, according to the latest (2019–20) All India Survey of Higher Education Report (AISHE 2019–20).

The number of institutions has expanded by more than 400 percent since 2001, with much of the growth taking place in the private education sector, according to a major 2019 report from the Brookings Institution, Reviving Higher Education in India . This growth continued through 2019–20, according to the 2019–20 AISHE report.

Capacity is growing rapidly to serve India’s large youth population and burgeoning college-aged cohort. One metric of note is gross enrollment ratio (GER), which measures total enrollment in education as a percentage of the eligible school-aged population. India’s GER of 27.1 percent in 2019–20 seems poised to fall below the Ministry of Education’s target of achieving 32 percent by 2022. It is also significantly behind China’s 51 percent and much of Europe and North America, where 80 percent or more of young people enroll in higher education, according to Philip Altbach, a research professor at Boston College and founding director of the Center for International Higher Education.

The number of institutions has expanded by more than 400 percent since 2001. ...Capacity is growing rapidly to serve India’s large youth population and burgeoning college-aged cohort.

India has produced many noteworthy higher education institutions, including those specializing in sciences and business, though none of them take the top spots in global rankings. Its highest-ranked institution, the Indian Institute of Science, was in the 301–350 range among institutions worldwide in 2022, according to the Times Higher Education 2022 World University Rankings . China, by contrast, has 16 institutions in the top 350, including six ranked in the top 100 and two in the top 20. However, much is different about India—its central government is less efficient and empowered, there’s enormous variation between India’s 36 states and territories, there’s less affluence, and the country has a democratic political system.

Across India, there is an enormous variation in quality institutions between states. For instance, according to the National Institutional Ranking Framework of India 2021 , the best colleges in the country are concentrated in 9 of India’s 28 states: Delhi, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, and West Bengal. The colleges in these states are all in the ranking’s top 100 institutions, notes Eldho Mathews, deputy advisor at the National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration. In states with fewer resources, offering quality education is more of a challenge.

Other difficulties that hobble the sector include lack of sufficient funding at both the national and state levels; inefficient structure; massive bureaucracy; and corruption. An additional, formidable hurdle is to bridge the gap between graduates and jobs, as many employers have doubts about the quality of Indian graduates’ skills. In a recent survey by Wheelbox, Taggd, and the Confederation of Indian Industry, respondents rated graduates of higher education institutions below a 50 percent employability level, according to the resulting Indian Skills Report .

The NEP: Introducing New Reforms

To address the challenges and steer the overall Indian tertiary sector, the Indian government released the NEP 2020 and the Education Quality Upgradation and Inclusion Programme (EQUIP), a five-year education plan announced in 2019. In addition to its teacher-education initiatives and the introduction of 4-year degrees and more flexible pathways, the NEP’s major reform components include the following:

• Raising the percentage of young people enrolled in postsecondary education significantly—up to 50 percent from the current 26.3 percent. The draft national policy aims to increase the gross enrollment ratio (GER) to at least 50 percent by 2035, while EQUIP has a goal of doubling the GER to 52 percent by 2024.
• Increasing expenditures on all levels of public education from 10 percent of all government spending to 20 percent over a 10-year period.
• Imposing a differentiated system of research universities, teaching universities, and colleges that seeks to do away with the affiliation model, merge institutions to create larger multidisciplinary education and research institutions, and give greater autonomy to the best universities.
• Establishing a Global Initiative of Academic Networks to engage with the international talent pool of scientists and entrepreneurs to augment the country’s existing academic resources, accelerate the pace of quality reform, and elevate India’s scientific and technological capacity to a standard of global excellence.
• Establishing a Scheme for Promotion of Academic and Research Collaboration that taps foreign academics to improve the competitiveness of the Indian system.
• Continuing and expanding the existing Institutions of Eminence (IoE) program, which focused on creating world-class teaching and research institutions. Ten public and 10 private institutions are to be identified as world-class, with the goal that these institutions are eventually ranked among the top 100 in the world over time. The IoE designation is intended to allow these institutions greater freedom to determine fee and course structures and the discretion to establish their governing bodies.
• Continuing the Leadership for Academicians Programme, launched in 2019, which provides training for those in academic and administrative leadership positions in partnership with selected foreign universities.
• Restructuring and consolidating the system so that institutions have a minimum 3,000-student enrollment.

Several Indian states have still not implemented the NEP 2020, in some cases because of disputes over language issues and allegations that state powers are neglected in the plan. While some states are close to achieving target GERs, others lag far behind, according to Changing Higher Education in India , a 2022 higher education treatise that includes an analysis of implementation of NEP 2020 reforms.

Some say that more funding is a core need, and there is no indication that expenditures of that magnitude will occur. India’s Economic Survey 2021–22 reported that spending on education as a percentage of GDP grew slightly—an estimated .3 percent—since 2014–15, but all sources interviewed were skeptical that a substantial increase in the tertiary education sector spending will occur.

“It is not enough to announce these things; [they] take money and follow-through, and there are a lot of powerful negative forces that continue to the present,” says Altbach. “There are good proposals coming forth from the government and semigovernment private commissions that roughly say the same thing and sound more serious than the past, but the jury is out.”

“Emphasis on quality entails limitations on quantity and…inclusiveness. Diversity of gender, ethnicity, country, and region all contribute to excellence. Values are paramount.” —Ramaswamy Sudarshan

Lakhotia is also skeptical: “NEP 2020 has now been formally in place for nearly 2 years, but its implementation is visible only in fragments,” he says.

The rush to increase capacity with limited resources is highlighting trade-offs and forcing hard choices, says Ramaswamy Sudarshan, dean of the Jindal School of Government and Public Policy at the private O.P. Jindal Global University (JGU) in Haryana. “Not all good things go together,” he says. “Emphasis on quality entails limitations on quantity and…inclusiveness. Diversity of gender, ethnicity, country, and region all contribute to excellence. Values are paramount.”

Others express more positive reactions to the prospects of the NEP 2020. Raghu Radhakrishnan, director of international relations at the Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE), praises the NEP 2020.

