Too specialised ?

The Yashpal Committee report says that specialised universities in our country are a bane and do not contribute to broad-based knowledge of students. Educationists worldwide feel that research in single-subject universities is bound to suffer.

June 02, 2013 12:16 pm | Updated 05:38 pm IST

As its policy initiative states, the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) intends to create a robust and vast system of higher and technical education. For this to happen, the Ministry concurs with the view expressed by Yashpal Committee that in order to prevent fragmentation of knowledge, single-discipline or specialised universities should not be created.

The Yashpal Committee report on renovation and rejuvenation of higher education, which recommends protecting intellectual autonomy of educational institutions and creation of an all-encompassing National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER) to replace or subsume existing regulatory bodies, conceptualises the university as a place for diverse growth of knowledge. This idea agrees well with the emerging consensus amongst higher education systems worldwide that an institution can legitimately be called a university only when it addresses a number of academic subject areas, academicians say, explaining that research culture in single-subject universities is bound to suffer.

The essence of academic life is in trans-disciplinary knowledge and discovery, they believe, and caution that establishing specialised universities for science and humanities, medicine, engineering, law, teacher education, physical education, agriculture, marine sciences, veterinary science, agriculture, and fisheries would be detrimental to the higher education system.

Holistic education

Says M. Anandakrishnan, Chairman, IIT Kanpur: “The presence of specialised universities is unfortunate. Fortunately single-subject universities are confined only to a few States in India. The concept of a university as defined by the Radhakrishnan and Kothari Commissions rests of the idea that a graduating student must be equipped with broad-based knowledge. The student may have a core subject, but must have a broad knowledge of other areas.” Elaborating, Prof. Anandakrishnan cautions that the knowledge base would be stunted in single-subject universities. For instance, understanding biological principles is important for students of a sports university. When sports-related courses are offered in a university with a composite outlook, the best people in the biology department will teach the students. Likewise, students in any branch need to know the economics related to the society they live in.

The latest technological developments

“Ideally universities have to provide opportunities to get holistic education, enabling students to move forward beyond what they studied in school. In broad-based universities, multiple career avenues could be explored. On the other hand, the options are very limited in single-subject universities, and will cause frustration to students,” he said.

Interference

It is improper to call specialised subject institutions by the name, universities. Single-discipline institutions such as Indian Institutes of Management, Indian Institutes of Technology and National Institutes of Technology also grant diplomas and degrees, but they are not universities. Standards in the so-called single-subject universities are deplorable, which is most of the time accentuated due to excessive interference by regulatory bodies,” says P.S. Manisundaram, the first Principal of Regional Engineering College, Tiruchi (now National Institute of Technology – Tiruchi). Universities need to be assertive in exercising their autonomy, Prof. Manisundaram advised.

Though it is desired, the idea of restoring universities composite character is difficult to implement in the prevailing scenario wherein regulatory bodies or professional councils created for recognising courses and promoting professional institutions end up diluting academic autonomy of universities, according to C. Thangamuthu, former Chairman of National Council for Teacher Education’s Southern Regional Council, Bangalore.

The existing norm that a specialised university must secure the consent of relevant regulatory bodies for the courses it offers is harmful. A medical university, for instance, has to secure the nod of the Medical Council of India, Indian Nursing Council, Pharmacy Council of India, Dental Council of India and Rehabilitation Council. The medical university gets fragmented by the regulatory bodies that reinforce artificial barriers, says Prof. Thangamuthu, advocating restriction of the role of regulatory bodies to post facto ratification of the courses.

As Thangamuthu says, “The very idea of a specialised university is false. What actually happens is that such universities end up starting various departments haphazardly in contravention of UGC norms, wreaking havoc with the higher education system. Ultimately, students struggle to make sense of their degrees as they find themselves ineligible for pursuing doctorates or applying for jobs.”

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.