Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce

Slide 1

NEP 2020
Higher Education
Restructuring of (a) courses, (b) institutions, (c)
regulatory framework and (d) public funding
scheme tethered together to bring about a
complete makeover of education,
Market Determination of Education.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 2

NEP: A coherent
framework for
Privatisation
1. Academic Restructuring: tuned to market &
demand based variable teacher (service
delivery personnel) requirement.
2. Institutional
Restructuring: each HEI under
full control of a nominated management (BoG)
with unregulated powers over courses, number
of students, size of staff, terms & conditions of
employment, & internal decision-making
structures.
3. Regulatoryframework: non-interference in the
domain of BoGs, demands public self-
disclosure of information by each BoG.
4. Changed Funding scheme: facilitates self-
financing of public HEIs.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 3

NEP borrows a failed

model from US and UK

liberalisation models of US & UK, more

1. The
moderate than NEP, have caused disasters.
2. Institutional
debt and Student debt have
skyrocketed.
proportion of teachers have become low
3. Larger
paid contractual workers; contract renewal
contingent on demand.
4. Greaterself-financing & Race for ranking (for
market success) has led to marketability-based
differential pay for the tenured faculty.
domination of a managerial class; NEP
5. Gradual
seeks outright handing over of control to
outside managers.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 4

Academic
Restructuring
Creation of a common education market for
HEIs to do business.
A common market with uniform & flexible
structure and inter-institution mobility is
conducive for private players of all sizes and for
big online platforms.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 5

Academic Restructuring - I

FYUP with multiple exits: a curricular

1. Flexible
nightmare; semester wise teacher requirement to
become variable forever.
2. Greater uncertainties in teacher requirement due
to a questionable right to acquire degrees by
accumulating aggregate credits across disciplines,
institutions, and online & offline modes.
3. The online / blended modes are for ease of
raising revenue and cutting costs, not about
expanding the reach.
4. Multi-disciplinarity,
and more options, amenities
& inclusiveness are now each HEI’s responsibility
backed by provision for full cost recovery.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 6

Academic Restructuring - II

1. Academic Bank of Credits to facilitate offline

and online accumulation of credits from
anywhere.
2. NRF is not for augmenting research grants but
to centrally control who does the research and
what is allowed / facilitated to be researched
just like HEFA has been used to substitute
loans for infrastructure grants (e.g., for EWS
expansion in DU & its colleges).
3. Teachers’ Autonomy limited to choice of
books and pedagogy in teaching courses
approved by the BoG.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 7

Institutional
Restructuring
Reshaping HEIs into business units run by
managers with autonomy to decide products,
quality & processes in cost efficient manner.
Right to hire & fire is a logical fallout of
liberalising education market.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 8

Institutional Restructuring - I

1. Each HEI under a BoG - a self-renewing

management body once the Government
constitutes it for the first time.
2. BoG has following powers, which are now in
the domain of the UGC:
a. Courses to offer, number of students to
admit and educational outcomes;
b. Number of teachers & other employees
to recruit;
c. Terms and conditions of employment
including remuneration, increments,
promotion & continuation in service (the
last one now under the purview of Statutes &
Ordinances as per Acts such as the DU Act).
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 9

Institutional Restructuring - II

1. BoG also gets all other powers which now lie

with AC, EC & University Court
decision-making bodies, their
2. Internal
compositions, powers and procedures are to
be determined by each BoG for its own(ed)
HEI.
3. Two restrictions on BoG: (a) merit-based
choice of and nurturing of institutional
leaders; (b) merit-based promotion,
increments & continuation. Seniority et al. not
to be considerations at all.
4. “Merit” itself is to be defined and evaluated
by the BoG.
5. Regulations or accreditation agency will have
no say in the functioning of HEIs placed
under BoGs.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 10

High ranking makes an HEI fit for self-

financed expansion;
Low ranking invites punishment (closure,
takeover, restarting under new
management)

Regulatory
Restructuring
No Regulation on input specification or
processes, only outcomes measurement.
Private business freed from having to satisfy
input norms in education business.
Govt’s job is not input provision, but ensuring
outcomes-based rewards & penalty.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 11

Regulatory Restructuring - I

1. Nointerference in BoG’s domain:

a. inputs (teachers, staffing infrastructure)
b. processes terms & conditions of
employment.
c. products (courses or any other activities)
d. Mechanisms & procedures of decision
making on processes, products,
employment contracts, pay, etc.
e. Specification of educational outcomes
2. Accreditation process to assess HEI’s
progress against BoG’s institutional plan, and
some basic norms of (a) good governance and
(b) financial probity & viability.
3. BoGs to make public self-disclosure about
their products, procedures, processes, inputs,
educational outcomes and assessed progress.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 12

Regulatory Restructuring - II

1. Regulations to treat private and public HEIs

alike.
2. Regulations to promote private investment.
3. Regulations
to promote online education and
online modes of delivery
4. Regulations to allow /encourage public HEIs
to depend on private funding
to facilitate full cost recovery by
5. Regulations
HEIs, private or public.
6. NEP makes a ridiculous claim that mere self-
disclosure by unregulated BoGs prevents
commercialization!
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 13

Funding scheme
befitting new
framework
Full funding incompatible with freedom for
BoGs on courses, fees, staff size and pay.
Funding mechanism geared to creating incentives
for better “performing” HEIs to expand and
disincentive for others.
Not full funding for expansion, only incentives.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 14

Funding Framework –I

1. Each HEI made responsible for multi-

disciplinarity, FYUP, more student choices &
amenities, inclusion measures, etc.
2. The powers given to BOGs w.r.t fees, cost
recovery, cost efficiency (including employee
cost) are for a purpose.
a. Full funding claim undermined as size of
staff and their remuneration are to vary
across HEIs.
b. Full funding appears illogical: a BoG can
get more funds for its decision to pay
employees more while another, less!
c. The powers granted to the BoG enable
net revenue generation basis for
employees’ pay.
 Sanjaya Kumar Bohidar, Shri Ram College of Commerce
Slide 15

Funding Framework -II

1. Funding by HEGC based on institutional plan

(IDP) by BoG & progress in meeting outcomes
specified in IDP.
2. While each HEI is to spend more towards
academic restructuring, inclusion, facilities, etc.
full funding provision is absent.
3. HEGC to disburse “scholarships and
developmental funds for launching new focus
areas and expanding quality programme
offerings.” – not full funding but incentives for
self-financed expansion.(No fund for recurring
salary payment for expanded faculty!)
4. A poor IDP with no new focus area or expansion
in quality offering means less funds (more self-
financing or reduction of expenditure on faculty
and other staff), when not outright closure.