India’s Largest College Case Study Competition
NationBuilding Case
Study Competition:
Case Study
Enabling 100 World-Class
Higher Education Institutions
and 75% Tertiary GER by 2047
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
Task at a Glance
03-04
Introduction
05
Relationship Between Higher Education
and National Development
06-07
Higher Education and Viksit Bharat
08-09
NationBuilding Case Study on Higher
Education
10-12
Transformation Model for
NationBuilding Case Study Competition
13-27
Overview of the Current Situation of
India’s Higher Education Sector
28-50
Visionary Initiatives in
Higher Education Since 2014
51-52
References
53-54
02
Task at
a Glance
For the purpose of the competition,
we define the transformational vision
for a world-class higher education
system in the form of two specific
impact goals:
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has
articulated India's collective resolve to
become a Viksit Bharat by the year 2047.
In the journey to this cherished milestone,
a fundamental transformation of many
areas of our social and economic
landscape will be essential. No country in
the world has achieved greatness without
an excellent higher education system. A
higher level of educational attainment,
enabled by a well-developed and mature
tertiary education system, is often a
notable feature of any developed nation.
A world-class higher education system
par excellence, thus, will not just be a
desired outcome but also an enabler of
India's lofty national ambitions for 2047.
In its inaugural edition, the NationBuilding
case study competition invites the youth
of this country to engage with the journey
to Viksit Bharat by participating and
contributing their transformational
solutions to create a world-class higher
education system for Viksit Bharat.
● Creation of 100 world-class higher
education institutions (HEIs) by
2047.
● Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) of
75% at the tertiary level by 2047.
The participants are expected to craft and
propose a solution that enables the
achievement of the two impact goals as
defined above. The solutions proposed by
the participants should ideally be in the
nature of one or more levers covering at
least one area of impact of the higher
education system as defined in the
Transformation Model (See the full
document for details of the model). The
solution should preferably be within the
mandate and capacities of the
government. Solutions can be completely
afresh or some creative combination of
existing levers. The solution should also
be cognizant of the current policy and
regulatory landscape which should
ideally form the starting point.
03
The proposed solution, in the first round,
will be submitted in the form of a 3-slide
presentation which should articulate the
broad contours of the solution and its
linkage with the defined impact goals.
Over the later rounds, the participants will
be expected to build upon the proposed
solution in terms of format, detailing, and
overall integration; while articulating its
modalities, resourcing, stakeholder
relationships, execution, evidence,
alternative assessments, and
performance against the principles of
impact defined in the Transformation
Model.
The solution proposed by the participants
will be assessed based on the
creativity/originality of the solution,
understanding of the landscape, critical
application of mind, strength of impact,
feasibility/workability, along with the
content and presentation of the
submission, and other relevant factors.
For the benefit and reference of the
participants, the following document
provides further details as to the
Transformation Model for the higher
education system, its critical
elements, and their interrelationships.
It also further provides an overview of
the current situation of the Indian
higher education system on various
aspects relevant to the transformation
of the system. The document also
gives an overview of the bold initiatives
initiated under the leadership of Prime
Minister Narendra Modi since 2014
which forms the foundation of any
transformation of the system over the
next few years.
04
Introduction
Prime Minister Narendra Modi
has articulated India's collective
resolve to become a Viksit Bharat by the year 2047. In the journey to this cherished
milestone of a developed nation status, a fundamental transformation of many areas of
our social and economic landscape will be essential to enable India's well-deserved
rise. The 'Amrit Kaal' spanning from today to India's 100th year of independence will
be a vibrant phase of collective NationBuilding wherein every section of the Indian
society will have a contribution to make.
"
Every country experiences a phase in its
history when it propels its developmental
journey multiple folds ahead… For Bharat,
this 'Amrit Kaal' has arrived now. This is
the period in the history of Bharat when it is
about to take a quantum leap… That's why I
say, now is the time for Bharat, this is the
right time. We must make the most of every
moment of this 'Amrit Kaal'; we can't
afford to lose even a single moment.
