Education in Support of Viksit Bharat

 India aspires to become a vishwaguru. Prime Minister Modi recently outlined six key pillars that will drive the country’s journey towards this goal. These are: making India a global manufacturing hub; reviving the glory of Indian Knowledge System; ensuring every dining table in the world has at least one Indian product; powering green energy; expanding tourism; and working for inclusive development of the world, especially the Global South.

Surprisingly, strengthening the current Indian education system was not listed as a priority for advancing India to a great power status. While some may argue that revitalising the Indian knowledge system to its ancient glory is essential, this would involve overcoming significant historical and practical challenges. Ancient Indian knowledge flourished during the Early Vedic Era (2500–1000 BCE), reaching remarkable heights in knowledge management that involves acquisition, retention, dissemination, and creation. However, during the Later Vedic Period (starting around 1000 BCE), the system deteriorated due to internal contradictions. Focus shifted from knowledge acquisition to rituals and mantra recitation, and exclusion of vast segments of the population, notably women, from education.

Reviving this ancient knowledge system would require bridging a gap of nearly three millennia and would likely take several decades — possibly over fifty years, if not more — to achieve. Given the fast-paced, technology-driven world we live in, the country does not have the luxury of such a long timeline. Therefore, the immediate priority should be to strengthen and enhance the current education system through focused efforts to improve its quality.

India’s Human Capital

With a median age of 28.4 years, India boasts the youngest population in the world, a fact often cited in discussions of its potential demographic dividend. Yet, the country has struggled to harness this potential due to systemic issues in its education system, both at the school and higher education levels. Alarmingly, 58% of students drop out before reaching secondary school, and in 2023, 80% of Indian employers reported difficulties in finding qualified talent, underscoring the poor quality of higher education.

The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 is widely viewed as a solution to these challenges, promising to address the deficiencies of previous policies like NEP 1968 and NPE 1986, all of which emphasised improving educational quality. However, NEP 2020’s implementation lacks insights from past policy failures. Without understanding why earlier policies fell short, there is a risk that the same mistakes may be repeated, a luxury India cannot afford.

Demographic dividends are fleeting, and for India, this advantage will begin to diminish around 2040. Therefore, the country urgently needs a transformative overhaul of its education system and cannot afford to rely on slow-paced incremental changes.

Teachers are critical change-agents who can drive the transformative shifts needed in the education system. In India, nearly 11.5 lakh schools require training for approximately 1.15 crore teachers, while over 1,200 universities and 56,000 colleges need to upskill around 16 lakh faculty members. Addressing this massive undertaking necessitates a well-thought-out, systematic and structured approach to achieve the desired educational reforms.

Indian education institutions need to revamp their pedagogy to align with the learning styles and preferences of Generations Z and Alpha, who are currently in schools and universities.

Budgetary Outlay for Education

Numerous committees have repeatedly recommended that the government allocate at least 6% of the country’s GDP to education, but this target remains unmet. In fact, education spending has declined from 4.5% in 1999 to just 2.9% in 2024. This reduction is compounded by uneven distribution of funds. Elite institutions such as the IITs, NITs, and IIMs receive a disproportionate share of the central government’s higher education funding. Despite enrolling only about 3% of students of the country, these institutions receive over 50% of the central funding. In contrast, public institutions, where nearly 97% of students are enrolled, receive far less financial support. This disparity results from the government’s focus on improving the global rankings of a few select institutions rather than addressing the broader needs of the education sector. To foster meaningful progress, the government must reassess its budgetary priorities. The crucial question is: Should the aim be to establish a few world-class universities, or to create a truly world-class education system?

Ranking of Universities

There are over 150 university-ranking systems worldwide, with Times Higher Education (THE), QS, and Shanghai being among the most prominent. Many countries have developed their own ranking systems tailored to their respective national priorities. Notably, while a few, such as the one from Shanghai Jiao Tong University, are not driven by commercial interests, most rankings are promoted by large corporations where commercial considerations often overshadow educational goals.

India’s National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) is largely modelled after the criteria used by THE and QS. However, Indian policy makers need to recognise that the country’s unique educational and environmental context requires a different approach. NIRF primarily evaluates teaching-learning in institutions based on proxy parameters like teacher-to-student ratio, the number of PhD-holding faculty members, library resources, and laboratory equipment and number of classrooms. Unfortunately, it does not assess the value added to students’ knowledge and skills at the time of graduation.

With advancements in technology, including artificial intelligence, it is now feasible to measure these educational outcomes fairly accurately. Furthermore, the current emphasis on the volume of publications in peer-reviewed journals often overshadows the contributions universities make to social, economic, and industrial development at the local, regional and national levels – their main role.

While some may argue that the suggested parameters are difficult to measure, the crucial question is: should we measure what is of value or value what we measure? Rather than uncritically adopting international ranking methodologies, Indian policymakers should develop systems that align with the country’s specific needs and priorities.

Although reviving ancient Indian knowledge systems is important, the primary focus should be on enhancing the quality of education across the nation’s institutions.