SUBMITTED
REPRESENTATION OF AIFUCTO TO CHAIRMAN, UGC
ON
INCLUSIVE DEVELOPMENT
New Delhi
;
25-2-2008
AIFUCTO
welcomes the Prime Minister’s projection of XI Plan as an Education Plan. The
proposed increase in the gross budgetary support to education from 7.7% to over 19%, which would
translate into a five-fold increase in public spending on education in the 11th
plan as compared with the 10th Plan, would be an unprecedented
financial support for education in
India
, if it actually materializes.
At the same time, this in itself would not ensure “faster and more inclusive
growth” in higher education, as being claimed by the Planning Commission. The
triple objectives of expansion, inclusion and excellence
in higher education would also require that appropriate programmes are drawn up
for greater promotion of public funded institutions and regulation of private
initiatives in higher education.
But the implementation
strategies being promoted by the Planning Commission and the NKC to a large
extent and MHRD to some extent involve not only greater public investment and
greater private investment in higher education, but greater integration between
the two within a largely unregulated framework. The proposals of the Planning
Commission and NKC for hiking fees even in public institutions, for commercial
use of public lands by universities, for setting up private corporate universities
through land grant , for providing a level playing field for foreign for-profit
investors in education, for differential salaries to teachers and of MHRD for
providing financial assistance to private deemed universities envisage a substantial partnership between public and
private entities in higher education.
It is true that there is
nothing new about public-private partnerships. Higher education has flourished
in this country in the past through such partnerships. But it is highly
doubtful whether such partnerships would bring about positive results now as in
the past. This is because the context of partnerships has substantially changed
over the last two decades. Education was not a money spinning proposition till
nineties of the last century. Private investment that came in was charitable in
its nature and objectives. Since the introduction of the policies of Liberalization,
Privatization and Globalization (LPG), there has been a sea change in the
nature and objectives of private investment in higher education. It has become
much larger and for-profit. The executive and the judiciary have been proactive
in facilitating this change. There has been little legislative intervention to
preserve and strengthen the constitutional ethos of education as a charitable
activity. The propaganda unleashed by the World Bank that higher education is a
non-merit good has had its impact on policy decisions, executive actions and
judicial pronouncements ,so much so that
that trading in education has now come
to be perceived as a legitimate activity .
In
the scenario prevailing in the country at present, a project of increasing
access, quality and equity in higher education would definitely require very
large investment, both public and private. But it would also be necessary to
keep public and private investments distinct and separate, so that public
assets are not appropriated for private profits. Further, stringent regulatory
frameworks should be put in place to enforce adequate social and academic
control over private institutions to ensure both equity and quality in the
services provided by them. The
Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model of development that the Planning
Commission, NKC and MHRD recommend in higher education is tilted more in favour
of the private entrepreneurs and against the general public.
The above strategy of development would
defeat the goals of inclusive development and promotion of quality in higher
education. The net result is likely to be as follows. There would be a
large number of professional institutions and courses offering a wide variety
of choices to those who can pay. But there would only be a marginal increase in
the number of students who join the higher education stream. The growing middle
class which has benefited from the liberalization regime would bring in the marginal
addition. Tall claims about inclusive and sustainable development would prove
to be a mirage. Students belonging to lower middle class and poorer sections would
not be absorbed due to substantial hike in fees. Marginal increases in the
number of scholarships would help only to sustain the rhetoric of inclusion,
without actually facilitating the same. The institutions and courses that
promote the study of basic disciplines and research would get more and more
marginalized due to paucity of public support and private patronage. Sustainable
development would suffer as basic disciplines and fundamental research would be
pushed to the background in a competitive environment with its emphasis on
immediate returns, both for the educational entrepreneur and the student
consumer. Universities would cease to be
centres for the adventure of ideas and become market places for trading
educational wares. The universities would continue to preserve of the statusquo
of restricted access and contain the opposition against its conservatism by
co-opting a minuscule of bright young men and women from the lower classes
through a system of patronage offered in the form of merit-cum-means
scholarships.
In this context, AIFUCTO welcomes the
recommendations of the National Conference of Vice Chancellors which has
recognized the synergies among the goals of expansion, equity and excellence
and has suggested appropriate programmes for the promotion of public funded
institutions, providing support to marginalized sections and regions and
greater regulatory measures over private entrepreneurs in higher education. AIFUCTO
particularly welcomes the draft UGC (Admission and Fee Structure in Private
Aided and Unaided Professional Educational Institutions) Regulations 2007.