Prime Minister
Narendra Modi
11 December 2023
In its inaugural edition, the NationBuilding case
study competition competition invites the youth
of this country to engage with the exciting
journey to a Viksit Bharat by contributing to the
transformation, with their intellect and
experiences, an area which they know best:
higher education in India.
05
Relationship Between
Higher Education and
National Development
No country in the world has achieved
greatness without an excellent higher
education system. The seeds of many a
social epoch in world history can
invariably be linked to a major
reorientation in higher education. The
p re m i e r s t a t u s o f a n c i e n t I n d i a n
civilization in the world owed a lot to our
great learning centres like Nalanda and
Takshila. The pursuit of rationality and
science and its dissemination through a
higher education system was central to
European enlightenment both as a cause
and an outcome. The Oxbridge-educated
archetype of the colonial administrator
was the backbone of the British empire.
America’s 20th century economic and
industrial successes can be traced to
the expansion of higher education
avenues through the land-grant
colleges established late 1800s. More
recently, modern economies are
knowledge economies/societies more
than anything else which have higher
education at their core. Given this
t r a j e c t o r y, h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n i s
understandably growing in importance at
a rapid pace across the world (Marginson,
2016; Schofer & Meyer, 2005).
06
A higher level of educational attainment,
enabled by a well-developed and mature
higher/tertiary education system, is often
a notable feature of any developed
nation. Mean years of education in
developed countries like the US and the
UK can be as high as 13.6 years indicating
some tertiary education for a substantial
proportion of the population (UNESCO
Institute of Statistics, 2024). Developed
countries tend to have a higher proportion
of population with tertiary education
within the overall working population as
well as within the 25-34 years age group
(OECD, 2023). Jobs requiring tertiary
education contribute the biggest share of
the employment pool in developed
countries like the US (US Bureau of
Labour Statistics, 2023). Developed
countries also account for a significant
chunk of the overall tertiary enrolments
across the world. As of 2021, the group of
High-Income Countries1 (HICs)
accounted for nearly a fourth of the
tertiary students in the world, while
constituting only about a sixth of the
world’s population (UNESCO Institute of
Statistics, 2024). HIC also attract nearly
two-thirds of the internationally mobile
students globally (UNESCO Institute of
Statistics, 2024). Developed nations also
eclipse other countries in global
university rankings with only two
universities from non-developed
countries managing to find a place in the
top 25 universities in the Times Higher
Education (THE) World University Ranking
2024 as well as the QS World University
Rankings 2024. The integral role of higher
education in developed economies is,
thus, undoubtedly evident.
1. As classified by the World Bank.
07
Higher
Education
H i s to r i c a l e x p e r i e n c e a n d g l o b a l
evidence leave no doubt that creating a
higher education system that is worthy of
a developed India will be a vital and
impactful area of national endeavour
during the Amrit Kaal. A higher education
system par excellence will not just be a
desired outcome but also an enabler of
the lofty national ambition for 2047.
&
Viksit
Bharat
"
India has proved that it has its own
mind, which has deeply thought and
felt and tried to solve according to its
light the problems of existence. The
education of India is to enable this
mind of India to find out truth, to make
this truth its own wherever found and
to give expression to it in such a
manner as only it can do.
Rabindranath Tagore's Lecture
“The Centre of Indian Culture” (1919)
It is hardly surprising that it was
through a worthy higher education, that
great nationalists like Madan Mohan
Malviya and Rabindranath Tagore
believed, the destiny of an independent
India can be forged.
08
The time to reorient the higher education
system in India to give a boost to the
ambition of Viksit Bharat is now. A child
born this year, in 2024, will most likely
complete her tertiary education in 2047.
