People's Democracy
(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)
No.
07
February 14, 2010
|
Vol. XXXIV
No.
07 February 14, 2010 |
On Draft
NCHER Bill 2010
Academia, Legislatures
Need Not Think but Follow New Commission�s Dictates
Vijender Sharma
THE
central government
constituted a task force on September 7, 2009, with joint
secretary (higher
Education) as its convener,
to aid and advise the central
government in the establishment of a commission for higher education
and research
as recommended by the Yashpal committee and National Knowledge
Commission. On
first of February, the ministry of human resource development uploaded
on its website
(http://www.education.nic.in/) the draft of National Commission for
Higher
Education and Research (NCHER) Bill, 2010 as approved by the task force
and
sought �feedback and suggestions from all stakeholders�.
As
one reads this draft bill, one finds that this is not to �promote�
but undermine �the autonomy of higher educational institutions�. This
is to
restructure higher education system for �competitive global
environment� and not
for catering to the aspirations of our youth. This is not for helping
state
governments to strengthen higher education but to snatch away from them
even
whatever their powers were left after education was included in the
concurrent
list of the constitution of
UNFOUNDED
PRESUMPTIONS
It
is presumed that by abolishing University
Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council of Technical Education
(AICTE) and
National Council of Teacher Education (NCTE) and establishing a seven
member
NCHER will lead to �renovation
and rejuvenation� of higher education. It is also presumed that the
selection committee,
consisting of the prime minister, speaker of Lok Sabha, the leader of
the opposition
in Lok Sabha and two ministers in charge of higher education and
medical
education [Section 5(5)], will chose
seven members, most competent for �renovation
and rejuvenation� of higher education
and will be the best brains and only brains
to shape the future of higher education in the country. It is further
presumed
that by according to the chairman and six other members of NCHER the
status of chief
election commissioner and Election Commissioners respectively [Section
12 (1)
and (2)], the ills of the UGC, AICTE and
NCTE and prevalent corruption in these institutions can never induce
the
proposed NCHER.
In
fact the concept of NCHER was ill thought out by the Yashpal committee
itself while responding to the neo-liberal agenda of the central
government.
Similar structure was proposed by the National Knowledge Commission led
by Sam
Pitroda with market oriented motives. Both were strongly rejected by
�all stakeholders�.
The
central government
has been privatising the work of permanent and perennial nature and
appointing
staff on contract basis through private manpower suppliers. The work
related to
security and sanitation has already been privatised. Now, its thrust is
to
privatise the entire ministerial work. The UGC has recently floated
tender for
the appointment of 130 employees for secretarial and administrative
work
through manpower service providers at low wages. The central government
seeks
to legalise contractual appointment of �academic,
management, accounting,
technical and scientific experts� in the NCHER [Section
14(3)]. The privatisation of such
work cannot be accepted.
COLLEGIUM:
AN
UNDEMOCRATIC
BODY
A �collegium�
will be
established consisting of �core Fellows and co-opted Fellows, being
persons of
eminence and integrity in academia in higher education and research�
[Section
17(1)]. Core Fellow has to be a national research professor, or a
recipient of
the Nobel Prize or Field Medal or Jnanpith award, or a member of an
Academy of
international standing [Section 17(3)]. The numbers of core Fellows and
their
appointing authority have not been provided in the draft bill. There is
no
provision under which states can recommend persons as core Fellows.
The co-opted
Fellows will
be chosen by core Fellows, to represent each state and each union
territory
from a panel of five persons recommended by the government of each such
state
or union territory. The election of the co-opted Fellows is very
complicated. The
state/UT representative has to muster first preference vote from at
least
two-third of the core Fellows present and voting. The core Fellows
while
electing co-opted Fellows will also �ensure representation to persons
with
expertise in such field of knowledge which, in their opinion, is not
adequately
represented in the collegium� [Section 17(5)].
Thus the
representatives
of states and UTs will have second class status as they have to depend
on the
support of core Fellows. The states and UTs have been treated with
contempt.
They will be at the mercy of the �wisdom� of core Fellows and may have
to
change their nominations to cover particular field of knowledge as
desired by
core Fellows. The term of core Fellows will be life time, while that of
co-opted Fellows will be five years. Lifetime appointments generate
vested
interests and akin to breeding corruption.
