Notwithstanding the overwhelming weight of informed academic opinion having turned against the varsity affiliation system, university managements across the country continue to expand the ambit of their operations by recklessly affiliating common and garden varieties of colleges with dubious and suspect antecedents. Vidya Pandit reports from Lucknow

Despite over two decades of debate since the National Policy on Education (NPE 1986) first mooted the idea of discarding the university affiliation system — a distinctive characteristic of tertiary education in the Indian subcontinent — and replacing it with a network of academically and financially autonomous colleges designing their own curriculums and awarding institutional degrees, the ancient regime shows no signs of this widely desired metamorphosis. On the contrary with new colleges mushrooming cross-country in response to the rising demand for tertiary education, the huge number of colleges affiliated with India’s major universities has transformed them into the largest in the world. 

Thus Andhra University has 405 affiliated undergrad colleges; Bangalore University 400; Osmania 390 and Bombay University 300 (see box p. 59). Quite clearly supervising the operations, conducting examinations and awarding degrees to students of such large numbers of affiliated colleges stretches the resources of parent universities to the limit, leaving little time for them to supervise postgrad education and undertake research studies which should be their first priorities.

“The affiliating system of colleges was originally designed when their number in a university was small. The university could then effectively oversee the working of the colleges, act as an examining body and award degrees on their behalf. The system has now become unwieldy and it is becoming increasingly difficult for a university to attend to the varied needs of individual colleges. The only safe and better way to improve the quality of undergraduate education is to delink most colleges from the affiliating structure. Colleges with academic and operative freedom are doing better and have more credibility,” comments a concept paper Tenth Five-Year Plan in Higher Education authored by Dr. Arun Nigavekar, chairman of the University Grants Commission in 2003.

Yet it’s a telling commentary of the extent to which the higher education system has become change resistant that despite the overwhelming weight of informed academic opinion having turned against the varsity affiliation system, university managements across the country continue to expand the ambit of their operations by recklessly affiliating common and garden varieties of colleges with dubious and suspect antecedents. And perhaps nowhere else in the subcontinent is the abuse of the varsity affiliation system more apparent than in the Hindi heartland state of Uttar Pradesh — India’s most populous (166 million) and arguably most lawless, state.

With its 35 universities which cater to 1.1 million students, UP has engendered some of the most glaring misuses of the affiliation system. The latest of these which is rocking the state capital Lucknow, is the consequence of an innovative interpretation of the Uttar Pradesh Universities Act, 1973 which has enabled university managements to rake in millions through the promotion of off campus education centres.

It is notable that nowhere does the UP State Universities Act allow for off campus study centres to function. States s.7 (4) (c) of the Act: “…the university shall have the power/duties to hold examinations for, and to grant and confer degrees, diplomas and other academic distinctions to and on persons who have pursued a course of study by correspondence whether residing within the area of the university or not, and have been registered by the university, subject to such conditions as may be laid down in the statutes and ordinances as external candidates.”

The state’s governor, T.V. Rajeshwar Rao, also chancellor of the state’s universities obviously having read the Act well, has launched a crusade against these centres. On June 5, he ordered seven UP universities, including Chaudhry Charan Singh University, Meerut; Veer Bahadur Singh Poorvanchal University, Jaunpur; MJP Rohilkhand University, Bareily and Bundelkhand University, Jhansi to shut down their distance education centres and ordered a probe into how these universities had been allowed to run unauthorised centres for so long. A special inquiry was also ordered into the distance education centres of several agricultural universities including Chandrashekhar Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur; Narendra Dev University of Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Faizabad, and Sardar VB Patel University of Agriculture and Technology, Meerut.

Once the inquiry reports started rolling into Lucknow, it became abundantly clear these universities had interpreted the Act with reckless abandon. They were found guilty of having unauthorisedly started off campus study centres and granting affiliations to colleges and institutes for offering courses such as M.Tech and physiotherapy, without bothering to check if they had installed minimal lab and gymnasium facilities.

The first target of inquiry in this scam of yet undisclosed proportions was Bundelkhand University (estb. 1975), an institution low on academic standards but one which in the last couple of years has morphed into one of the state’s richest universities. In blaring full-page advertisements in Lucknow’s dailies, its management boasted of “earning” Rs.150 crore in the past five years and contrasted its resource generation efforts with the meagre Rs.6.92 crore grant that the state government has provided it since its inception. This ad campaign also displayed shopping arcades, recreation centres, water fountains and lush green lawns as its ‘achievements’ and demanded that central status be accorded to the university. But unimpressed by the self-laudatory claims of Bundelkhand University’s vice-chancellor Ramesh Chandra, governor Rajeshwara Rao sacked him on July 17, after an inquiry report pronounced him guilty of recklessly granting affiliations to numerous colleges in violation of the provisions of the UP Universities Act, statutes and relevant ordinances.