Her's will probably be the first cohort to
graduate into working in a developed
economy. Between 2024 and 2047, nearly
688 million individuals2 will pass through
the typical higher education age pool of
18-23 years accounting for more than half
of the working age (15-64 years)
population in 2047. Even assuming a
constant tertiary GER of 30%, the Indian
higher education system will have
processed no less than 210 million during
the Amrit Kaal, equivalent to providing
tertiary education nearly the entire 2022
population of Brazil. Few other
components of Indian society will have
touched the lives of such a large number
of people on the road to 2047. The
opportunity to enlighten and actively
harness more than half a billion educated
minds from the Amrit Peedhi in the
progress of the nation is an opportunity
which cannot be wasted.
2. Calculations based on the population projections by United Nations (2022)
09
NationBuilding
Case Study on
Higher Education
Through the NationBuilding
Case Study Competition, we
invite the youth of this
country to participate and
contribute their
transformational solutions
to create a world-class
higher education system for
Viksit Bharat.
While a world-class higher education
system is a very broad notion and can
be defined in many diverse ways, we
define this vision in terms of two
specific impact goals for the purpose
of the case study competition:
● Creation of 100 world-class higher
education institutions (HEIs) by
2047: This goal entails the
presence of 100 unique Indian HEIs
in the global top 500 university
rankings of either the QS World
University Rankings or the World
University Rankings.
We believe that the youth, as the primary
stakeholders in the higher education
system, know the system best and are
most capable of taking up the challenge.
Their immersion into this system and
their experiences are vital to shape the
transformation of India’s ter tiar y
education. The creativity, vitality, and
energies of the youth can most
impactfully light up the pathway to a
world-class system.
● Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) of
75% at the tertiary level by 2047:
This goal entails that the
enrolments in tertiary education in
2047 should be at 75% of the
population cohort of 18-23 years in
that year.
10
The Task:
Format and Content of
Solution:
The participants are expected to craft and
propose a solution which enables the
achievement of the two impact goals as
defined above viz. 100 world-class HEIs
and tertiary GER of 75% by 2047.
The proposed solution, in the first round,
will be submitted in the form of a 3-slide
presentation which should articulate the
broad contours of the solution and its
linkage with the defined impact goals.
Nature of Solution:
Over the later rounds, the
participants will be expected to build
upon the solution in terms of format,
detailing, and overall integration as
per the following indicative
progression:
The solutions proposed by the
participants will, ideally, be in the nature
of one or more levers that indicatively
include but are not limited to policy
guidance, legislation, policy, regulation,
schemes, resources, communication,
behaviour change, taxation, incentives
etc. The solution should ideally cover at
least one area of impact (Refer the
detailed Transformation Model later in
the document) of the higher education
system. The solution should preferably
be within the mandate and capacities of
the government, either explicitly or
implicitly. Solutions can be completely
afresh or some creative combination of
existing levers. The solution should also
be cognizant of the current policy and
regulatory landscape which should
ideally form the point of departure. The
overarching expectation for the solution
is, however, that it must establish a clear
and causal path to the impact goals as
defined above.
● Zonal Rounds: The submission will
include greater details and
modalities of the solutions
proposed, roles of stakeholders,
resourcing of the solution etc.
● National Round: The submission
should provide a comprehensive
view of the solution including
execution level detailing,
supporting evidence, assessment
against alternatives, and
assessment against the principles
of impact. (Refer the detailed
Transformation Model later in the
document)
11
Assessment Criteria:
The solution proposed by the
participants will generally be assessed
based on the creativity/originality of the
solution, understanding of the
landscape, critical application of mind,
s t r e n g t h o f i m p a c t ,
feasibility/workability along with the
content and presentation of the
submission etc. As the rounds progress,
these general assessment criteria will be
applied in the context of the changing
formats and expectations from the
submissions. The capstone
assessment principle will, however, be
the potential for impact created by the
solution.