AIFUCTO would organize a national campaign for the implementation of the
regulations. AIFUCTO would further
request UGC to play a more proactive role for ensuring that the prospect of
greater investment in education during the XI Plan is turned into an
opportunity for the balanced development of higher education.
Thomas
Joseph Asok Barman
President General
Secretary
To
The
Chairman, UGC
New
Delhi
25-2-2008
Dear
Sir
UGC PAY REVIEW
COMMITTEE-REQUEST FOR EXPEDITING THE DELIBERATIONS -REG
AIFUCTO
had its first meeting with Prof. Chadda Committee on
22-11-2007
. The Committee held extensive
discussions with AIFUCTO on the questionnaire to be sent to universities and
colleges for the collection of relevant data regarding the status of
implementation of the V Pay Review Committee recommendations. AIFUCTO notes
with great satisfaction the comprehensive approach taken by the committee, and
the gesture shown by the Committee, especially by the Chairman, for
incorporating the views of AIFUCTO in the preparation of the questionnaire. But
it is regrettable that there has been little progress in the work of the
Committee since then, probably due to absence of adequate administrative
support for the proper working of the Pay Review Committee. AIFUCTO would
request the UGC Chairman to intervene immediately to expedite the working of
the Pay Review Committee to ensure that there is no further delay in the
working of the Committee.
It
is also requested that immediate steps be taken to include accompanists and
coaches with in the purview of the UGC pay review, in fulfillment of the long
standing demand of AIFUCTO.
A
copy of the representation already submitted by AIFUCTO to Prof. Chadda Committee is enclosed herewith for the reference of
the UGC Chairman.
Yours
faithfully
Ashok
Barman
General
Secretary
To
The
Chairman, UGC
New
Delhi
25-2-2008
Dear
Sir
Early
Compliance with the Direction of High Court of Kerala in regard to
implementation of C.A.S. from
1-1-96
.
AIFUCTO
has been time and again requesting the UGC and MHRD to rectify a major anomaly
in the implementation of the Vth Pay Review Committee recommendations, which
has been instrumental in perpetuating great injustice to a section of the
teachers who were promoted to Selection Grade between
1-1-96
and
27-7-98
.
Such teachers were denied both benefits of fixation at 14940/- and reduction in
the number of years required for promotion from 16 to 11. Now the Hon. High
Court of Kerala has directed the Government of Kerala, UGC and MHRD to issue necessary
orders for implementation of CAS from
1-1-96
for the rectification of the anomaly.
AIFUCTO
would request the UGC to take the initiative for early compliance with the
directive of the High Court of Kerala so that there would be no further delay
in meeting the ends of justice in the matter.
Yours
faithfully
Ashok
Barman
To
The
Chairman, UGC
New
Delhi
25-2-2008
Dear
Sir
SARASWATHI
NARAYANAN
COLLEGE
,
MADURAI-
WITHDRAWAL OF AUTONOMY
–REG
AIFUCTO would like to draw the attention to the UGC to
the large scale malfunctioning of
Saraswathi
Narayan
College
,
Madurai
, which has recently been
conferred with autonomous status. The management has resorted to harassing
teachers and the principal by suspending them. Even though the suspended
teachers have been reinstated through court direction, salary is still denied
to them. Academic bodies have not been constituted as per UGC norms.
Syllabus has not been approved by
academic bodies. Still examinations are being held. Regulations regarding
appointment of teachers have been violated.
The expert committee of the Syndicate of the
Madurai
Kamaraj
University
which visited the college under instructions from UGC has already sent its
report highlighting the malpractices of the management. The Government of Tamil
Nadu has intiated steps for the taking over the administration of the college.
Under the circumstances, the management would misuse the autonomy granted to it to
perpetuate its misdeeds and to resist attempts of the university and the state
government to implement the rule of law in the college.
Considering all the above, AIFUCTO would request the
UGC to immediately suspend the autonomy granted to the college and take further
steps for the permanent withdrawal of the autonomy.
AIFUCTO would also request the UGC to appoint a Commission
to review the working of all autonomous colleges in the country and to postpone
a decision on further grant of autonomous status to colleges till the
Commission comes out with its report.
Thanking you
Yours faithfully
Ashok Barman
|