Indian Higher Education : The Quiet Death of Foreign Education Providers Bill

Some media reports emerged that the Indian Government has now quietly dropped the Foreign Education Provider Bill from its legislative agenda. This may not be surprising, given that this bill was around - in different forms - for more than 10 years now, but was never a priority; despite a late flourish during the first 100 days of the UPA government, this was never much talked about, debated or considered important enough.

Despite the disappointments this will bring, this may actually be good news. The bill, as it stood, was deeply flawed. It was conceived with the justification of stemming the flow of Indian students to universities abroad, worth $4 Billion of expenses a year: However, such mercantilism is out of step with the global world, and would have ended in a failure anyway. Given this limited goal, the bill was highly protectionist, focused on limiting any outflow that may happen from the Foreign Education providers' activities in India, and left little financial incentive for any foreign university to set up a campus in India. In its original form, the opportunity was only open to Top 500 universities in the world, another demonstration with India's obsession with prestigious education for its privileged, which demonstrated a poor understanding of how Higher Education institutions really operate [Most High Prestige institutions being concerned with limiting the access, rather than expanding]. Though a later amendment took this requirement (of being ranked in Top 500) away, overall the bill was impractical, disconnected from India's needs and requirements and little more than a political grandstanding.

That the political priorities have changed and the bill will be dropped is, therefore, completely unsurprising. The Indian middle class isn't the focus of the government anymore, and it was always unlikely that the government will spend its scarce political capital in pushing through a bill which would have still been highly unpopular, hitting the politicians where it really mattered, in their pockets. Though this may be disappointing for some foreign universities, most have already come to accept that Indian market will never open up (any residue optimism wiped out after a close reading of the proposed bill in question), and this should hardly change their approach to India. 

The only question worth exploring, therefore, whether the demise of the bill will leave Indian students disadvantaged, and the answer, reassuringly, is negative. Indian students need education, not foreign education: Whether foreign campuses are set up in India or not, has no impact on an average student's life prospects. It matters much more whether India can help develop a better Higher Education system on its own, and this is where minds and hearts need to be focused.

The current government's agenda is defined by a focus on eradicating poverty, and India can boast some serious achievements on that count. The rural poverty is noticeably down and literacy has improved across the board. Indeed, these achievements have not translated into overall prosperity and rather caused runaway price increases and consequent sluggishness of the economy (and a noticeable flight of capital) because the government failed to create conditions of productivity increases and achieve reduction of transaction costs. If anything, productivity growth has stalled, as bad education crowded out the diffusion of expertise through global exposure; the transaction costs have gone up with massive corruption, which usually accompany privatisation efforts of any state with weak institutions, and poor infrastructure. If Higher Education was one of the priority areas for the current government, for the next one, due after election of May 2014, it will be one of the life-or-disaster issues, as the relative rural prosperity must find a sustainable path to general prosperity and progress. Neither the productivity growth, nor enabling institutions, can really be achieved without a functioning Higher Education sector, which India somewhat lacks (outside a few elite institutions).

Foreign education providers, as planned in the now irrelevant bill, would not have solved any of these problems: They would have created more options for the already privileged 0.1% of the Indian students; they would have helped lure away the best researchers and teachers from Indian institutions, particularly the state funded ones, and would have created a further cycle of disadvantage at even the top end of the scholastic spectrum. However, enhancements through learning from established practices elsewhere would be of critical importance, and hopefully the demise of this high profile bill will now allow practical, grassroots conversations about academic collaboration, exchange and pathway programmes to assume a new seriousness, which, in effect, will be better for the country.

So, this is hardly a time of mourning, another sign of retrograde direction of Indian policy: This may be, instead, much needed return to realism and the opportunity to re-imagine the educational needs of the country. This may also be the time to bring a twenty-first century update in educational policy thinking - isn't foreign campuses so passe already - and to create space for new conversations about open qualifications and credit systems, technologies of learning, and a new risk- and outcome-based approach to regulatory systems rather than clinging to the old, planned economy ones.


From, Mousumi Mukherjee on Facebook: I am not advocating for foreign campuses here and am quite aware of the pipeline it creates to drain high achieving faculty and students to these campuses within the outside the country. But, the economy has now merged with the global neoliberal economy and even FDI has been passed by the Parliament; then how can protectionist nationalist education policy help the situation? How will the gap between the needs of the global economy and the out-dated knowledge students gain in colleges and universities be bridged? This is more crucial in a country where majority of the poor students seek education with high hopes of social mobility but end up frustrated without jobs as their degrees do not match the skill-sets the economy needs. Its not that there aren't jobs but even people with the degrees do not have the required skill-sets to do the job and in the govt. sectors out-dated recruitment policies even block eligible people from getting jobs. The higher education sector is now an unregulated lawless market where sub-standard foreign & domestic education providers are operating within the country fleecing the gullible students. You write: "This may also be the time to bring a twenty-first century update in educational policy thinking - isn't foreign campuses so passe already - and to create space for new conversations about open qualifications and credit systems, technologies of learning, and a new risk- and outcome-based approach to regulatory systems rather than clinging to the old, planned economy ones." The country worked on the basis of a planned economy for many years and now even with the merger with the global economy, the Planning Commission keeps preparing reports with the global rhetoric of systemic change for every sector of the economy. But, who has the skills to propose and draft legislation for proper systemic change? Also, there are some great academics and scholars working within the higher ed. sector (some of whom are my friends and teachers) with deep content knowledge in their own field & area of studies; but do they really have the skill sets they need to propose and implement systemic educational change? I know well about some expats who returned to India with high ideals and hopes of making changes within the higher ed sector are highly disillusioned. Rather than being able to propose and make systemic change they are having to slowly comply with the out-dated system and become part of it.
My response: Many thanks for this comment. I shall take the liberty of copying your comment also on my blog, as that will reach to a wider audience. I am obviously not condoning the state of Indian Education system, which you correctly and adequately describe here, and the primary cause of this decline is the lack of imagination of the policy-makers. My broader argument is that even the Foreign Providers' Bill was affected by similar lack of imagination - in summary, it was no big deal and wouldn't have changed anything in India - and therefore, its demise is unremarkable. A new solution is needed, and hopefully it will emerge - sooner or later - may be through a crisis or may be not. It is worth debating the shape of that new solution, rather than mourning the demise of this pointless bill. Here, I shall argue, we have to think carefully about what approach to globalisation one should take: The costs of integration with the 'neo-liberal' economy is already quite obvious and the argument whether to make the democratic prerogative to global capital flows is urgent and serious. The argument that nationalistic systems don't work (and everything should go global) may have been undermined by China, and India may have to draw lessons from such experiments from around the world. My personal belief is that India needs to build an education system, which is intellectually open but locally grounded, the shape of which I am trying to explore in my various musings and work.

Popular posts from this blog

Lord Macaulay's Speech on Indian Education: The Hoax & Some Truths

Abdicating to Taliban

When Does Business Gift Become A Bribe: A Marketing Policy Perspective

The Morality of Profit

‘A World Without The Jews’: Nazi Ideology, German Imagination and The Holocaust[1]

The Curious Case of Helen Goddard

A Conversation About Kolkata in the 21st Century

The Road to Macaulay: Warren Hastings and Education in India

The Road of Macaulay: The Development of Indian Education under British Rule

A Future for Kolkata

Creative Commons License