12
Transformation Model for
NationBuilding Case Study Competition
Areas of
Impact
Impact
Goals
Principles
of Impact
Channels
of Impact
Transition
In
Indian Society & Economy
Stakeholders
Levers of Impact
Curriculum
Student Success
Infrastructure
Student Experience
Institutions
Indian Higher Education System
Systems
Resources
Increased
Earnings and
Opportunities
Quality
Social
Mobility
and Equity
Fiscal
Benefits
Responsiveness
100 World Class HEIs | 75% Tertiary GER
Benefits for
Economy
and
Innovation
Affordability
National
Identity and
Values
Equity
Societal and
Democratic
Engagement
Scale
Fulfillment
of
Aspirations
Viksit Bharat @ 2047
Transition
Out
Efficiency
International
Commitments
and Rankings
13
For benefit of the participants and to define the problem space for the
NationBuilding Case Study Competition, we articulate a
'Transformation Model for NationBuilding Case Study
Competition' to provide an at-glance view of the setting and
dynamics of the higher education system in India. Participants may
refer to this model to inform their understanding of the problem space
and potential levers.
Placed within the overall context of Indian society and economy, the higher education
system will be influenced through stakeholders and levers of impact across the
enumerated areas of impact that encompass the critical aspects of the tertiary
education system in India. By applying transformational solutions to these areas of
impact, a world-class higher education system can be achieved. The transformational
solutions, if supportive of the principles of impact, will through the various channels of
impact lead to the destination of Viksit Bharat.
Areas of Impact
For the purpose of delineating the areas
of impact as articulated in the
Transformation Model, the following
coverage is defined. However, this is
indicative only, as in view of the
complexity of the system overlaps can
be expected:
higher education including issues related
to access to HEIs, cost of education,
opportunity costs, financial aid etc. It
covers the information processes based
on which the student makes her choice of
entry and institutions, along with the
pathways available to her. It also includes
the admission/student recruitment
policies and processes including various
methods for student screening,
admission testing, and recruitment of
International students. This area also
includes the re-entry of students into the
higher education system at higher levels
or the same levels and includes re-entry
for skill enhancement, encompassing the
educational mobility of students over a
lifetime.
Transition In:
This area of impact covers the intent,
ability, and act of the student to enter the
higher education system. This area
mainly spans the transitional phase
between the output of the lower levels of
education, including the effects of quality
at lower levels. This also covers the
student’s motivations, incentives, and
disincentives for the choice to opt for
14
Systems:
Institutions:
This area of impact covers the intent,
ability, and act of the student to enter the
higher education system. This area
mainly spans the transitional phase
between the output of the lower levels of
education, including the effects of quality
at lower levels. It covers the student’s
motivations, incentives, and
disincentives for the choice to opt for
higher education including issues related
to access to HEIs, cost of education,
opportunity costs, financial aid etc. It
covers the information processes based
on which the student makes her choice of
entry and institutions, along with the
pathways available to her. Additionally, it
includes the admission/student
recruitment policies and processes
including various methods for student
screening, admission testing, and
recruitment of international students.
Furthermore, this area includes the reentr y of students into the higher
education system at higher levels or the
same levels. It includes reentry for skill
enhancement, encompassing the
educational mobility of students over
lifetime as well.
Institutions are the formal or informal
entities that are involved in the actual
delivery of the core objectives of higher
education. This area of impact comprises
the full range of institutions obviously
including traditional HEIs but also others
like research bodies, university
associations, placement bodies, testing
agencies, etc. This area includes the
design of institutions, the institutional
mix, the relationship between various
institutions, size/intakes/capacities etc.
It also includes the governance,
management, and decision-making
systems and practices within the
institutions. Further, it encompasses the
visioning and planning methods of the
institutions. It also covers the
mechanisms through which institutions
interact with the society and other
stakeholders including local
communities.
15
includes what roles institutions will play in
design and delivery of the curriculum. It
also encompasses the process for
identifying and revising curriculums and
includes the curriculum-related role of
professional standards bodies. It covers
various modes of learning delivery
including online and MOOCs.
Infrastructure:
This area of impact covers the physical
infrastructure and facilities that have an
impact on the higher education system
located within or outside the institutions.
This includes the choice, form, use, and
utilization of the physical infrastructure.