Likewise Prof. Ram Pal Singh, vice-chancellor of Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut was sacked on August 5 after a probe panel found him guilty of illegally constituting inspection panels for affiliating unqualified institutions and colleges with the university. He was also found guilty of granting affiliations in gross violation of prescribed procedure and norms for B.Ed courses and of admitting students under the management quota against norms for illegal consideration, aka bribes.

Awdhesh Kumar, manager of a Lucknow based college, which has been trying to get affiliation for its B.Ed programme for the past two years, explains how money has come to play a huge role in the university affiliation system. “The first step is to get a ‘no objection certificate’ from the state government. The price is Rs.100,000. Next we are required to deposit Rs.500,000 as endowment fund with the affiliating university and Rs.300,000 into the reserve of the National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE). The NCTE team, which came to inspect my college, demanded accommodation in a 5-star hotel, a shopping allowance beside other incidentals. The team from the university had its own similar demands. After investing almost Rs.80 lakh in infrastructure, we have two options. Either to spend on value additions such as more books and computers or pay to keep the inspectors happy. The latter is obviously a more sensible choice. The inspection team from NCTE clearly told me, ‘We earn from your college just this one time, while you will earn all your life. So why grudge us these small amounts?’ That’s the nitty-gritty of the affiliation system which is of vital importance to new colleges,” says Kumar.

Nor are apex level academics such as Singh and Chandra exceptions in a state where vice-chancellors have manipulated the affiliation system to enrich themselves. N. Gautam, vice-chancellor of Veer Bahardur Singh Purvanchal University (VBSPU), Jaunpur, has been accused of granting affiliations for subjects such as physiotherapy and computer application through distance education besides holding M.Tech and LLM classes in off campus study centres. A whopping 809 dubious teaching centres across the country offering highly technical and advanced courses are affiliated to this university, some of them spread as far afield as Gujarat, Punjab and Tamil Nadu.

An inquiry report into the operations of VBSPU also queries the appointment of ‘technical associates’ who head off campus study centres. These functionaries, says the report are mere middlemen allowed to deduct 35 percent of the tuition fees paid by students. While such funding innovations are advertised as financial creativity in an era when state-funding for higher education is drying up, students clutching degrees cheaper than the paper they are printed on, have little learning or skills acquisition to show for their money and time.

“The biggest problem,” says Umesh Chandra Vashistha, head of the department of education, Lucknow University, “is that we are being forced into a situation of dispensing more affiliations each year. There is a deep nexus which exists between politics, bureaucracy and an academic mafia. Two years ago the board of studies of Lucknow University suggested a moratorium on affiliations for B.Ed courses. But this was opposed by the National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE) on the ground that more teachers are needed. Thus we have been forced into a situation where we are inspecting colleges which with only 17 books in their library are demanding affiliation for B.Ed programmes. What we have now is a system of administrative rather than academic affiliation.”

But while the great majority of careerist academics are helpless bystanders as university standards and reputations of the few excellent colleges within each varsity are being run into the ground, there is a growing chorus of protest against the dumbing down of higher education in general and the “curse of the university affiliation system” in particular.

Comments Dr. Frazer Mascarenhas, principal of Mumbai’s highly regarded St. Xavier’s College: “Mumbai University was, and perhaps still is, considered among the country’s best. Its administrators are good but with more than 300 institutions affiliated to it, how can they deliver? It’s too heavy a task. Then also consider that the colleges affiliated to universities are of widely varying capabilities. Thus, when taking decisions on any issue, it is often the lowest common standard which is approved, whether it’s for the examination system, framing the syllabus or any other issue, since that’s what all colleges can handle. The autonomous system is better for some good colleges and the University Grants Commission has been pushing for it, but a lot of universities will not want to let go their high performing colleges since these are the ones which bring them prestige.”

Affiliations also translate into paper work. Hence, major Indian universities which have affiliated hundreds of undergrad colleges are burdened with too much administrative work. As a result they have little time or energy for academic learning, especially research. “Administrative work has definitely overtaken academic work in the present system. Universities have been turned into mere exam-conducting bodies with little control over the quality of education dispensed in affiliated institutions. In the long run this erodes the reputation of the affiliating university,” says Dr. P.V. Indiresan, the Delhi-based former director of IIT-Madras.

