VC choice fear

New Delhi, Aug. 1: The expert who proposed an overarching higher education regulator has criticised key provisions of the bill the Centre plans to bring in Parliament’s monsoon session to set up such a body.

Yashpal’s main objections are related to proposed rules that require vice-chancellors of central universities to be picked from a pool of candidates suggested by a collegium.

The noted professor believes having to choose from such a list will deny universities a say in deciding who should be their vice-chancellors while the collegium itself will “create an army of academic babus”.

“I strongly object to the notion that university bodies should have no say in who they want as their leader. The fact that the present system of appointing search committees does not always work properly is no excuse to infringe the right of universities to choose the person they like,” Yashpal has written in an article.

It was the Yashpal committee’s report of 2009 on Renovation and Rejuvenation of Higher Education that led to the idea of setting up the regulator, the National Commission on Higher Education and Research.

In the article, “Making our universities innovative and vigorous”, Yashpal has explained his objections about the two provisions of the bill drawn up by the HRD ministry.

According to the bill, the NCHER will subsume existing regulators such as the University Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE), National Council of Teacher Education and the Distance Education Council. The body will set standards.

The NCHER will have a chairperson and six other members to be appointed by the President on the recommendation of a selection committee headed by the Prime Minister.

The collegium will advise and make recommendations to the NCHER on co-ordination, maintenance of standards and promotion of research.

The NCHER will prepare a registry of possible candidates for vice-chancellors of central universities. The appointment will have to be made from a list of five. The collegium will recommend names for inclusion in the national registry to be maintained by the NCHER.

Yashpal said the university should have a role in the selection of the vice-chancellor. “The proposal of the task force might further enhance the powers of interference by babudom of governments or unscrupulous politicians,” he wrote.

On the collegium, Yashpal said it would create another layer, lead to delays, infringe on the autonomy of the universities and make the system dysfunctional. “It will create an army of academic babus with little function except adding to the viscosity of the system.” Asked about the article, Yashpal told The Telegraph that both the controversial provisions should be dropped.

Some states have opposed another provision in the bill, one that will require a new university to seek approval from the NCHER before starting operations.

The HRD ministry is expected to introduce three other bills — the National Academic Depository Bill, University for Innovation Bill and Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Bill — in the monsoon session that began today.

The academic depository bill seeks to create a database of degrees of school and university pass-outs to prevent mark sheet forgeries. The depository will establish and maintain, in electronic format, all certificates issued by universities, central and state school boards.

The bill on university for innovation aims to establish 14 varsities that will promote excellence in research. These will be theme-based institutions focusing on research in subjects such as energy, food security, environment, climate change, liberal arts, town planning and others.

But Yashpal suggested there was no need for such institutions. “This idea of an innovation university does not make much sense. In fact, all institutions should aim at innovation and excellence,” he said.

The bill on CBSE seeks to make the school board a statutory body to help it take independent decisions and expand its spread internationally.

Eleven education-related bills are already pending in Parliament. These include the Foreign Educational Institutions (regulations on entry and operation) bill, prohibition of unfair practices in technical educational institutions, medical educational institutions and universities bill, and the educational tribunal bill.