Toeing the line set by the rest of the world, India has seen the massification of higher education in the new millennium. The NEP-2020 is posed to transform India with the sole objective of making education holistic and multidisciplinary.

The NEP has tied this goal to one specific reform of the Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUP) with multiple exit/entry systems (MEES), which, it is feared, would produce qualified professionals who will not be able to meet market demands. Since publicfunded institutions are highly sought after mostly by citybased students, it is likely to create a higher education crisis even bigger than in 2014 when the idea was mooted.

In fact, in Europe and the UK, the three-year format is preferred for holistic and multidisciplinary education. Modalities like credit transfer, originated in Europe and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD); they were promoted by multilateral agreements like the Bologna Process and the Lisbon and Incheon Declarations. They were, in fact, designed to solve the European problem of excess capacity in higher education and expansion to ensure their viability.

Advertisement

The Indian education system has radically different issues. The widening of access to higher education in our country has failed to reduce inequality. It seems unfeasible to design a single curriculum such as the first and second years fulfilling vocational requirements, the third addressing general education needs and the fourth year taking responsibility for those in pursuit of higher studies. In the US, there are separate institutions ~ called community colleges ~ to offer one and two year degrees whereas the universities offer four-year courses.

MEES may not be able to address the issues common to India of financial constraints. Instead, it would help to rename dropouts as certificate or diploma holders. Short-term credentials would help families to withdraw their wards from educational institutions as the present state of higher education in India shows a high rate of dropouts because those from marginalized sections of society want to finish learning and start earning to support their families. The former syllabi are force fitted into FYUP format, so the most likely outcomes are bound to be diluted long courses, lopsided short courses or both.

The quality of undergraduate studies is sure to be severely impaired by this breathless tinkering. The curriculum will certainly militate against gaining knowledge in depth. The new format envisages a marked emphasis on general rather than specified learning.The common courses, which range from environmental science to sports and fitness, have raised hackles even at the level of academics.

The Honours subject, a discipline that is reinforced........

© The Statesman