This covers academic campuses,
laboratories and research facilities,
residential facilities, libraries, sports
facilities, administrative buildings etc. It
encompasses the physical tools and aids
available in the classrooms for learning
enhancement. This area of impact also
includes the digital and technology
infrastructure including access to online
resources, prototyping systems,
computer networks etc. This area also
covers shared facilities and leveraging of
infrastructural assets for the furtherance
of the HEI's objectives.
Resources:
This area of impact includes the tangible
as well as non-tangible resources
available to the institutions. It
encompasses the financial resources
including public and private investment
and funding, along with the own financial
models of the institutions. This includes
funding mix that institutions choose to
opt for along with their budgets and
expenditure priorities and plans. It also
covers development and application of
human resources in the form of teaching
and non-teaching staff and includes
systems and programs for teacher
education. The mix, recruitment, pay and
benefits, career progression, evaluation,
motivation etc. of the teaching and nonteaching staff are covered in this area
along with mechanisms for pedagogical
training and reskilling. Further, it also
includes knowledge resources like
i n t e l l e c t u a l p ro p e r t y ( I P ) a s s e t s ,
institutional knowledge bases etc. As a
critical resource, the research output of
an institution is covered under this area of
impact along with the mechanisms to
Curriculum:
This area of impact deals with the
objectives and coverage of the learning
experience delivered by the higher
education system along with the levels
and mix of curriculum. It also includes the
choice of skill sets chosen to be delivered
by the system to the students and its
relationship with the socio-economic
context. It covers the organization,
content, delivery, language, duration of
the curriculum, along with the academic
evaluation/examination systems. It
16
encourage and leverage this output. This
also includes academia/industry
collaborations on academics and
research including visiting faculties,
exchange programmes etc.
outcomes. The delivery and quality of
non-teaching student services is also a
part of this area of impact. Mechanisms
to increase the richness of the lived
experience when enrolled in the form of
the residential, transport, nutrition, and
extra-curricular facilities are also central
to this area of impact. It also covers the
interaction and integration of students
with their peer community within and
outside the classroom through formal
and informal opportunities. Further, this
includes participation of students in
governance processes and critical
decision-making at the institutions along
with channels and methods of grievance
redressal. It also encompasses all the
dimensions of the quality of their life
including physical and mental well-being
and overall satisfaction while enrolled.
Student Experience:
This area of impact covers the full
spectrum of the experiences of students
once they are a part of the tertiary
education system and encompasses
mechanisms for a student-centric
delivery of comprehensive higher
education services. This includes their
interaction with the facilities, processes,
and systems of the institutions for
teaching as well as non-teaching
purposes. This covers effective access to
faculty, study materials, learning
methods etc. and clarity on the learning
17
Student Success:
Transition Out:
This area of impact covers a wide range
of ways in which student success
manifests within the system and outside.
This covers the mechanisms of how
institutions optimize the positive effects
for their individual students. This entails
mechanisms for enabling academic
success in the form of improved learning
outcomes, higher grades, engagement
with curriculum and classes, and also
covers augmented learning experiences,
remedial measures, academic guidance,
mentoring etc. This also includes the
retention of students within learning
systems with alternative pathways, interinstitution mobility etc. This area also
covers the mechanisms that enable
students to achieve greater successes in
life building on their learning which
i n c l u d e s d eve l o p m e n t o f g e n e ra l
cognitive skills and soft skills, internship
programmes, financial skills, social
engagement, alumni networking etc. This
area also covers student suppor t
mechanisms like incubators,
commercialization, seed funding etc.
This area of impact covers the stage
where a student moves out of the system
with or without a degree. This includes
the information and readiness of the
students relative to the workforce she is
entering into and the mechanisms
through which they are connected
including placement policies etc. This
also covers the matching of the student,
employment, and employer for optimal
outcomes. This also encompasses the
overall quality and reputation of the
output of the institution. This further
covers the student decisions to drop out
of the system and the mechanisms and
policies to address the same.
