The World Economic Forum (WEF), supposedly the voice of the global economic and political elites, recently published an article by Phil Baty, Chief Global Affairs
Officer of Times Higher Education (THE), about Indian universities and
their apparent progress towards world-class status, shown by their
participation and performance in the THE Impact Rankings, which measure
universities’ contributions to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
This is misleading and irresponsible. Participation, or even
a high score, in the Impact Rankings, whether overall or for specific
indicators, has little, if anything, to do with the ability of universities to
provide instruction in academic and professional subjects or to pursue research,
scholarship, and innovation. Indeed, it is difficult to see how many of the
criteria used in the Impact Rankings are relevant to attaining the SDGs.
The article begins by quoting Philip Altbach, who said
in 2012
that India was a world-class country without world-class universities.
That in itself is an interesting comment. If a country can be world-class
without world-class universities, then one wonders if such universities are
really essential.
There is a bit of bait and switch here. Whatever Altbach
meant by world-class in 2012, I doubt that he was referring to performance in
meeting the UN’s SDGs.
Baty goes on to claim that Indian universities are improving,
and this is shown by Indian universities submitting data for THE impact
rankings, which assess universities' contribution to the SDGs, 125 compared
with 100 from Türkiye and 96 from Pakistan, out of a total of 2152 universities around the world.
That sounds impressive. However, submissions to the impact
rankings and other THE products are voluntary, as THE often points out. There
is no real merit involved in filling out the forms except perhaps showing a
need to be ranked for something.
In any case, according to the uniRank site, there are 890 higher
education institutions in India, 174 in Türkiye, and 176 in Pakistan. That
means that the participation rate is about 14% for India, 57% for Türkiye, and
55% for Pakistan. India's participation in THE Impact Rankings is less than
that of Pakistan and Türkiye, and in previous years, it has been much less than
that of countries like Algeria, Iran, and Iraq.
Nor does gaining a high score in the Impact Rankings tell us
very much. Universities are ranked on their four best scores. Many universities
simply submit data for five or six goals and just ignore the others, for which
their actual contribution might well be zero or negative.
These rankings rely heavily on data submitted by universities.
Even if everybody concerned with the collection, transfer, and processing of
information is totally honest and competent, there are often immense obstacles
to data curation confronting universities in the Middle East, Africa, and Latin
America. These rankings may be, in effect, little more than a measure of the
ambitions of university leaders and the efficiency of their data analysts.
Moreover, much of the progress toward these goals is measured
not by hard, verifiable data but by targets, programs, initiatives,
partnerships, facilities, policies, measures, and projects that are subject to
an opaque and, one suspects, sometimes arbitrary validation process.
Also, do the criteria measure progress toward the goals? Does
producing graduates in law, civil enforcement, and related fields really
contribute to peace, justice, and strong institutions? Does a large number of graduates
qualified to teach say much about the quality of education?
It might be commendable that a minority of Indian universities, albeit
proportionately less than many other countries, have signed up for these
rankings and that a few have done well for one or two of the SDGs. It is helpful
to know that JSS Academy of Higher
Education and Research is apparently a world beater for good health and well-being,
Shoolini University of Biotechnology and Management for clean water and
sanitation, and Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences for
affordable and clean energy, but does this really compensate for the pervasive
perceived mediocrity of Indian higher education?
The validity of the Impact Rankings can be checked by comparing them with
the UI GreenMetric Rankings, which have measured universities' commitment to
environmental sustainability since 2010. Some of the indicators here, such as
Energy and Climate Change and Water, are similar, although not identical, to
those in the Impact Rankings, but there is almost no overlap between the
best-performing universities in the two rankings. No doubt THE would say their rankings
are more sophisticated but still, even the least cynical observer might wonder a
bit.
The reality is that Indian universities have consistently underperformed
in the various global rankings, and this is, on balance, a fairly accurate
picture. It is probable that current reforms will bring widespread change, but
that is still something on the horizon.
Here, THE has not been helpful. Over the last few years, It has
repeatedly exaggerated the achievements of a few Indian institutions that have
risen in their world or regional rankings, often due to the dysfunctional
citations indicator. These include Panjab University, Vel Tech Rangarajan Dr.
Sagunthala R&D Institute of Science and Technology, JSS Academy of Higher
Education and Research, and the Ropar and Indore Institutes of Technology. This
has caused resentment among leading Indian institutions, who are perplexed by
such relatively marginal places zooming ahead of the highly reputable Indian
Institutes of Technology of Bombay, Madras, and Delhi.
The article ignores the boycott by the leading Indian Institutes
of Technology (IITs) of the THE World University Rankings partly because of their
opacity, where all the metrics are now bundled into pillars, so it is next to
impossible to figure out what is causing movement in the rankings without
paying THE for consultation and benchmarking.
Indian universities have not performed well in global
rankings. In the Shanghai Rankings, the best performer is the Indian Institute
of Science in the 401-500 band, down from 301-400 in 2023. In the CWTS Leiden
Ranking, the leading university is the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
in 284th place. Compared to China, Japan, and South Korea, India’s
performance is rather tepid. The occasional show of excellence with regard to
one or two of the SDGs is hardly sufficient compensation.
The current reforms may put Indian research and higher
education on track, but India’s problems go deeper than that. There is
widespread evidence that the country is lagging far behind in primary and secondary
education, and ultimately, that will matter much more than the exploits of
universities on the way to meeting sustainability goals.
No comments:
Post a Comment