“The new NEP is on the anvil to meet the changing dynamics of the population’s requirement with regards to quality education, innovation, and research, aiming to make India a knowledge superpower by equipping its students with the necessary skills and knowledge and to eliminate the shortage of manpower in science, technology, academics, and industry,” Radhakrishnan says.

Working It Out: Public and Private Universities

With the government’s focus on primary and secondary education in the past several decades, higher education in India as “a huge unmet need,” says Sudarshan. This has left private institutions to fill the tertiary education space.

“The rate of expansion of public universities in the country is poor relative to the emphasis given to primary and secondary education,” he says. “Instead, [the government] encouraged the private sector to produce [university expansion]. The number of private universities presently exceeds that of publicly funded ones, and the gap between the two will continue to increase.”

Indeed, unlike the United States and China, India has tended to promote the creation of a larger number of these smaller institutions. The Brookings Reviving Higher Education report notes that Indian institutions, on average, have about 690 students, whereas China averages 16,000 students per institution, allowing the country to scale up more rapidly.

A total of 78.6 percent of India’s colleges are private, accounting for about a third of total college enrollment, according to the AISHE 2019–20 report. However, while most of the enrollment capacity growth in Indian higher education has happened through the expansion of these private institutions, quality is uneven. The All India Council for Technical Education has imposed a moratorium on approval of new engineering colleges given attendance shortfalls in the country, notes the Times of India . This ties into another item on the NEP’s to-do list: Ensure a minimum enrollment of 3,000 students and phase out small colleges with lower enrollments.

“I think we need a mix of [large and small institutions] to effectively cater to the differing needs of learning desires and logistics of the rural and urban populations on one hand and the significantly varying local needs on the other.” —S. C. Lakhotia

Some smaller, private, upstart universities, however, have better resources and have broken free from the model, making dramatic progress in providing a small number of students more resource-rich educations—but these institutions remain a small part of the picture.

S. C. Lakhotia, a distinguished professor at Banaras Hindu University (BHU) questions whether having larger institutions would necessarily improve the situation. “I am not sure if fewer but larger institutions would be an answer to the mammoth task of providing reasonable quality of higher education to the huge population,” he says “With all cities in the country already bursting at their seams, having larger institutions would aggravate the conditions due to further migration to such centers. I think we need a mix of both to effectively cater to the differing needs of learning desires and logistics of the rural and urban populations on one hand and the significantly varying local needs on the other.”

Structural Difficulties

The structure of India’s higher education system creates its own challenges that the NEP aims to address. At the hub of the system are the public universities. Most of them have affiliations with numerous smaller, often private, colleges—generally of lesser prestige and quality.

“Of 40,000 colleges, most are dependent on a mother university for their frameworks and other things, even though many Indian colleges are older than the universities to which they are affiliated,” says Mathews. “That is a big hurdle.”

“The public universities are overstretched,” says William Brustein, interim director of the University of Pittsburgh’s Global Studies Center and formerly the vice provost for global strategies and international affairs at The Ohio State University (OSU) from 2009 to 2016, where he established U.S.-India mobility programs. “Their faculty are not paid well, and they have to hold two or three jobs. They can’t devote time to research, and they lack the technology in their classrooms that you would find in China.”

One example of an overstretched public institution is BHU, located in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. The university, recognized as an Institution of Eminence in 2020, started in 1916 with strong national backing, an ambitious vision, and deep resources. Its 1,300-acre campus is home to a residential university, as well as to three other affiliate colleges: a women’s college, the Institute of Medical Sciences, and the Institute of Technology, which was recently separated as an independent institution. But BHU has faced challenges in recent years. 

“The diversity of subjects, the huge campus, and the large number of students and faculty have indeed presented a variety of administrative and academic challenges,” says Lakhotia.

The NEP’s goal in addressing these difficulties is to move away from the affiliation model and create a new system of research universities, teaching universities, and colleges. Merging institutions will create larger multidisciplinary education and research institutions and give greater autonomy to the best universities.

Bridging the Funding Gap

One of the NEP’s major objectives is to double the amount spent on public education, which should ameliorate a major challenge that plagues higher education in India: inadequate funding for both central- and state-funded public universities. Central universities receive funding from the national government, through the University Grants Commission (UGC), while state universities are funded by state governments, in addition to some grants from the UGC.

“Although there is a general perception that central universities are better funded than state universities, the facts, at least for BHU, are different,” says Lakhotia. “Some of the central universities … have better funding than the earlier established central universities like BHU. The more recently established central universities perhaps also have better budgets. Many of the state universities are in worse conditions with respect to the funds provided by the given state governments.”

“More recently, there has been a shift to understanding that you cannot just focus on the early part of the pathway and neglect youths coming into and out of higher education.” —Rajika Bhandari

And much funding has been concentrated on the primary and secondary levels. “For many years, there was heavy focus on primary and secondary education,” says Rajika Bhandari, author and former president and CEO of the IC3 Institute, which promotes career and college counseling at schools around the world in partnership with universities, and with a large presence in India. “More recently, there has been a shift to understanding that you cannot just focus on the early part of the pathway and neglect youths coming into and out of higher education.”

The NEP specifies that “revamping colleges and universities to foster excellence” is a priority for the government’s financial investment.

The Deadening Effect of Bureaucracy

Excessive bureaucracy rivals insufficient funding as a root cause of the challenges of the Indian higher education sector. Many colleges function under the supervision of a university or a government body, reducing their autonomy. In many cases, the university or government body is unable to regulate them effectively, the Brookings Institution report notes. States are also the leading funders of many institutions, removing the ability of the central government to use funding as a lever to improve the systems.

That bureaucracy has a deadening effect on the ability of Indian higher education institutions to experiment and evolve, says Pankaj Chandra, vice chancellor of Ahmedabad University, one of India’s upstart private institutions.