18
Principles of Impact
The impact goals in the Transformation
Model can only create an optimal effect
for the ambition of Viksit Bharat if it
adheres to the principles of impact. The
principles of impact provide the values
framework for a Viksit Bharat. Only by
ensuring that the principles of impact are
considered in the solution it will be
possible to gain the desired effect. The
proposed solutions, therefore, should be
cognizant of how the principles of impact
are integrated in the solution. An
indicative relevance of the principes of
impact is as below:
Solutions for transforming the education
system, therefore, must be scalable at the
national level and applicable for a large
system footprint.
Equity:
A holistic view of Viksit Bharat calls for
the society and economy in 2047 to be
fair and equitable in terms of
opportunities, outcomes, and
experiences. The notion of equity in the
context of higher education must cover
the full spectrum from entry choice to
lifetime success. Bridging the various
dimensions of inequity – gender, urbanrural, caste, economic status along with
disparities amongst regions will have to
be central to the solutions for leveraging
the higher education system for Viksit
Bharat. Removal of disparities in access
is not adequate; sustainable and longterm equity should be enabled.
Considerations of how equity can be
embedded in conceptualization, design,
and implementation of the solutions will
be a primary consideration for suitability
of the solution for the ambition for a
world-class higher education system.
Transformation of the educational
system must also be mindful of how
factors outside the higher education
system (like social context, attitudes etc.)
can affect equity within the system.
Scale:
Any solution to reshape the Indian higher
education system for Viksit Bharat will
require solutions that can be scaled at a
rapid pace. A 75% tertiary GER in 2047 will
require servicing an enrolment of 98.7
million, nearly double of today’s levels.
This will entail adding in mere 23 years a
capacity equal to what was created in the
past 75 years. The need for scaling would
also extend to the diverse aspects of
systems, infrastructure, resources,
delivery etc. Scale however does not just
mean capacity; it also means the reach
and coverage of impact. It must take into
account the diversity of context of the
higher education system. It also implies
increasing, or at least constant, rate of
return for efforts for additional coverage.
19
implies transparency and accountability
against the standard sought to be
achieved, and the possibility of seeking
incremental and continual improvements.
Quality, ideally, should not just manifest in
aggregate but at a student level.
Harnessing all aspects of higher
education for improving quality and
ensuring integration of quality aims is
critical.
Affordability:
Affordability as a remover of economic
barriers making the benefits of higher
education system accessible to the
widest possible pool of individuals
irrespective of their past or present future
economic situation and without unduly
affecting their future freedom of choices
must be a critical feature of the solutions
for transforming India’s higher education
system. A comprehensive view of
affordability which includes not only
direct and monetary costs, but also
indirect non-monetary costs will have to
be taken. The lifetime effects for the
beneficiaries will have to be net positive.
The fluid conception of affordability
based on levels, life stage, gender must
be considered. The solutions must be
built around the core of cost reduction for
individuals and society without adverse
impact on other desired principles.
Responsiveness:
The higher education system can
continually contribute to the creation and
working of Viksit Bharat only if it is
responsive to the changing context,
demands, and priorities of the nation. An
inherent flexibility to reorient is desired in
the solutions for transformation of the
tertiary system. This encompasses the
awareness, intent, and capabilities to
respond to the expectations; and the
ability to evaluate and refine those
responses. Responsiveness spans both
the society and the economy. In terms of
responsiveness to the society, it aims to
contribute to furtherance of social values
and solving societal problems. In the
economic context, it seeks to respond to
the changing needs of workforce and
technology while reorienting the pathway
of economy through innovation. Finally,
the higher education system must be
responsive to its most immediate
stakeholders: students, staff, and state.
Quality:
Quality implies delivering an experience
and outcome which is optimized for
achieving a standard which is set at the
highest level which can be aimed by
human capacities. This is an ambition for
world-class excellence. It entails a
consideration for quality inherent in the
solutions for transformation and aims for
a culture of quality where excellence is
central to thoughts, plans, behaviours,
and incentives of the stakeholders. This
20
ensuring timely and competent
execution. Creating the right incentives
and harnessing market forces for
enabling efficiency is central to achieve
sustainable efficiency. Especially, the
focus on increasing the efficiency of
public resources in the context of
competing national priorities is essential.
