 TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT EDUCATION

NPERC's Perspective

14.1 The NPERC, in its perspective on technical and management education underscored the following:

i) Need to unfailingly project the human face of technology.

ii) Technical and management education should pay attention to the real needs of our rural society and disadvantaged sections.

iii) A culture of eternal dependence on foreign technology should not be created.

This perspective is largely a restatement of NPE/POA and of the Science and Technology policy.

Brain Drain

14.2 Almost all the recommendations relate to specific modalities of implementation. The one recommendation which has policy implication is R.No. 229 relating to brain drain. The NPERC put forth the view that it should be compulsory for the graduates of IITs and RECs to serve at least three years within the country before going abroad as they receive high quality education at highly subsidised costs. The fact remains that the country has not been able to gainfully employ all the graduates passing out from technical institutions in the country, particularly in some disciplines. Further, in an age of 3c3 Š global interdependance, no country can afford to insulate itself from the emerging developments in the frontiers of science and technology, for insulation entails technological and economic stagnation and even regression. our young scientists and technologists should not be deprived of opportunities of interaction with institutions and academics outside the country and from acquiring valuable research and work experience abroad. Many of our professionals do return to the country after study/ work abroad. This trend should further increase with the modernisation and technological upgradation of the economy, the increasing availability of modern facilities in industry, universities and research institutions and the more liberalised incentives for NRI investment. If properly utilised, the Indian professionals abroad can constitute a brain bank. We are of the view that all efforts should be made to ensure that environment for science and technology in the country is attractive enough for talented persons. However, we do not consider regulatory legislation as advisable. one of us does not agree with the last point.

Thrust Area Schemes

14.3 The NPERC had recommended a detailed evaluation of the thrust area schemes by a national level expert committee (R.No.221). These schemes are extremely important because of their linkages with economy. Therefore, a proper system of monitoring and evaluation is extremely important. We have been informed that large scale funding has been provided for these schemes only during the last three years and that it would be premature to have the schemes evaluated by a national level expert committee. Therefore, we suggest that a detailed evaluation be taken up in 1994-95, the third year of the Eighth Plan (1992-97) by when the schemes would have operated on a large scale for about 5-6 years.

Community Polytechnics

14.4 R.No.222 suggested the revision of the scheme of community polytechnics on the basis of the report of the Kalbag Committee. The Department of Education, GOI, should take early decision on the reports of the Kalbagh Committee.

IITs

14.5 R.No.224 suggested early decision to be taken on the report of the IIT Review Committee. The Department of Education, GOI, should take early decision on the report.

AICTE

14.6 R.No.223 suggested that emergent steps should be taken to ensure that regional offices of the AICTE are fully staffed and that adequate authority and function are devolved on these offices. We have given a great deal of thought to the functioning of the AICTE Act. We do 3š3 Š appreciate the reasons which impelled its enactment. We are of the firm view that it is necessary to ensure the maintenance of standards in technical education. It cannot be gainsaid that there is no need for an all-India professional body in the field of technical education for planning, formulation and maintenance of norms and standards, accreditation, funding of priority areas, monitoring and evaluation, maintenance of parity of certification and awards, and ensuring the coordinated and integrated development of technical and management education. However, we feel that the role of AICTE should be akin to that of the UGC and that it should not be more regulatory than the UGC. We have explained in para 13.3 of the report the reasons why we cannot subscribe to the recommendation of the NPERC for vesting the UGC with statutory powers to regulate the opening of non- standard and sub-standard universities and colleges. We are of the view that the Regional Committees of the AICTE should be adequately staffed and that the Chairman of the Regional Committee should be an Education Minister of a State from the region, by rotation. The Regional Committee should have the power to make recommendations on the opening of new institutions, starting of

new courses and enhancing the intake within the framework of the guidelines laid down by the AICTE. The State Governments and the universities should issue the necessary approvals based on the recommendations of the Regional Committees only.

Future Perspective and Measures

14.7 The NPERC also made a number of recommendations regarding improvement of quality and standards, upgradation of infrastructure facilities, industry-institutions linkages, technology watch and manpower planning, promotion of R&D, special programmes for the disadvantaged, entrepreneurship development and continuing education and retraining programmes. In the revision of POA, these recommendations would have to be given due consideration.