Implication of National Higher Education Policy on the Management Discipline

     

The draft National Education Policy 2019 prepared under the chairmanship of Dr.K.Kasturirangan, Former Chairman, ISRO has comprehensively covered the entire gamut of education starting from early childhood care and education to higher education. In the process of delving into the education sector, various allied aspects like regulatory and accreditation framework that governs the education sector; technological use; current issues that plague the sector; funding for institutions; vocational and teacher education  have been considered to arrive at the draft  policy built on the pillars of Access, Equity, Quality, Affordability and Accountability.

Since 'Management' as a discipline deals with the branch of knowledge that studies the principles and practices of managing resources, the policy has myriad implications for the management discipline because of the transformational nature of changes suggested in the regulatory framework of National Higher Education Policy. Under the prevailing regime, University Grants Commission (UGC) along with the regulator earmarked for a specific domain (eg. AICTE for Technical Education) perform overlapping regulatory roles which results in confusion and delay for institutions seeking grants, opening new departments, starting a programme in distance education mode and the like. This is expected to change with the introduction of a single regulatory body – National Higher Education Regulatory Authority (NHERA) for all forms of higher education. All other regulatory bodies like All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), Medical Council of India (MCI) that exist currently are expected to transfer their regulatory function to NHERA. Though the formation of NHERA may reduce the traditional hassles faced by the higher education institutions where they seek approvals from multiple regulatory bodies, formation of NHERA may result in concentration of power. If not managed properly, this may bring in new troubles for institutions.

With the existing regulatory bodies- AICTE, MCI, NCTE morphing into new Professional Standard Setting Bodies(PSSB), roles and responsibilities of these new PSSBs need to be redefined to suit their new avatars of developing professional standards for their respective fields. Redefining roles and responsibilities for these PSSBs will give raise to staffing needs which in turn needs to be filled by eminent people for providing intellectual leadership for their respective professions. The policy also speaks about the transition of University Grants Commission (UGC) from its present form of regulatory and funding roles into Higher Education Grants Council (HEGC) that will perform only the funding role alone. Thus the roles and responsibilities of the newly envisioned HEGC need to be drafted by taking cognizance of the funding role performed by UGC. Given the massive restructuring of regulatory and accreditation framework with the existing bodies transitioning into new units with reduced/changed roles and creation of a new apex body like Rashtriya Shiksha Aayog(RSA), change management has to be carried out at various levels in a structured  manner to seamlessly transition into the new way of functioning.

Secondly, the National Higher Education policy says that all existing institutions shall transition into any one of the following three types of institution by 2030.

·         Type 1 – research universities targeting an on-campus enrolment of 5000 -25000 or more students; providing top-notch research at par with global universities; 150-300 in numbers with the target of one such university for every 50 lakhs population

·         Type 2- teaching universities targeting an on-campus enrolment of 5000-25000 students; providing high quality teaching and research;1000-2000 in numbers with the target of hosting one such university for every 5 lakhs population

·         Type 3-colleges targeting an enrolment of 2000-5000 students to focus on high-quality teaching; 5000-10000 in numbers with the target of having one such college for every 2 lakhs population

In this case again, however laudable the aim may be, this idea sounds nothing short of being utopian. For the plan to see limelight there needs to be an unfailing commitment from the Centre combined with the presence of an able leader/leaders at various levels to obtain buy-in from various stakeholders and perform the execution. Execution of the policy can face: likely deterrence from various quarters like non-performing institutions with poor infrastructure or low enrollment that require to be shut down; resistance from existing institutions to change to the new nomenclature and stiff opposition from some states that may oppose the Centre's unilateral move in the subject area 'education' that falls under the Concurrent list.

Thirdly from the research perspective, research in the discipline of management in India like various other disciplines is in a nascent stage. Transforming into Type 1 research institutions and appropriate funding through the envisioned National Research Funding (NRF) will make research an attractive career option. This may to an extent (based on the world rankings of these type 1 research institutions) prevent brain drain. A far-fetched idea is to think of the emergence of Indian equivalents of consulting giants in Management - BCG and Mckinsey as a result of such impetus on research.

From the programme design perspective, the policy focuses on developing 21^st century capabilities and liberal education at the undergraduate level conceiving new combinations like music and chemistry at the Bachelor's level. Since management as a discipline focuses on theories and practices of administration, studying varied subjects will help students acquire knowledge about different subjects at the undergraduate level and learn practices of management associated with the application of these subjects in industries during their graduation. The flexibility in choosing courses for a programme and multiple entry and exit options while pursuing a programme is laudable and is likely to increase the gross enrollment ratio across disciplines.

Finally, lateral hiring for full-time faculty positions by inviting practitioners in management as mentioned in the policy will be fruitful only if compensation and perks offered for such positions are commensurate with what practitioners get in the corporate world. Thus the implication for hiring practitioners from corporate world for institutions will be an increased cash outflow.

In a nutshell, the policy puts forward lofty goals that require complete overhaul of the current system and creation of new agencies and working models at various levels. Time alone will tell whether this move, if implemented, will add value or result in the 'old wine in new bottle' situation.

References

(2019). Draft National Education Policy.

 

Author

Deepiga K.G

Ph.D Scholar Management