Efficiency:
The approach for transforming India’s
higher education system for Viksit Bharat
should aspire to be efficient in terms of
resources and deliver greater value for
investments for all actors involved. For a
given level of resources, highest
outcomes and quality should be enabled.
This entails identifying the most
appropriate application for resources and
"
Education is a great leveller and is
the best tool for achieving economic
and social mobility, inclusion, and
equality. This National Education
Policy envisions an education system
rooted in Indian ethos that
contributes directly to transforming
India, that is Bharat, sustainably
into an equitable and vibrant
knowledge society, by providing
high-quality education to all, and
thereby making India a global
knowledge superpower.
National Education Policy 2020
21
Channels of Impact
A well-developed higher education
system has a dual role in the
devel op men t of a n a ti on . G l ob a l
experience suggests that it is not only an
indicator but an enabler of developed
status. A world-class higher education
system can, thus, be expected to further
the goal of Viksit Bharat through multiple
channels of impact:
with higher education are more likely to be
aware and connected with the society
around them and they can contribute to
society in many more ways than just as
e c o n o m i c a c t o r s ( O E C D, 2 0 0 8 ) .
Democratic engagement, along with
transparency and accountability of
governance, also tends to improve with
higher educational attainment in a society
(Dee, 2004). This can help in cultivating a
deeper civic sense and reduce
undesirable activities like crime etc.
These social capital effects of higher
educational attainment have been known
to extend not only to the tertiary-educated
cohort but also to the overall society in
general (Helliwell & Putnam, 2007).
Fulfilment of
Aspirations:
A world-class education system is a
precious normative goal in itself. As a
pioneering developed nation, leadership
in higher education, a historically crucial
feature of human civilization, is an
aspirational objective. Further, as one of
the defining features of a Viksit Bharat
must be the ability of its people to access
multitudes of opportunities and pursue
highest self-actualization, a critical social
service like good higher education will be
highly necessary and advantageous to
meet aspirations.
National Identity and
Values:
Higher education is an important medium
of helping people to develop a
consciousness and better understanding
of national history and culture and shape
a collective identity built on a shared
perception of the nation’s experiences
and values. In a diverse country like India,
higher educational attainment can also
be a major force for greater national
integration.
Societal and Democratic
Engagement:
The intellectually liberating effects of
higher education on human dignity and
enlightenment can have beneficial
effects for society. Importantly, persons
22
automation takes over routine tasks.
Increased educational attainment will
also be critical for triggering an
accelerated structural transformation of
the economy with an expanding high-skill
high-productivity manufacturing/service
sector supporting the transition from a
low-productivity but large agricultural
sector while creating a suitably skilled
workforce. Developed economies like the
US tend to require more workers with
graduate education (US Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 2023). Workforce participation
for college-educated individuals is
typically higher as compared to lower
levels of educational attainment which
can help expand the productive pool for
the economy.
As innovation takes a premier position in
accelerated economic growth, the skills
required for producing and leveraging
new ideas or practices are more likely to
be cultivated by higher education than by
lower levels of attainment. (Bouhajeb,
Mefteh, & Ben Ammar, 2018; Hoidn &
Kärkkäinen, 2014). Higher education can
be a significant source of “national
technological development” which is
foundational for innovation and research
(Galan-Muros & Alep Liu, 2023). Higher
educational attainment can also amplify
the benefits for technological progress as
a bigger starting knowledge base is likely
to have greater production of knowledge.
The linkage between higher education
and innovation is evident in examples like
Benefits for Economy
and Innovation:
A world-class higher education system
can be an economic force multiplier in
India’s journey to achieve greater
prosperity and a higher level of
development. Higher education is
considered a significant contributor to
human capital which has an increasingly
impor tant role to play in modern
knowledge-driven economies (Flabbi &
Gatti, 2018). Higher educational
attainment is evidently correlated with
higher levels of economic growth (Barro,
2001). In its instrumental role in
economic growth, a higher level of
educational attainment (and thus,
accumulation), by improving the skills
and technological know-how in an
economy, can boost its productivity.