This
collegium will recommend
to the selection committee, constituted as mentioned above, a panel of
persons
for appointments of members and chairperson of the commission [Section
19(1)].
It has not been provided in the draft as to whether NCHER will be
created first
and then collegium or collegium first then NCHER.
MARGINALISATION
OF
STATES
This
collegium will also
make recommendations to the commission for the determination,
co-ordination,
maintenance of standards in higher education and research, a vision on
the emerging
trends in different fields of knowledge and inclusion of persons
eligible and
qualified to be appointed as vice chancellor of a university in the
national registry.
The names of suitable persons eligible and qualified for appointment as
vice chancellor
of a university for inclusion in the national registry proposed to the
commission
by the central government, state governments, or universities will be
referred
to the collegium for assessing their suitability and competence
[Section 20(2)].
The power of
the states
to appoint vice chancellors of their state universities will be taken
away.
They have to depend first on the recommendation of the collegium,
heavily
dominated by core Fellows appointed for lifetime, for the inclusion of
persons
in the national registry and then on the list of five persons provided
by the commission.
No person will be appointed as the vice chancellor if his/her name is
not
included in the National Registry.
The NCHER
will be all
powerful. Once it comes into being, the powers of the state
legislatures to
start new universities will be seriously eroded. They have to be
established in
accordance with the norms and processes specified by the commission.
And, in
order to start functioning they have to get �authorisation� from the
commission
to award any degree or diploma.
CENTRALISED
STRUCTURE
The NCHER
will develop
national curriculum framework, guide universities in revising course
curricula,
specify norms of academic quality for accreditation, affiliation of
colleges,
and governance in universities, and minimum eligibility conditions for
appointment of vice chancellor of any university [Section 24]. It will
develop
policies for interaction between students and teachers. It will take
necessary
measures including schemes for gradually enabling colleges affiliated
to
universities to function in an autonomous manner independent of such
affiliation. The coordination, determination and promotion of standards
in
distance education systems will also come under it [Section 56(3)].
It will also
specify the
norms for financing higher education institutions, principles of
allocation of
grants for their maintenance and development and will disburse grants.
The
principal of giving block grants, rather than financing higher
education
institutions on the basis of their requirements, will be introduced
[Section
45]. Thus there will be a total centralized structure with no scope for
the
academic activity in accordance with requirements of the states and
areas. Much
trumpeted recommendation of the Yashpal committee regarding academic
freedom of
teachers and institutions of higher education is being put underfoot.
There
would be no scope for different syllabi in different states based on
their
socio-cultural conditions.
The
commission will
prepare, every five years, a report on the state of higher education
and
research in every State and its relation to national trends. The
governor of
every state will get such report laid before the legislative assembly
along
with an explanatory memorandum on the action taken, or proposed to be
taken,
thereon in respect of each recommendation made by the commission
[Section 27].
Thus the state governments will be forced to implement the agenda set
by the commission
and the powers of the state legislatures will be restricted.
However, the central government has retained powers [Section
29] to frame in consultation
with the state governments and the commission a national
policy, for the development of higher education and
research, which shall guide the commission.
RETROGRADE
PROPOSAL
On
what basis, the central government thinks that all the ailments of the
UGC,
AICTE and NCTE cannot affect the NCHER. After all, these bodies were
also
established with similar intentions for which NCHER is being proposed!
The
understanding of the seven members of the commission will decide what
should
happen in the field of higher education in
We
have enough experience of how the education curriculum and structural
framework
of educational institutions have been communalized. We also have
experience
that policy thrust of these bodies and education ministry changes with
the
change in persons. Some of the issues which would fasten the process of
commercialization of higher education taken up by the present Human
Resource
Development minister Kapil Sibal on priority basis were not the
priority of the
previous ministry.
The
proposal to establish NCHER reflects the tendency of the central
government
towards centralisation of higher education. It negates the role of
state
governments and academia in strengthening the higher education system
in their
respective areas and in the country as a whole. It will prove to be
retrograde
for the development of higher education in
