Under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, a District Education Officer can impose a fine on a school operating without government approval. Yet a private university can apparently run professional courses without the requisite recognition, leaving hundreds of students to face an uncertain future.
Surajmal University, located in Kichha, about 12 km from Rudrapur, the district headquarters of Udham Singh Nagar in Uttarakhand, is a private institution. Like many private educational institutions, it appears to have been established with the expectation of generating profits. Among the courses it offers are B.Sc. Nursing and General Nursing and Midwifery (GNM), of four and three years' duration respectively.
When the first batch of GNM students graduated, they discovered that their qualification was not recognised by the Indian Nursing Council (INC), as a nursing qualification ought to be. The B.Sc. Nursing students soon realised that they, too, faced the same predicament. Their future suddenly looked bleak. Who would employ them without a recognised degree?
The university's website mentions "INC Suitability Approval" for these two courses, whatever that phrase may mean. If the courses do not have the recognition required under the applicable norms, the university has a responsibility to explain this clearly to students and parents. Families are paying substantial fees—often from their hard-earned income and, in some cases, through loans. The annual fee for the B.Sc. Nursing course is reportedly more than Rs. 1 lakh. A primary school cannot function without government approval, yet here we have a university offering professional courses whose recognition is in question.
The students have been protesting outside the university's main gate for about a month. After the police initially tried to browbeat them, the District Magistrate of Udham Singh Nagar submitted an enquiry report to the state government on 4 August. The state government subsequently issued a show-cause notice to the university.
On 19 August, the Deputy Secretary, Medical Health and Medical Education, Government of Uttarakhand, asked Surajmal University to explain why its Essentiality Certificate should not be annulled in view of alleged violations of established INC norms. The university has also been asked to put admissions for the next academic year on hold.
It now appears that some action may finally be taken against the university. But what happens to the students who have already graduated, those who are about to graduate, and those still enrolled remains unclear. The government must work out a solution that protects the careers of these students. This could involve transferring them to another recognised institution or, if necessary, taking over the university and putting its affairs in order.
The Surajmal University episode, however, is only a symptom of a much larger crisis in Indian education. If we leave aside the country's elite institutions, the state of education in ordinary schools, colleges and even universities is deeply disturbing. In far too many places, education has become a farce. Teachers, managements and education department officials have collectively failed students.
Teaching is often only nominal. Where institutions are fortunate enough to have teachers, students may still remain disoriented. Unfair means during examinations are widespread. When students have not been taught properly, copying becomes almost inevitable. External examiners may be willing to award marks in return for money. Education, in such circumstances, becomes synonymous with corruption.
Private universities themselves are established under Acts of state legislatures. There have long been allegations that money and political influence play a role in securing such approvals and appointments. The office of the Vice-Chancellor, which should represent academic leadership and integrity, can instead become entangled in political and financial interests. When universities are treated as sources of revenue rather than as institutions devoted to learning, the consequences are bound to be disastrous.
The same is true of appointments and administration. If academic institutions become instruments of patronage and rent-seeking, those who run them have little incentive to uphold academic standards. The result is a system in which every possible source of revenue is exploited, while the interests of students are relegated to the background.
When privatisation, liberalisation and globalisation became the dominant policy framework, private educational institutions were presented as an answer to the inadequacies of the government-run education system. The assumption was that competition and private investment would improve efficiency and quality. But private institutions have not necessarily delivered on that promise.
A government institution, at least in principle, is accountable to the public through established administrative and legislative mechanisms. In a private institution, accountability can be far less transparent. Owners may be distant from day-to-day operations, while Vice-Chancellors can be reduced to little more than administrators with limited authority. Students and parents are often left wondering whom they should approach when something goes seriously wrong.
In such a situation, where can one expect honest teaching and genuine learning? Students are increasingly left to fend for themselves. If they learn anything, it is often because of their own efforts rather than because the educational system has enabled them to learn.
The deeper problem is that an education system does not merely produce degrees; it also shapes the values and habits of the people who pass through it. If students grow up in an environment where rules can be bypassed, marks can be purchased and qualifications can be obtained without learning, they may come to regard such behaviour as normal.
When people shaped by such a system eventually occupy positions of responsibility, they may reproduce the same culture in public life. The consequences are visible in the erosion of institutional credibility and the growing perception that money and influence can purchase almost anything.
There is therefore little reason to expect our present education system to produce the innovators, researchers and socially responsible citizens that the country needs. A system designed primarily around examinations, certificates and commercial interests will inevitably encourage mediocrity unless teaching and learning are placed back at its centre.
The movement undertaken by the Cockroach Janata Party, which began around the issue of the NEET paper leak, has now expanded to encompass broader questions of educational reform. So far, much of the discussion has focused on infrastructure and institutional arrangements. But the more difficult question is how to ensure that teachers actually perform their responsibilities honestly and effectively.
Quality education ultimately depends on what happens inside the classroom. Infrastructure can provide the physical conditions for learning, but it cannot substitute for a committed teacher. And education is not merely the transfer of information. It also involves the cultivation of values. Those values can be inculcated only when teachers themselves practise them.
That is the real challenge. Can teachers who have themselves emerged from a deeply compromised educational system transform themselves into the inspirational, quintessential gurus that a healthy education system requires?
The crisis at Surajmal University should therefore not be treated as an isolated administrative irregularity. It should prompt a larger question: if a private educational institution fails its students so fundamentally that their degrees and careers are placed at risk, should the government merely issue notices and impose penalties, or should it intervene directly to protect the students?
Where private management has demonstrably failed and students' futures are at stake, nationalisation or government takeover may sometimes be the only effective remedy. Education is too important to be left to institutions that treat students primarily as sources of revenue. The ultimate responsibility for protecting the right to meaningful education must rest with the state.
---
The writer is Secretary General, Socialist Party (India)
Comments
Post a Comment
NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor