The sharp reaction caused by the statement of the Union environment minister and his subsequent strategic retreat is on expected lines. He should have known that he was treading into a hostile area by questioning the credentials of a major special interest group. Indeed, in the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed person is the king, and it would be a heresy to question the standing of faculty in elite institutions. The discussion has raged from the meaning of ?world class?, constraints in achieving the world class, over 25% of world class students being the faculty making it the world class, to abysmally low level and defeatist arguments like politicians not belonging to the world class.
Interestingly, no one seems to seriously question the basic contention of the minister that the faculty in these premier institutions in terms of their research contributions is not world class. In fact, that is a fact taken for granted, and the arguments are focused mainly on pointing out why research in these institutions does not compare with those in good universities and institutions abroad. The people involved in the debate have been busy explaining reasons, and factors are identified as rigidities in the system, existence of constraints, low salary levels and excessive teaching loads. Of course, there was one worthy who derives satisfaction by stating that our politicians are not world class either!
I remember an eminent director of a law school once telling me that most ?high class? institutions in India are merely good screening institutions. Given the scarcity of these elite institutions whose graduates can reap a very high rate of return on their investments and, therefore, have overwhelming excess demand, more than half the job is done in selecting the best students. Much of the value addition to the students during their stay in these institutions comes from the quality of interaction among themselves and the competition to excel in order to earn high incomes.
The lone defence of the teachers was by Kapil Sibal and that is unconvincing. Does the fact that 25% of the faculty in IITs is their former students make them world-class teachers and researchers automatically? Sibal should have known that teaching and research require different skills and specialisation. It is important to realise that every profession grows in the institutional milieu in which it is placed. The students in these institutions have had to compete hard to get admitted and have to continue to compete hard to excel to be among the best. The rate of return depends on the excellence achieved. In contrast, the standards of getting in as a teacher are different and once a teacher becomes the professor, she does not have any incentive to publish.
The problem is not merely with the lack of competition. The non-competitive pay scales are an important barrier for the entry of the best into the profession of teaching. The mediocrity perpetuates it as they set the standards and institute an evaluation system. Once a person becomes a professor, there is no further incentive for him to publish. Equally concerning is the fact that the performance has nothing to do with the reward. I have known of an economics professor with several publications in reputed journals, such as Journal of Economic Theory and Econometrica, who recently retired from a well known university, which also has professors with little to show for publication in refereed journals. Perhaps, scholars like him are few and far between because that is simply being irrational!
The hierarchical system in many of the institutions does not provide the necessary environment for competent youngsters to thrive. The seniors often feel threatened when a youngster starts publishing in important journals. Not surprisingly, the bright young scholars do not find the atmosphere congenial. I know of a young lecturer in IIT Delhi who resigned from the
Institute a few years ago because he could not get leave to visit the International Centre for Theoretical Physics in Trieste for a couple of months. A rational scholar with good publications and seeking to continue to publish in reputed journals will move into places where the atmosphere is congenial, she is respected and her competitive spirit is rewarded.
Excellence cannot be achieved in the absence of incentives and accountability. Higher education in India still suffers from the licence-permit raj and is constrained by quantity, price and wage controls. The barrier to entry arising from the licence-permit raj reduces accessibility and constrains competition. Thus, in an area where India has a comparative advantage to make itself a hub for quality higher education, over 3 lakh Indian students end up seeking education outside the country. The ones within the control of the government, including the IITs and IIMs, have no incentive to expand, nor is it easy to get even the faculty of the quality they have at present for expansion. Those in the private sector get the licence even with poor faculty quality and run the institutions to make money. When there are controls on the price, they charge capitation fees and collect rent in various ways. Control on the faculty salaries makes the profession relatively unattractive and surely, if we have to attract world-class faculty to our institutions, we have to pay them competitive salaries. Besides not making teaching an attractive option to the new entrants, control over pay scales rules out the possibility of eminent Indian scholars, living overseas, returning to teach. Absence of competition condemns the teaching community to mediocrity. The same faculty could publish much more in a more competitive setting, but when performance has nothing to do with rewards, we cannot expect anything different. Over time, the entrenched teachers themselves become a major special interest group and would force a status quo.
The policymakers ought to realise the fact that the current policy regime has served only a few and has been instrumental in creating strong special interest groups. What is needed is an overhaul of the higher education policy in a comprehensive manner, not just talking about the class of faculty in a few elite institutions.
The author is director, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy. These are his personal views
