Free up the learning curve
On the recommendation of a NITI Aayog Committee, on which the authors were privileged to serve (as chair and as a member), the human resource development (HRD) ministry and the University Grants Commission (UGC) initiated an important reform in higher education in February 2018. Under the reform, colleges receiving scores of 3.51 or higher on a scale of 0 to 4 from the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), or accredited by the National Accreditation Board (NAB) in three or more programmes with scores of 750 or more in each programme, automatically become eligible for autonomy. The reform also opens the door to autonomy to somewhat lesser performing colleges. But the procedure for it is more elaborate rather than automatic.
The experience with the implementation of autonomy, to date, offers an interesting window to the difficulty of reform within the command and control system with multiple power centres that has remained undisturbed in higher education. Without determination and persistence on the part of actors and entities piloting reforms, odds are in favour of the survival of status quo.
With autonomy, a college gains full control of its destiny. Academically, it is free to introduce new courses and programmes and review, restructure and redesign the existing ones. Administratively, it can constitute its own governing bodies, including the academic council, board of studies and finance committee. And, on the financial front, it has full freedom to fix its tuition fees. Other than a nominal upfront fee at the time of grant of autonomy, it owes no affiliation fee to its affiliating university.
To date, 59 colleges have received autonomy under the new rules, with another 100-plus at various stages of the process. Remarkably, only one of these 59 colleges — Government VYT Post-Graduate College in Chhattisgarh — is owned and run by the government. All others are government-aided private institutions.
Our laws being what they are, UGC cannot automatically confer autonomy on colleges. Instead, the eligible college must apply for it to its affiliating university and the government of the state in which it is located. In several cases, the first hurdle the reform faced was at the level of the college: its administration was hesitant to apply lest it leads to discontinuation of government funding. It took repeated assurances directly and through the state governments to bring the colleges on board.