VIEWS ON CURRENT PATTERN OF MANAGEMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
[Conduct of Survey . Findings Other Issues]
5.0 THE SURVEY An opinion survey was conducted on various aspects of current status of management of higher education. The questionnaires* were distributed to the participants of the three seminars conducted at Hyderabad, Varanasi and Jaipur. It was also mailed to the officers of all the 152 universities in India and other eminent persons connected with higher education.
In all, 3000 questionnairs were mailed of which 295 responded. The respondents included Vice-Chancellors, Members of Senate and Syndicate, Members of Academic Council, University professors, Readers and Lectures, Members of Boards of Studies, Registrars, Government Officials and others.
The following observations are drawn from the above opinion
5.1 HOW UNIVERSITIES ACCOMPLISH THEIR OBJECTIVE ON THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF UNIVERSITY'S OBJECTIVES, MOST OF THE PEOPLE ARE SATISFIED WITH WHAT THE UNIVERSITIES DO IN THE FOLLOWING ASPECTS:
- In holding examinations, conferring degrees, titles etc.
- In instituting degrees, titles, diplomas, and other academic distinctions.
- In providing instructions and training.
THERE IS TOTAL DISSATISFACTION OVER WHAT UNIVERSITIES DO IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS:
- In instituting fellowships
- In administering hostels for the students
* as in appendix
71
- in instituting, managing and maintaining research Institutes and University Colleges
THERE IS GENERAL DISSATISFACTION IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS:
- In instituting teaching positions
- In exercising control over the students of the University
- In conferring honorary degrees, titles and such distinctions
- in providing for research and for advancement and dissemination of knowledge.
THERE HAS BEEN NEITHER A SATISFACTORY NOTE NOR A DISSATISFACTORY NOTE IN THE FOLLOWING ASPECTS
Granting approvals and autonmy to affiliating colleges.
5.2. AUTHORITIES AND BODIES
5.2.1 SENATE / COURT With regards to the Senate / Court the respondents feel that its effectiveness is just adequate.
With regards to the constitution of Senate Court the following categories of membership are considered appropriate, in the order of their importance:
- Heads of University Departments of Study and Research
- Representation from Teachers
- Directors of Collegiate, School, Technical, Medical and Legal education
- Principals of affiliated colleges
- The University Librarian
- Members of Syndicate, who are otherwise not members
- Nominees of the Chancellor
- The Director of Physical Education
- Representation of Registered graduates
- Representation from College Committees.
72
THE FOLLOWING MEMBERSHIPS WERE OPINED INAPPROPRIATE:
- Representation from members of Legislative Assembly
- Representation from Headmasters of Higher Secondary Schools
- Nominees of Pro-Chancellor
- University Students
On the question if any category was removed from the membership of the Senate / Court, will it affect the effectiveness, the respondents opined that IF THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES WERE REMOVED THE EFFECTIVENESS WILL IMPROVE:
- Representation from members of Legislative Assembly
In almost all the other cases, respondents feel that there will not be any change if they are removed, but in the following cases there is firm indication that IF THEY ARE REMOVED EFFICIENCY WILL DECREASE:
- The Heads of University Departments of study and Research
- Principals of affiliated colleges
- The Directors of Collegiate, School, Technical, Medical and Legal education.
- The elected representation from teachers.
- The opinion about the ideal size of the Senate is that the size be between 31 AND 60 members.
THE RESPONDENTS DECIDEDLY DISAGREE WITH THE IDEA OF ABOLITION OF SENATE / COURT.
5.2.2ACADEMIC COUNCIL Most of the respondents feel that the effectiveness of the Academic Council is just adequate.
Respondents feel that all the present memberships, the Directors of Collegiate, Technical, and Medical education, the Chairmen of Boards of Studies of all UG and FG courses. the Deans of all the faculties, Representation from the Principals of affiliated colleges, Heads of Departments of Studies and Research in the University are appropriate for the Academic Council.
73
5.2.3SYNDICATE / EXECUTIVE COUNCIL The respondents are of the opinion that the present composition of membership in Syndicate / Executive Board is appropriate. The categories included in the questionnaire were.
1. Secretary to Government in charge of Education
2. The Directors of Collegiate, Technical, Medical and Legal Education
3. Principals, by ELECTION among themselves
4. Teachers, by ELECTION among themselves
5. University Professor nominated by the Chancellor
6. Senate Court members, by ELECTION within Senate Court.
7. Academic Experts nominated by the Chancellor
8. University Reader nominated by the Vice-Chancellor
9. University Lecturer nominated by the Vice-Chancellor
10. Chancellor's nominees
Respondents are of the opinion that there should be no sectional representation in the Syndicate / Executive Board.
THEY ALSO FEEL THAT THE SIZE OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD SHOULD NOT BE MORE THAN 15.
5.2.4 BOARD OF STUDIES The respondents feel that the functioning of the Boards of Studies is just adequate.
They consider all the membership categories in the Board of studies, except that of students are appropriate. The categories included in the survey were: Head of the University Departments, Senior Faculty from University Departments, Subject specialists from other universities, Senior Faculty from colleges and students.
Likewise, they opine that any of the categories except that of students, if removed, would decrease the Boards'effectiveness. if the category of students is removed, they consider, the effectivness will increse.
74
The respondents are also of the opinion that a permanent cell like curriculum development cell cannot be a substitute for the present Boards of Studies.