“Indian higher education suffers from lack of experimentation and hence an inability to react to the changing environment—and it is true of some of India’s better institutions, such as its Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) and Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs)as well,” Chandra says. “Having studied at an IIT and taught for two decades at two of the IIMs and led one of the premier IIMs as its director, I feel that they could be many times better if the government just stopped controlling them or dictating to them as to what should they do. They need to be left alone to chart their own destinies.”

Similarly, India’s regulatory framework and bureaucratic mindset “have been and remain obstacles,” in the progress of JGU, notes Sudarshan. These obstacles include passing legislation to create the university, obtaining permissions and approval for developing the land, and seeking recognition for JGU’s law school.

“There is a great tradition of individual inquiry and learning in India and its institutions; we just need to make them collectively able to deliver new ideas and scientific knowledge for the society.” —Pankaj Chandra

Streamlining systems and reducing inefficiencies are key aspects to India becoming a bigger player as a destination country in international education, though the NEP does not address these particular pain points. It does, however, outline implementation plans that include better coordination between central and state governing bodies, leveraging existing strengths of India’s academic tradition.

“There is a great tradition of individual inquiry and learning in India and its institutions; we just need to make them collectively able to deliver new ideas and scientific knowledge for the society,” Chandra says. “Given the fundamental ways in which the world is changing, here is an entry point for institutions that think differently to become leaders globally.”

Changing Mindsets

In addition to bureaucracy, long-held attitudes about higher education—and who should have access to it—prevent progress that could benefit potential students.

Brustein says he also encountered an elitist aspect to the central governmental mindset toward Indian institutional capacity development. He recalls attending Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce (FICCI) conferences in New Delhi, where government officials expressed their desire to create the equivalent of Ivy Leave institutions in India.  

“I think India would do much better with a land-grant model and, also, community colleges,” says Brustein. “That is where India could really make a difference in its higher education. But there has been no effort to do that.”   

Lakhotia agrees that more technical and vocational training might be better fits for the needs of many young Indians. “While there may be larger institutions which cater more to those primarily interested in academic careers, there have to be many smaller institutions across the country that provide basic education and vocational trainings beyond secondary schools,” he says.

The NEP outlines robust plans to reimagine how vocational training is offered in higher education, especially given the prevailing social attitudes that view vocational training as inferior. One major goal is, by 2025, to have 50 percent of Indian students exposed to some type of vocational education; currently, it’s less than 5 percent.

“The present trend that everyone should have an undergraduate degree to get a job has resulted in the unmanageable migrations from rural to urban areas on one hand, and a worrying lack of skilled manpower for agriculture and various services [on the other],” Lakhotia says.

Accreditation, Equity, and Teacher Development

The NEP focuses a large part in its higher education plans on accreditation, which is also seen as incomplete and insufficient to ensure institutional quality. Mandatory accreditation under the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) is limited to institutions seeking funding, while another accreditation body, the National Board of Accreditation (NBA), is limited to technical programs like engineering and management. NBA accredits individual courses rather than institutions, resulting in a small proportion of institutions with NAAC accreditation, notes the Brookings Institution report. In 2018, the UGC proposed that more accreditation agencies be created.

Equity is another deeply rooted obstacle for India’s higher education sector. To increase diversity in admissions, there is an affirmative action policy (called “ reservation ”) that allots a certain percentage of seats to historically disadvantaged groups, including women; people from disadvantaged castes, tribes, and religious minorities; and those from economically disadvantaged segments of society.

Challenges remain for many of these students once admitted. Ministry of Human Resource Development data published in 2019 reveals that out of 2,461 students who dropped out from IITs over a 2-year period, nearly half were from reservation groups. Of the 99 students who dropped out of IIMs, most were from reservation classes, writes Rudrashis Datta, an assistant professor in English at Pritilata Waddedar Mahavidyalaya in West Bengal, in an opinion article in The Statesman . A similar pattern of high dropout rates for reservation class populations from seven top IITs was reported for a 5-year period by the Education Ministry in 2021, according to The Hindu .

To remedy these problems, the NEP outlines eight specific steps for governing bodies and 14 steps for institutions to take in order to ensure better equity, access, and student success—from financial assistance and inclusive curriculum to wheelchair-accessible buildings and counseling and mentorship programs.

An area where the NEP’s efforts are bearing fruit is in boosting teacher qualifications. Under the NEP 2020, the central government requires a 4-year integrated bachelor’s of education as the minimum required degree for teaching by 2030. In 2021, the government announced a program of instruction for that degree in 50 institutions across the country. The program will start in the 2022–23 academic year and will allow graduates to get a degree in education as well as in a specialized subject, such as history, mathematics, arts, economics, or commerce.

“Having the right environment that encourages research, independence, academic freedom, and stimulating students are incentives [for faculty].” —Ramaswamy Sudarshan

In March, the UGC began considering modifications to its regulations to allow the appointment of professionals and industry experts as professors in central government universities as part of the implementation of the NEP 2020.

Better funding and institutional mandates that emphasize more research have allowed some universities to recruit and retain top talent. “We have managed to attract about 20 new faculty every year to the university during the last 4 years,” Chandra says. “The largest majority amongst them are Indians who have completed their PhDs at some of the best places like MIT, Stanford, Chicago, Penn, and Cambridge. The rest are PhDs from some of the best institutions in India.”

Similarly, says Sudarshan, “JGU has benefited from brain gain, with its top scholars returning to work with us, even though they will take a pay cut. I did when I left the [United Nations Development Programme] and joined JGU. Having the right environment that encourages research, independence, academic freedom, and stimulating students are incentives.”

Introducing New Approaches

In India, 3-year arts, commerce, and sciences degrees remain the most common. And traditional pedagogy, such as rote learning, still hold sway. Mousumi Mukherjee, a professor at JGU and deputy director of the International Institute for Higher Education Research & Capacity Building, says the teaching reality of many professors in India at colleges affiliated with public universities still resembles her own early career experience as a lecturer at a college affiliated with the University of Calcutta.

With a syllabus designed by an administrative body far from her campus, she and other teachers were expected to deliver the curriculum as planned with no autonomy in the classroom—“whether the students were actually able to understand it or not,” she says. “I later studied abroad under a Fulbright teaching fellowship, and I had to unlearn everything I had learned about teaching from that period in my career.”