Dr. Anil Wilson, the forthright principal of the St. Stephen’s College, Delhi, widely acknowledged as India’s premier liberal arts college which is a cherished showpiece of Delhi University, is more critical of the affiliation system. “It has outlived its purpose. The sheer size to which universities have grown is the biggest pitfall. But, is anyone listening? Dinosaurs became extinct because of their big size; the same applies to universities. With the size of universities growing, it adversely affects their academic capability, administrative structure and related work. Delhi University has 80 affiliated colleges, so how can the university administration meet all their needs? Consequently academic improvement and excellence is neglected. The executive and other decision-making bodies are weighed down with administrative work and have little time to discuss academic issues. The affiliation system has produced non-productive structures that impede quality education,” says Wilson.

Box

Expert opinion on collegiate autonomy

In view of mixed experiences with the system of affiliation, autonomous colleges will be helped to develop in large numbers until the affiliating system is replaced by a freer and more creative association of universities with colleges. Similarly, the creation of autonomous departments within universities on a selective basis will be encouraged. Autonomy and freedom will be accompanied by accountability – National Policy on Education, 1986

The objective of granting autonomy to certain colleges is to provide academic freedom, especially in designing their curricula, evolving new methods of teaching, research and learning; framing rules for admission, prescribing courses of study, setting examination papers and conducting exams – Annual report of the Union department of Secondary and Higher Education (1999-2000)

The affiliating system of colleges was originally designed when their number in a university was small. The university could then effectively oversee the working of the colleges, act as an examining body and award degrees on their behalf. The system has now become unwieldy and it is becoming increasingly difficult for a university to attend to the varied needs of individual colleges. The colleges do not have the freedom to modernise their curricula and make them locally relevant… The only safe and better way to improve the quality of undergraduate education is to delink most of the colleges from the affiliating structure. Colleges with academic and operative freedom are doing better and have more credibility – Xth Plan of the University Grants Commission

We don’t believe in the process of affiliation for postgraduate courses. Primarily because at the postgrad level learning extends beyond the classroom, syllabus and exam to peer learning, exploration and project work — methods which require the passion of the instructor. This calls for empowerment of teachers and affiliation does not provide for that – Prof. S. Sadagopan, founder director of the Indian Institute of Information Technology, Bangalore

Yet perhaps the sharpest criticism of the “curse” of the university affiliation system comes from V.C. Kulandaiswamy, chairman of the Tamil Virtual University and former vice-chancellor of Madurai Kamraj University. In a hard-hitting op-ed page column in The Hindu (May 18, 2005) Kulandaiswamy unequivocally called for the varsity affiliation system to “vanish from Indian soil”. “The outdated affiliation system is a curse on our higher education system. It has converted colleges into coaching centres and teachers into mere tutors. Steps must be taken to liberate the higher education system from the emaciating effects of this curse. Autonomy must be granted to as many deserving colleges as possible. Colleges marginally falling short of autonomy requirements must be helped to fulfil the requirements and gain autonomy. For each major university having a number of affiliated colleges, an autonomous board of examinations under the full charge of a pro vice-chancellor should be established and the board of management of the university must be concerned only with the university departments and autonomous colleges… There must be encouragement to establish private universities with adequate safeguards to ensure quality and healthy management,” argues Kulandaiswamy.

Nor is it mere coincidence that India’s globally respected Indian Institutes of Technology and Indian Institutes of Management (IITs and IIMs) have studiously steered clear of the affiliation system. “Once we start affiliating institutes, enormous pressures will be brought to bear on us to cut corners and dilute standards in affiliates. To foreclose that possibility affiliation has never been discussed within the coordinating council of IIMs. The IIMs have taken a policy decision not to press for deemed university status either. We have certain internal quality systems in place which cannot be replicated,” says Prof. Devi Singh, director IIM-Lucknow.

However despite its manifest infirmities best exemplified in Uttar Pradesh, the affiliation system has its defenders. Comments Radhey Shyam Yadav, pro vice-chancellor of Lucknow University: “The provision in the Constitution for equality forces social commitment upon university managements which have to provide for all who aspire to higher education. Promoting, registering and starting a new university is a time-consuming and expensive affair and not possible in all circumstances. A university also has limitations of infrastructure and faculty, which precludes admitting all those who seek admission. Affiliation of smaller colleges is the only option.”