5.3 OFFICERS
5.3.1 VICE-CHANCELLOR The respondents consider that all the three categories, viz. Government's nominess, Senate's nominee and Syndicate's nominee, are appropriate for membership in the selection committee for panel of candidates for Vice-Chancellor's appointment.
They affirm that the Visitor / Chancellor will be the appropriate person to select the Vice-Chancellor in perference to the State Government or the Syndicate.
The opinion on the term of Office for the Vice-Chancellor is that it should be 5 years.
Majority of the respondents feel that the powers exercised by the Vice-Chancellor are perfectly in order.
However, majority of the respondents are of the opinion that VICE-CHANCELLOR'S FREEDOM TO DISCHARGE HIS RESPONSIBILITIES IS INADEQUATE.
5.3.2 PRO-VICE-CHANCELLOR THEY FEEL THAT AN OFFICE OF PRO-VICE-CHANCELLOR WILL FACILIATE SMOOTHER FUNCTIONING OF THE UNIVERSITY.
5.3.3 REGISTRAR The respondents prefer a 5 year term for the Registrar.
They feel that the powers exercised by the Registrar are generally adequate.
They Consider that the choice of the Registrar should be Left to the decision of the Vice-Chancellor.
They do not agree, however, to the view that the Registrar's term of office should be co-terminus with that of the Vice- Chancellor.
75
5.4 INTERFACE RELATIONSHIPS The respondents rate the autonomy enjoyed by the University authorities/bodies as inadequate.
They also rate the cooperation extended by the State Government as just adequate.
They rate the process of decision-making as sluggish where the University authorities and Government authorities are required to collaborate.
THE RESPONDENTS ARE OF THE OPINION THAT A STATE LEVEL APEX BODY, SUCH AS A STATE COUNCIL FOR HIGHER EDUCATION,IF CONSTITUTED ON THE LINES OF UGC WOULD IMPROVE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF UNIVERSITY FUNCTIONING.
5.5 DECENTRALISATION IN DECISION MAKING A GREAT MAJORITY OF THE RESPONDENTS FEEL THAT DECISIONMAKING IN THE UNIVERSITY NEEDS TO BE DECENTRALISED.
They suggest that independent and final decision on all academic matters [including the relevant statute making] be left to the Academic Council.
They also suggest that the Syndicate be vested with only administrative / financial powers, leaving all other decisions to the respective authorities/ bodies.
It is also suggested that the University must have full freedom to make and amend the Statutes without waiting for the approval of the Governor / Government.
At the same time, they feel that the University's suggestion on amendments to the University Acts must be duly placed before the legislature for its consideration and decision,
They feel that in an affiliating system of the University, the University's burden in respect of overall supervision of conditions of affilation and other, administrative matters is normal, the burden being neither excessive nor insignificant.
Wherever it is considered to be in "excess" the respondents suggest a statutory body of College Development Council, with about 10 members, to function with necessary powers to decide on the affiliation / development of the colleges under the jurisdication of the University.
76
They suggest that, the University departments of studies research be conferred full academic autonomy, (including conduct of examinations for students] under the overall supervision of the concerned Dean / Director of the Schools.
It is also suggested that the Universities grant autonomy to more number of colleges so that every University will ultimately become a unitary one.
The respondents feel that in due course of time, the autonomous colleges, be conferred with Deemed University status if their performance is uniformly satisfactory and they be delinked from the parental University.
5.6 OTHER ISSUES: 1. The respondents overwhelmingly suggest establishment of an autonomous Accreditation and Assessment Council which will be competent to evaluate the academic Universities and decide performance of Colleges accreditation.
2. They also suggest that such an accreditation by an autonomous council be an essential condition for institutions to become eligible for Government UGC grants.
3. A Council for Central Universities to function as an apex policy planning body for all Central Universities is suggested.
4. They also suggest that the decision of such a Council for Central Universitites should be binding on the Executive Councils of various Central Universities.
5. They overwhelmingly subscribe to the view that a State Council for Higher Education comprising all Vice-Chancellors of State Universities and a few academicians/ educationists would facilitate the management of Higher Education.
6. They also think that such an autonomous State Council for Higher Education must be vested with Statutory Powers, including those concerned with fund allocation for State Universities and Colleges.
7. They approve the idea that all guidelines pertaining to Under-Graduate education be decided by the State Council for Higher Education and those pertaining to Post-graduate education be decided by the UGC [Central].
77
8. They also approve the view that the Chancellor must obtain the opinion of the chairman of State Council or UGC, as the case may be, before giving consent, to any legislation relating to Higher Education.
9. They are of the view that elections are major source of conflict in University bodies and they subscribe to the view of abolition of election in all University bodies.
10. They suggest that the University departments be grouped into Schools / Centre under the overall control of a Director / Dear, for the respective Schools / Centres.
11. They suggest that the heads of departments must occupy their offices for a specific tenure, say, five years, and the renewal to depend upon their satisfactory performance. There is almost unanimity among the respondents to have a Planning Board in every University, consisting of academics and user agencies, which will lay down the broad outlines / perspectives of University programmes every five years.
13. They also overwhelmingly approve the idea of instituting a Grievance Removal Cell i.e. a standing judicial tribunal of three High Court Judges which shall dispose of all disputes/grievances including interpretation of Acts / Statutes Regulations and that their decision shall be binding an all concerned.
WE HAVE KEPT IN VIEW THE FINDINGS OF THE SURVEY AS ABOVE IN MAKING OUR RECOMMENDATIONS
78