However, the NEP 2020 has introduced 4-year undergraduate degrees with multiple entry and exit points. The policy also seeks to increase flexible pathways to higher education learning, including increased credit transfers between different institutions and types of programs. Other new initiatives from the NEP in this area include an academic credit bank to allow students to move between different universities and gain credits from work that count toward a final degree. 

In addition, a draft Curricular Framework and Credit System for Four-year Undergraduate Programme , introduced by the UGC, calls for multidisciplinary and holistic education to emphasize conceptual understanding, creativity, and critical thinking. Stakeholders hope the greater flexibility will improve GER ratios, reduce dropouts, and increase degree completion. However, a liberal arts approach and the flexible thinking behind it are relatively new developments to the Indian ecosystem, says Chandra.

“India needs its own experiments and it needs to build liberal arts–driven education that is located in its context and is still global in its value and aspirations of meritocracy. Ahmedabad is an experiment in that direction.” —Pankaj Chandra

“Most parents are not convinced that such an education is superior to rote learning, as the latter gets them into established public institutions like IITs and IIMs,” he says. “Most employers also value single parameter achievement that is designed around marks in standardized exams. It is going to take some time before these employers break their mindset and start to hire graduates in large numbers. Some of the more enlightened ones are already coming to our campuses.”

Ahmedabad University has successfully implemented such an approach. “Many schools are simply trying to replicate the ethos, culture, and structure of programs in the United States or Europe,” Chandra says. “They are also attracting students from a certain section of the society because of their high fees. India needs its own experiments and it needs to build liberal arts–driven education that is located in its context and is still global in its value and aspirations of meritocracy. Ahmedabad is an experiment in that direction.”

The Strength of Specialized Institutions

While schools such as Ahmedabad are beginning to address the need for liberal arts-based education, the establishment of state-sponsored, science- and business-related institutions is a time-tested achievement. Resources are concentrated on these science- and business-related institutions, which recruit top Indian students. The country’s 23 Indian Institutes of Technology, its autonomous public technical and research universities, and its 20 Indian Institutes of Management are centrally funded and enjoy greater autonomy than most institutions, though they educate a relatively small number of students.

“The IITs are a bright point in the system, in part by leaning heavily on admissions testing to yield the brightest students from an enormous number of applicants,” says Altbach. “They are world class and mainly undergraduate. The Indian Schools of Management are the same thing, funded by the federal government.”

Such institutions are among the most selective in the world. “If these students were to come to the United States, they would attend Harvard or MIT,” says Brustein.

“The IITs are a bright point in the system, in part by leaning heavily on admissions testing to yield the brightest students from an enormous number of applicants. They are world class and mainly undergraduate.” —Philip Altbach

There are also noteworthy public institutions outside the IITs and IISc, which are established brands. “These institutions as whole entities are not as comparable to world leaders abroad, but many have excellent departments that do excellent research,” says Mathews. The Indian Institute of Science, Education and Research in Pune and the National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS) under the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research are central institutions doing very good basic science and research, Mathews notes.

The state university system includes several standout institutions, such as Calcutta University, Jadvapur University, and Pune University. “Their funding is much lower than the IITs, yet some of their departments conduct excellent research, which is amazing,” Mathews says. “These institutions often don’t get mentioned outside of the country.”

In fact, almost all prominent states that have a major teaching university also have research and training institutions—including some in advanced fields, such as the Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology (IIST) in Kerala, which is supported by the central government in strategically important areas, notes Mathews. In August 2021, the Indian Cabinet approved a noteworthy memorandum of understanding between IIST and the Delft University of Technology, for carrying out the academic programs and research activities involving students and faculty members in each institution.

A Game Changer: Distance Education

Distance education, one solution to some of India’s capacity challenges, continues to evolve—and may be one of the brightest spots in the country’s higher education sector, now that the government allows higher-ranked institutions to offer online degree programs. And as institutions around the world saw with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, remote learning is here to stay.

In India, distance learning accounts for “around 10 percent of the total enrollment in higher education, and [it’s] dominated by the public sector,” Mathews notes. “There are, however, some new forms of distance education that are disrupting the sector, most through private-public partnerships, institutions, and mass open online courses (MOOCs),” Mathews says.

Established in 1973, the Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore (IIMB), is one of the top management schools in India in the public sector and has a standout MOOC program, the IIMBx program. To date, IIMBx has had over 750,000 students from more than 190 countries, says P. D. Jose, an IIMB professor.

Another online program, the National Program on Technology Enhanced Learning (NPTEL), is a project run by the IITs and the Indian Institute of Science. Since 2003, it has offered more than 2,300 courses for students online, and, since 2014, it has allowed participating students to receive certifications from those institutions that include transferrable credits. The program, which offers courses in STEM, management, and the humanities also features proctored exams. NPTEL partners with other colleges within and outside India to extend the reach of the program.

The fact that NPTEL certificates come with IIT and IISc recognition has helped their acceptance among employers, says IIT Madras’s Andrew Thangaraj, who helps run the program.

“One of the things that’s unique or very interesting in India is online higher education is actually integrated quite strongly with on-campus education,” says Thangaraj. “Pretty much every college will know about Swayam (the national MOOC portal) and NPTEL training. [Institutions] are looking for competent teaching in every subject that have actually been offered there, and they get that through these kinds of online programs.”

“It is an experiment, and we are learning every day to perfect our online education methods. If we can do quality and scale, other institutions will follow suit and we will change the game for higher education in India.” —Andrew Thangaraj

In 2021, Thangaraj says IIT Madras took the online next step and began offering a full bachelor’s program online, a 3-year degree in programming and data science, which Thangaraj says is one of, if not the , only large-scale, full-degree online programs in India. It currently has more than 12,000 students participating. The program features live interaction with instructors for 8 to 10 hours per week per course. Students must come in monthly to one of 100 exam centers throughout India or the several foreign exam centers to be tested.