Similarly Dr. D. Viswanathan vice-chancellor of the Chennai-based Anna University makes a stout defence of the system which he says is best suited to Indian conditions because of the capacity supply-demand imbalance. “The growth in collegiate capacity has not kept up with the huge demand resulting in a greater need to monitor their operations. A classic example of this need is provided by private sector deemed universities in Tamil Nadu which do not restrict student intake, violate all norms and regulations and are wholly commercial. Moreover, non-affiliated colleges do not meet expectations with regard to several parameters including faculty numbers, laboratory and library facilities. Therefore they need the guidance and supervision of the affiliating university,” says Vishwanathan.

But with the cost in terms of falling teaching-learning standards and loss of reputation of the country’s best colleges exceeding the benefits of the university affiliation system, there’s a snowballing consensus in favour of granting colleges with proven records of scholastic excellence greater academic and operational autonomy. UGC, the apex body for promoting and coordinating university education in the country, has emerged as a vocal proponent of granting autonomy to colleges with proven academic credentials. It has identified about 150 colleges as institutions of excellence and intends providing development assistance to colleges with institutionalised accountability systems and NAAC accreditation.

“The assessment and accreditation of individual colleges by NAAC (National Assessment and Accreditation Council) and a recent analysis of the accreditation reports of about 100 colleges in the state of Tamil Nadu by an independent expert committee clearly indicate that autonomous colleges sustain quality performance in all areas. Along with their better capability, autonomy raises them to a higher level of efficiency in operations,” says Dr. Rajasekharan Pillai vice-chairman of UGC.

Likewise a Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE) committee chaired by West Bengal education minister Kanti Biswas which submitted its report to the Union HRD ministry on June 29 has recommended that colleges with NAAC’s A+ or A++ rating and identified as institutions with potential for excellence, should be granted autonomy without inspection. Moreover the Biswas Committee has recommended that autonomous colleges should be given progressively greater financial autonomy as well.

Refreshingly several state governments have already begun to act on these recommendations. In Karnataka seven colleges under Bangalore University (including Christ, Jyoti Nivas, St. Josephs and Mount Carmel) and another seven under Mangalore University were formally granted autonomous status on August 17. This follows the grant of autonomy to five colleges under Karnatak and Kuvempu universities on July 7.

But autonomy is not always welcomed by college managements. B.P. Masih, principal of Lucknow Christian College, accredited as a grade A college by NAAC, is cautious about its acceptability. “The grant of autonomy means we are free to experiment and evolve richer teaching learning systems. But within the college whenever there has been discussion on the autonomy issue, teachers have been quick to threaten revolt as they fear that their pay and retirement benefits will be adversely affected and the management will have an upper hand in college affairs. This despite the fact that they have been assured otherwise,” he says.

With the drive towards making a larger number of colleges academically — and financially — autonomous gathering momentum and given that only 6-7 percent of India’s college age population is accommodated by the higher education system, UP’s former director of education H.P. Pandey makes a guarded case for allowing greater private participation in higher education as the panacea for the ills of affiliation. “Private agencies have an important role to play in the field of education and by inviting such participation we ensure greater capacity creation. However, education is largely a matter of social responsibility so it cannot be completely left to market forces,” warns Pandey.

That the peril of privatisation can go horribly wrong was demonstrated in Chattisgarh. Earlier this year, a Supreme Court judgement derecognised over 100 Chattisgarh universities by quashing the state government Act under which they were established. Over 100,000 students enrolled in these ‘universities’ were left in the lurch, clutching worthless degrees.

Nevertheless Dr. M.S. Thimmappa, vice-chancellor of Bangalore University believes that autonomous private sector universities have a useful role to play provided they are carefully monitored. “An ideal monitoring system would be to empower national education bodies like University Grants Commission, the All India Council for Technical Education, the Medical Council of India and the like to set academic norms for higher education. Each college should be accredited by one of these bodies or their subsidiaries such as NAAC. Based on their rating the market forces will decide their future,” he says.

Meanwhile even while admitting that the world over the affiliating system “is not very welcome”, UGC chairman Arun Nigavekar is cautious about the grant of complete autonomy to colleges. “True, affiliation does not make much sense in an era where we are talking of borderless education. There is a need to have small structures that can be more open and accept the challenges of globalisation through flexible teaching-learning systems. However for a country like India, it would be difficult to dispense with the affiliating structure overnight. The immediate need is to create autonomous academic, financial and administrative institutes that can work in a more open and transparent manner within the existing affiliating system. This is the approach of UGC in the Xth Plan which aims to make clever and innovative use of technology blended with open and flexible structures. In the Xth Plan the number of colleges that have opted for autonomy is around 200. This is in addition to the 150 existing autonomous colleges. Now it is the responsibility of the universities and state governments to encourage autonomous colleges,” says Nigavekar.