By identifying transparency as the only mandatory good practice, The Prohibition of Unfair Practices in Technical Educational Institutions, Medical Educational Institutions and Universities Bill, 2010 seeks to equate good educational practices with good corporate practices. Profiteering in education would be justified, provided the account books are open. The Bill seeks to overcome the restrictions on commercialisation of education, which law courts have been consistently upholding, the Kerala State Higher Education Council submitted to the Parliamentary standing committee on HRD at the latter's sitting here on Tuesday.
The Bill enlarges the freedom of educational entrepreneurs by restricting the regulatory functions of the State. While the provisions in the Bill are commendable as far as they go, they do not go far enough, the memorandum submitted by the Council reads.
Transparency in functioning is an essential, but not an adequate condition for ensuring social and academic accountability of private professional educational institutions. There are no provisions to regulate the three vital functions of educational institutions, namely admission, fee and content of courses. There is no provision in the Bill for an admission procedure based on a Common Entrance Test (CET) and centralised counselling conducted by the agency of the State or allotment of seats among various categories of students, including Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe/Other Backward Communities/Minorities. There is also no provision for a differential fee structure on the basis of the income of students.
While there is a cap on the price of prospectus and fee that can be levied for entrance test, there is no cap on the amount of fee or other collections. What is more, the proposed legislation could even render the operation of admission and fee regulatory committees, set up by various State governments in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court, redundant. Through its studied silence on the quantum of fee, mode of admission and content of courses, the Bill seeks to limit the obligation of social and academic accountability of educational institutions to merely ensuring transparency in the process of admission and levy of fee, the memorandum argues.
The larger issues of social justice and excellence in education are totally ignored.
The provisions of the UGC draft regulations “Admission and Fee Structure in Private Aided and Unaided Professional Educational institutions, 2007” were much more wholesome than the present draft Bill. Relevant provisions of this draft bill should be incorporated in the present bill, the memorandum adds.