“It is an experiment, and we are learning every day to perfect our online education methods,” Thangaraj says. “If we can do quality and scale, other institutions will follow suit and we will change the game for higher education in India.” 

A challenge that hinders distance and online education in India is that many colleges do not have good internet connectivity, particularly in rural areas, says Mathews. Thangaraj notes that many smaller, local colleges allow students to access online courses through labs in their facilities, which can solve the problem of access for those with no connectivity. In some cases, students watch videos of the classes rather than enjoying real-time access.

But ultimately, Thangaraj sees online education as the gamechanger that will make the NEP 2020’s goals achievable. “Only 8 million students get admission into college each year,” notes Thangaraj. “Yet India has amazingly aggressive goals of admitting 20 or 25 million students each year by 2030. I don’t see any way of getting there other than online education playing a huge role.”

A Bright Future

If India can meet the ambitious goals outlined in the NEP and related plans, there is promise that it can successfully tap the remaining pockets of unrealized potential across the country. By building on the strengths of its higher education system and acknowledging the areas in need of reform, India can not only better meet its own students’ needs, but also attract talent from the region and the world.

About International Educator

International Educator  is NAFSA’s flagship publication and has been published continually since 1990. As a record of the association and the field of international education,  IE  includes articles on a variety of topics, trends, and issues facing NAFSA members and their work. 

From in-depth features to interviews with thought leaders and columns tailored to NAFSA’s knowledge communities,  IE  provides must-read context and analysis to those working around the globe to advance international education and exchange.

About NAFSA

NAFSA: Association of International Educators is the world's largest nonprofit association dedicated to international education and exchange. NAFSA serves the needs of more than 10,000 members and international educators worldwide at more than 3,500 institutions, in over 150 countries.

NAFSA membership provides you with unmatched access to best-in-class programs, critical updates, and resources to professionalize your practice. Members gain unrivaled opportunities to partner with experienced international education leaders.

Start Preparation for UGC NET Exam 2024 at Just ₹2999

Evolution of Higher Learning and Research in Post Independence India

Evolution of Higher Learning and Research in Post Independence India: Our country has always been identified as knowledge hub since the beginning of human civilization. Indian higher education system has been witnessing metamorphic changes and challenges through the years, i.e., from the ancient Gurukul system to the modern technology-based learning system have changed the life of millions of people.

This is evident from centres of learning which existed in the 7th century BC were the Buddhist monasteries and in the 3rd century AD was Nalanda (Perkin, 2006). Few of these centres were very large having several faculties. Invasions and disorder in the country have extinguished the ancient Indian education system. Britishers brought western and secular education, with an emphasis on scientific inquiry, to India.

To eradicate such prevailing systems in the pre-independence era. Many commissions were set up to propose recommendations to make a change in the educational system.

After independence, India legally delegated all powers regarding education to the provincial governments which laid more stress on the objective of increasing access than quality. As per the recommendation of the Sarkar Committee (1945), higher technical institutes were formed based on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the four regions of India.

This resulted in the setting up of the five Indian Institutes of Technology at Kharagpur (1950), Bombay (1958), Kanpur (1959), Madras (1960) and Delhi (1961). The All India Council for Technical Education was set up in 1945 , to oversee all technical education (diploma, degree and post-graduate) in the country. Under the able leadership of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the Government of India set up the University Education Commission (UEC) under the chairmanship of Dr. S. Radhakrishnan in 1948 .

The UEC discussed all aspects of university education, and based on its recommendation, the University Grants Commission (UGC) was set up in 1953 for the coordination of development and maintenance of standards in higher education. UGC became a statutory organization by the act of parliament in 1956 .

Since then, UGC has been effectively contributing to the Indian higher education system, framing appropriate policies needed to reform and revamp the higher education system. The Nehruvian Period (1947-1964) was more focused on large-scale industrialization which thereby gave impetus to the growth of higher technical institutions , but with Indira Gandhi taking over in 1964, the focus shifted to poverty and rural issues and the same tone is seen to be reflected in education as well.

Set up in 1964, under the chairmanship of D.S. Kothari, the Education Commission ( Kothari Commission ) submitted its report in 1966 which set in motion the National Policy on Education (NPE) in 1968 , still considered to be a landmark event in the history of India. The NPE became the basis of reforms that helped strengthen the higher education system in India.

Another important development that followed was the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution, (as a part of the Centralization Agenda of Indira Gandhi during internal Emergency) which made Education a concurrent subject in Indian Constitution , that is, now education became a joint responsibility of the central and the state governments, while earlier it was solely in the hands of the state governments.

All this while, the Planning Commission (established in 1950 by Nehru) with the Prime Minister as the ex-officio chairman , has formulated its five-year plans and the chief recommendations (with respect to higher education) of the first six five-year plans are presented in the following table.

Five-Year Plans covering the period 1951-1985

(Focused on Evolution of Higher Learning and Research in India)

As may be noticed above, the shift in focus from agriculture to manufacturing in the Second Plan led to a parallel shift in emphasis from elementary education to higher and higher technical education. This trend continued for quite some time, until the mid-1980s when the bias against school education was recognized.

Thus, came the watershed year 1986, when PM Rajiv Gandhi-led Government of India decided to launch the long-pending revision of the 1968 National Policy on Education in order to prepare India to face challenges of the 21 ST century.

The National Policy on Higher Education (1986) translated the vision of Radhakrishnan Commission and Kothari Commission in five main goals for higher education, which include Greater Access, Equal Access (or Equity), Quality and Excellence, Relevance and Value-Based .

The NPE of 1986 revamped the higher education system by its recommendations of expansion of Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs), development of autonomous colleges, redesigning of courses, enhancing quality research, training of teachers, increasing coordination between national and state-level bodies, fostering mobility between institutions.

