The government has responded positively, albeit after some hand-wringing, to this summer’s student protests and underscored its sensitivity to youth aspirations and anxieties.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s announcement of a new committee under Infosys chairman Nandan Nilekani to fix the technological and credibility gaps in India’s centralized examination system is a signal that the authorities have heeded a key demand of students worried about their careers and future.
Nilekani and his talented team have a challenge on their hands and it will require their combined wisdom to install, ab initio, an effective new system to replace the existing leaky one. A major focus area will be remedial action at the National Testing Agency, which was entirely reliant on private contractors.
The Nilekani panel must also strive to be inclusive, since digital access is still not universal in India, which leaves space for scamsters. While hopes have risen of a viable exam architecture that endures, two other vital issues need a closer look.
The first is our lack of an independent regulator in the education sector. With the proliferation of private engineering and medical colleges, universities and other specialized institutions, not to mention coaching centres, a free-for-all has ensued with student welfare and skill upgradation taking a backseat.
The University Grants Commission has some regulatory oversight, but it is limited in scope and its writ does not run across much of the private educational spectrum. An evident nexus between politicians, bureaucrats and coaching shops further accentuates the need for a regulator with functional autonomy.
Many structural suggestions have been put forth and they deserve to be taken seriously. What the government must, however, avoid is the appointment of a regulator seen as beholden to it, as that risks deepening an apparent trust gap between New Delhi and millions of students.
More importantly, the Centre must take states into confidence as they try to design an institution built for the stated purpose.
There is a broader issue at hand too: the need for an overhaul of India’s education sector. It is amply clear that our current system—right from primary school to higher education—is in the throes of a crisis and how it’s resolved will shape the country’s future.
While problems at the primary level need to be sorted out through meaningful centre-state cooperation, higher education calls for a vision document. One problem with India’s approach has been a fixation with making students job-ready; pedagogical quality gets sacrificed at the altar of quick fixes.
This has led to a deficit of critical-thinking abilities among students and may have weakened their capacity to solve complex problems. As AI looms larger over the economy, fixing that assumes urgency. And if the policy focus remains on quantity over quality, news of faulty bridges and the like should not surprise us.
Although job-orientation matters, it is worth asking: are all Indian graduates employable? Are enough jobs being created to absorb all the degree-holders who emerge every year? Jobless engineers being forced to apply for posts of peons should be a wake-up call.
There are no easy solutions, but structural reforms should also aim for a less centralized education sector, one which offers myriad academic paths that exhibit rivalry on quality and are not just affordable, but widely trusted to be free of grubby interests at some invisible level.