In 1992, the policy was revised by a committee under Janardhana Reddy, recommending planned development of higher education through different measures. The Action Plan of 1992 included schemes and programs which were directed towards the expansion of intake capacity in general, and that of the disadvantaged groups such as the poor, SC, ST, minorities, girls, the physically challenged persons, and those in the educationally backward regions, in particular. The Schemes/Programmes were designed to improve the quality through strengthening academic and physical infrastructure, to promote excellence in those institutions which have exhibited potential for excellence, and to develop curriculum to inculcate right values among the youth.

Summary and journey of Higher education from 1986 to 2015

Five-Year Plans covering the period 1986-2014

Current Scenario of Higher Education in India

Higher Education sector has witnessed a tremendous increase in the number of Universities/University level Institutions & Colleges since Independence. The number of Universities has increased 50 times from 20 in 1950 to 993 in 2019 . The sector boasts of 50 Central Universities of which 43 are under the purview of Ministry of Human Resource Development, 409 State Universities, 349 State Private universities, 127 Deemed to be Universities, 95 Institutions of National Importance (established under Acts of Parliament) under MHRD and four Institutions (established under various State legislations). The number of colleges has also registered a manifold increase of 84 times with just 500 in 1950 growing to 41,901 as on 31st March 2020.

At present, the main categories of University/University-level Institutions are Central Universities, State Universities, Deemed-to-be Universities and University-level institutions. These are described as follows:

Central University: A university established or incorporated by a Central Act.

State University: A university established or incorporated by a Provincial Act or by a State Act.

Private University: A university established through a State/Central Act by a sponsoring body viz. A Society registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860, or any other corresponding law for the time being in force in a State or a Public Trust or a Company registered under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956.

Deemed-To-Be University: An Institution Deemed to be University, commonly known as Deemed University, refers to a high-performing institution, which has been so declared by Central Government under Section 3 of the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act, 1956.

Institution of National Importance: An Institution established by Act of Parliament and declared as Institution of National Importance.

Institution Under State Legislature Act: An Institution established or incorporated by a State Legislature Act.

Important Institutions dealing with Higher Education

The following institutions or organisation are responsible for Higher education (also, School Education) and research in India.

University Grants Commission (UGC)

The University Grants Commission is a statutory organization established by an Act of Parliament in 1956 for the coordination, determination and maintenance of standards of university education. Apart from providing grants to eligible universities and colleges, the Commission also advises the Central and State Governments on the measures which are necessary for the development of Higher Education . It functions from New Delhi as well as its Seven Regional offices located in Bangalore, Bhopal, Delhi, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Kolkata and Pune.

National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), New Delhi

NCERT is an organisation set up by the Government of India, with headquarters located at Sri Aurbindo Marg in New Delhi, to assist and advise the central and state governments on academic matters related to school education. It was established in 1961.

Inter-University Centres (IUCs)

The UGC establishes autonomous Inter-University Centres within the university system under Clause 12(ccc) of the UGC Act. The objectives for setting up these centres are:

• To provide common advanced centralized facilities/services for universities which are not able to invest heavily in infrastructure and other inputs.
• To play a vital role in offering the best expertise in each field to teachers and researchers across the country.
• To provide access to research and teaching community to the state-of-the-art equipment and excellent library facilities which are comparable to international standards.

The Nuclear Science Centre at New Delhi (now called Inter-University Accelerator Centre) was the first research centre established in 1994. As of today, six Inter-University Centres are functioning within the university system, which is as follows:

• Inter University Accelerator Centre (IUAC), New Delhi
• Inter University Centre for Astronomy and Astro-Physics (IUCAA), Pune
• UGC-DAE Consortium for Scientific Research (UGC-DAECSR), Indore
• Information and Library Network (INFLIBNET), Ahmedabad
• Consortium for Educational Communication (CEC), New Delhi
• National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), Bangalore
• Inter University Centre for Teacher Education, Kakinada

Councils for Higher Education and Research

1. indian council of social science research (icssr), new delhi.

The Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR) was established in 1969 for promoting social science research, strengthening different disciplines, improving quality and quantum of research and its utilization in national policy formulation. To realize these objectives, the ICSSR envisaged development of institutional infrastructure, identifying research talents, formulating research programmes, supporting professional organizations and establishing linkages with social scientists in other countries. The ICSSR provides maintenance and development grants to various Research Institutes and Regional Centres across the country. Regional Centres have been set-up as extended arms of the ICSSR to support research and development of local talents and its programmes and activities in a decentralized manner.

Since 1976, the ICSSR has been carrying out surveys of research in different disciplines of social sciences.

With a view to give special emphasis to the promotion of social science research in the North Eastern Region, initiatives have been taken in the ICSSR to support research proposals and other activities.

2. Indian Council Of Philosophical Research (ICPR), New Delhi

Indian Council of Philosophical Research (ICPR) was set up in 1977 by the Ministry of Education, Government of India as an autonomous organization for the promotion of research in Philosophy and allied discipline. The ICPR was born out of the conviction that Indian philosophy tradition deserves to have an exclusive and special agency in the country.

The Council has a broad-based membership comprising of distinguished philosophers, social scientists, representatives of the University Grants Commission, Indian Council of Social Science Research, Indian Council of Historic Research, Indian National Science Academy, the Central Government and the Government of Uttar Pradesh. The Governing Body (GB) and the Research Project Committee (RPC) are the main authorities of the council. These bodies are vested with well-defined powers and functions.

3. Project Of History Of Indian Science, Philosophy & Culture (PHISPC)

PHISPC was launched in the year 1990 under the aegis of Indian Council of Philosophical Research (ICPR) with the basic objective of undertaking inter-disciplinary study so that inter-connection between Science, Philosophy and Culture as developed in the long history of Indian civilization, could be brought out in detail. From April 1, 1997, PHISPC was officially de-linked from Indian Council of Philosophical Research (ICPR) for a greater autonomy to complete the project by the stipulated period and is now affiliated to Centre for Studies in Civilizations (CSC). Government of India has recognized CSC as the nodal agency for the purposes of funding the ongoing research project, PHISPC.

4. Indian Council Of Historical Research (ICHR), New Delhi

Indian Council of Historical Research is an autonomous organization which was established under the Societies Registration Act (Act XXI of 1860) in 1972. The prime objectives of the Council are to give a proper direction to historical research and to encourage and foster objective and scientific writing of history. The broad aims of the Council are to bring historians together, provide a forum for the exchange of views between them, and give a national direction to an objective and rational presentation interpretation of history, to sponsor historical research programmes and projects and to assist institutions and organizations engaged in historical research. It has a broad view of history so as to include in its fold the history of Science and Technology, Economy, Art, Literature, Philosophy, Epigraphy, Numismatics, Archaeology, Socio-Economic formation processes and allied subjects containing strong historical bias and contents.

The ICHR has established two Regional Centres, one at Bangalore and the other at Guwahati with a view to reaching out the far-flung areas of the country.

5. National Council of Rural Institutes (NCRI), Hyderabad

The National Council of Rural Institute is a registered autonomous society fully funded by the Central Government. It was established on October 19, 1995, with its Headquarters at Hyderabad. Its main objectives are to promote rural higher education on the lines of Mahatma Gandhi’s vision for education so as to take up challenges of micro-planning for the transformation of rural areas as envisaged in National Policy on Education (NPE) 1986. In order to achieve its objectives, the NCRI has been identifying various programmes for providing support and financial assistance, to be taken up by suitable institutions including voluntary organizations.

Refs: Sen, D. (2016). Higher education policies: The Indian experience since Independence. Higher education , 1 (10). https://ugc.ac.in/

Related Topics

UGC NET Syllabus (Updated): Paper 1 and 2 Solved Question Papers of UGC NET Paper 1 UGC NET Study Materials for Paper 1 (Download PDF) MPhil and PhD Fellowship

Related Posts

Ict and governance | study notes | ugc net paper 1.

ICT and Governance ICT and Governance: According to the revised syllabus, ICT and Governance is a new topic of UGC NET Paper 1. Before the…

Read More »

Basics of Internet, Intranet, email, Audio and Video Conferencing

The basics of internet, intranet, email or audio and video conferencing can be better understood if we understand first the computer network. A computer network…

Number Series, Letter Series, Codes and Relationships

It is an important topic in reasoning, especially for UGC NET Paper 1. In series completion, the term follows a certain pattern throughout. The candidate…

Institutions of Higher Learning and Education in Ancient India

Ancient Institutions and Education in India: India was the top destination for the travellers from various regions having different climates and cultures. To them, India…

Start typing and press enter to search

AI Index Report

Welcome to the seventh edition of the AI Index report. The 2024 Index is our most comprehensive to date and arrives at an important moment when AI’s influence on society has never been more pronounced. This year, we have broadened our scope to more extensively cover essential trends such as technical advancements in AI, public perceptions of the technology, and the geopolitical dynamics surrounding its development. Featuring more original data than ever before, this edition introduces new estimates on AI training costs, detailed analyses of the responsible AI landscape, and an entirely new chapter dedicated to AI’s impact on science and medicine.

Read the 2024 AI Index Report

The AI Index report tracks, collates, distills, and visualizes data related to artificial intelligence (AI). Our mission is to provide unbiased, rigorously vetted, broadly sourced data in order for policymakers, researchers, executives, journalists, and the general public to develop a more thorough and nuanced understanding of the complex field of AI.

The AI Index is recognized globally as one of the most credible and authoritative sources for data and insights on artificial intelligence. Previous editions have been cited in major newspapers, including the The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Guardian, have amassed hundreds of academic citations, and been referenced by high-level policymakers in the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union, among other places. This year’s edition surpasses all previous ones in size, scale, and scope, reflecting the growing significance that AI is coming to hold in all of our lives.

Steering Committee Co-Directors

Ray Perrault

Steering committee members.

Erik Brynjolfsson

John Etchemendy

Katrina Ligett

Terah Lyons

James Manyika

Juan Carlos Niebles

Vanessa Parli

Yoav Shoham

Russell Wald

Staff members.

Loredana Fattorini

Nestor Maslej

Letter from the co-directors.

A decade ago, the best AI systems in the world were unable to classify objects in images at a human level. AI struggled with language comprehension and could not solve math problems. Today, AI systems routinely exceed human performance on standard benchmarks.

Progress accelerated in 2023. New state-of-the-art systems like GPT-4, Gemini, and Claude 3 are impressively multimodal: They can generate fluent text in dozens of languages, process audio, and even explain memes. As AI has improved, it has increasingly forced its way into our lives. Companies are racing to build AI-based products, and AI is increasingly being used by the general public. But current AI technology still has significant problems. It cannot reliably deal with facts, perform complex reasoning, or explain its conclusions.

AI faces two interrelated futures. First, technology continues to improve and is increasingly used, having major consequences for productivity and employment. It can be put to both good and bad uses. In the second future, the adoption of AI is constrained by the limitations of the technology. Regardless of which future unfolds, governments are increasingly concerned. They are stepping in to encourage the upside, such as funding university R&D and incentivizing private investment. Governments are also aiming to manage the potential downsides, such as impacts on employment, privacy concerns, misinformation, and intellectual property rights.

As AI rapidly evolves, the AI Index aims to help the AI community, policymakers, business leaders, journalists, and the general public navigate this complex landscape. It provides ongoing, objective snapshots tracking several key areas: technical progress in AI capabilities, the community and investments driving AI development and deployment, public opinion on current and potential future impacts, and policy measures taken to stimulate AI innovation while managing its risks and challenges. By comprehensively monitoring the AI ecosystem, the Index serves as an important resource for understanding this transformative technological force.

On the technical front, this year’s AI Index reports that the number of new large language models released worldwide in 2023 doubled over the previous year. Two-thirds were open-source, but the highest-performing models came from industry players with closed systems. Gemini Ultra became the first LLM to reach human-level performance on the Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark; performance on the benchmark has improved by 15 percentage points since last year. Additionally, GPT-4 achieved an impressive 0.97 mean win rate score on the comprehensive Holistic Evaluation of Language Models (HELM) benchmark, which includes MMLU among other evaluations.

Although global private investment in AI decreased for the second consecutive year, investment in generative AI skyrocketed. More Fortune 500 earnings calls mentioned AI than ever before, and new studies show that AI tangibly boosts worker productivity. On the policymaking front, global mentions of AI in legislative proceedings have never been higher. U.S. regulators passed more AI-related regulations in 2023 than ever before. Still, many expressed concerns about AI’s ability to generate deepfakes and impact elections. The public became more aware of AI, and studies suggest that they responded with nervousness.

Ray Perrault Co-director, AI Index

Our Supporting Partners

Analytics & Research Partners

Stay up to date on the AI Index by subscribing to the  Stanford HAI newsletter.

Engaging and Supporting Leaders to Develop an Inclusive and Equitable STEMM Research Ecosystem in Higher Education: A Workshop Planning Meeting #5

This is the fifth planning meeting for the Engaging and Supporting Leaders to Develop an Inclusive and Equitable STEMM Research Ecosystem in Higher Education: A Workshop.

Melissa E. Wynn

[email protected]

Responsible Staff Officers

• Melissa E. Wynn  

Additional Project Staff

• Maria Lund Dahlberg  
• Andrea Dalagan  

• Newsletters

IE 11 Not Supported

East carolina university studies how best to use ai, the university is leading research efforts with 19 of its counterparts on the use of artificial intelligence in education. ecu researchers are also working to develop new ai tools for students and researchers..

Financing of Public Higher Education Institutions in India

• First Online: 25 January 2023

Cite this chapter

• Jinusha Panigrahi 3  

138 Accesses

The Education for All (EFA) movement and universalisation of secondary education put pressure on the higher education sector to expand. The resource constraints did not permit the public exchequer to extend adequate funding support to an expanding higher education sector. The reforms initiated indicated a transformation from institutional financing to student-based financing in higher education. These changes also brought about changes in the allocation policies from an input-based funding to output-based or outcome-based funding. Higher education institutions across the globe and in India are devising strategies to mobilise non-governmental resources. This chapter examines the process of allocation of resources to selected state-level universities and their respective affiliated colleges and their capacities to mobilise resources through various strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

The chapter is based on the CPRHE/NIEPA’s major research study on “Financing of Public Higher Education Institutions in India: Institutional Responses to Decline in Public Funding” undertaken by the author during 2015–17 (Panigrahi, 2018a ).

Several states in USA make a comparison with similar types of institutions in other states while settling the per student costs in their funding formula (Salmi & Hauptman, 2006 ).

Scholarship figures for Odisha and Uttarakhand are merged with others category.

AISHE. (2018). All India survey on higher education (2017–2018) . Ministry of Human Resource Development, GoI.

Google Scholar  

Albrecht, D., & Ziderman, A. (1992). Funding mechanisms for higher education: Financing for stability, efficiency and responsiveness (Discussion Papers No 153) . World Bank.

Carnoy, M., Froumin, I., Loyalka, P. K., & Tilak, J. B. G. (2014). The concept of public goods, the state, and higher education finance: A view from the BRICs. Higher Education, 68 (3), 359–378.

Article   Google Scholar  

Dreze, J., & Sen, A. (1996). India: Economic development and social opportunity . Oxford University Press.

Lleras, M. P. (2004). Investing in human capital: A capital markets approach to student funding. Cambridge University Press.

McMahon, W. W. (2006). Education finance policy: Financing the non-market and social benefits. Journal of Education Finance, 32 (2), 264–284.

Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). (2015). Analysis of budgeted expenditure on education 2011–12 to 2013–14 . Bureau of Planning, Monitoring and Statistics, Department of Higher Education, Government of India.

Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). (2017). Analysis of budgeted expenditure on education 2013–14 to 2015–16 . Bureau of Planning, Monitoring and Statistics, Department of Higher Education, Government of India.

Musgrave, R. A., & Musgrave, P. (1989). Public finance in theory & practice (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Panigrahi, J. (2017). Resource allocation and innovative methods of financing higher education in India (CPRHE Research Paper 6). NUEPA.

Panigrahi, J. (2018a). Financing of higher education: Institutional responses to decline in public funding (A Research Synthesis Report). CPRHE/NIEPA.

Panigrahi, J. (2018b). Financing of Higher Education Institutions: Evidence from select case studies of universities in India. Arthika Charche: FPI Journal of Economics & Governance, 3 (1), 37–46.

Panigrahi, J. (2019 ). Institutional strategies to overcome declining public funding in higher education. In N. V. Varghese & J. Panigrahi (Eds.), India higher education report 2018: Financing of higher education (pp. 139–164). Sage.

Salmi, J., & Hauptman, A. M. (2006). Innovations in tertiary education financing: A comparative evaluation of allocation mechanisms. Education Working Paper Series, 4 , 38324.

Samuelson, P. (1954). The pure theory of public expenditure. Review of Economics and Statistics, 36 (4), 387–389.

Santiago, P., Tremblay, K., Basri, E., & Arnal, E. (2008). Tertiary education for the knowledge society (Volume 1), Special features: Governance, funding, quality . OECD.

Tilak, J. B. G. (2005). Higher education in Trishanku: Hanging between state and market. Economic and Political Weekly, 40 (37), 4029–4037.

Varghese, N. V., Panigrahi, J., & Rohatgi, A. (2018). Concentration of higher education institutions in India: A regional analysis (CPRHE Research Paper 11). NUEPA.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Policy Research in Higher Education, National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration, NIEPA Hostel, 17-B, Sri Aurobindo Marg, New Delhi, 110016, India

Jinusha Panigrahi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jinusha Panigrahi .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration, New Delhi, Delhi, India

N.V. Varghese

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration

About this chapter

Panigrahi, J. (2023). Financing of Public Higher Education Institutions in India. In: Varghese, N., Panigrahi, J. (eds) Financing of Higher Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7391-8_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7391-8_5

Published : 25 January 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-19-7390-1

Online ISBN : 978-981-19-7391-8

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research