Quantitative improvements in
educational attainment (in terms of mean
years of education) can positively
contribute to improving the multi-factor
productivity of the economy (nearly 1.82.2% improvement in productivity for
every 1.2 additional years of schooling) in
the long run while the effects can be twice
as large for qualitative improvements
(Égert, de la Maisonneuve, & Turner,
2022). Higher education is also the
primary medium for delivery of skills (like
non-routine cognitive skills) which are
now relatively more important in the
modern economic structure as
23
the Silicon Valley where the community of
technological advance is built around a
nucleus of a higher education institution.
To be competitive with developed
economies in traditional as well as new
sectors of the economy, it is essential to
match their existing knowledge and
technological base.
Higher education, as a sector, can be a
source of vibrant economic activity and
contribute significantly to the national
output and employment, especially when
export of educational services by an
economy is large. The higher education
sector (directly and indirectly)
contributed nearly £130 billion to the UK’s
economy in year 2022 (nearly 5% of the
national GDP) and provided employment
to nearly 0.77 million people (Booth,
Miller, Halterbeck, & Conlon, 2023), of
which international students contribute
over £42 billion. International students
alone contribute nearly $40 billion to the
US economy (0.2% of the national output)
(N AFSA, 2023). Higher education
institutions, depending on their size and
location, can also generate a significant
level of dependent economy along with
indirect activity and employment. This
creates an economic opportunity to be
developed to add to the national output
on the path to 2047.
Increased Earnings and
Opportunities:
At an individual level, a higher level of
edu catio nal attainment can have
increased individual benefits, both in
monetary and non-monetary terms
(OECD, 2008). Tertiary education is
generally associated with a higher level of
employment rates as compared to mere
secondary or upper secondary education.
Evidence from OECD countries indicates
that this difference could be as high as 27
percentage points and 9 percentage
points respectively (OECD, 2023). A
tertiary level educational status often
creates an earnings premium for the
individual, both at a wage level as well as
cumulative lifetime earning level. The
annual earnings of a tertiary-educated
worker in an average OECD country can
be nearly twice that of a worker with
secondary-level education (OECD, 2023).
In both the US and the UK, the education
24
premium over a non-graduate worker
accounted for nearly a third of a graduate
workers mean annual salary (Department
for Education (UK), 2023; US Bureau of
Labour Statistics, 2023). In the US, the
lifetime earnings advantage of a college
graduate over a high-school-educated
worker was assessed to be nearly
$400,000 (Ma & Pender, 2023). For
individual workers, higher educational
attainment is also likely to increase
employment options by opening up
diverse career pathways and increase
general resilience to economic changes
or shocks through greater ability to
transition and learn new skills. OECD
evidence shows that tertiary-educated
workers are twice and thrice more likely to
participate in some non-formal education
or training programme relative to uppersecondary-educated and below-uppersecondary-educated workers
respectively (OECD, 2023).
Social Mobility and
Equity:
For individuals and households, higher
education is often the single most
important driver of socio-economic
mobility. In the words of the National
Education Policy (2020), it can be a “great
leveller”. Higher educational attainment
is also associated with a progressively
better standard of living which can help
take masses of people out of poverty.
Increased incomes and consequent
access to better services can help
households rise in socio-economic
status. A diversity of human development
measures like nutrition, infant mortality,
health behaviours, addiction rates, and
mental health are generally seen to be
better in a society with greater
educational attainment (OECD, 2008; Ma
& Pender, 2023). Parental education is
one of the most significant contributors
to inter-generational income mobility
(Narayan & Weide, 2018; D'Addio, 2007).
Higher educational attainments also
support a virtuous cycle of sustainable
levels of education within a society as
tertiary-educated parents (especially
mothers) are more likely to educate their
children at the same or higher levels
(Suhonen & Karhunen, 2019). Further, the
socio-economic spillover effects of
higher educational attainment are
societal as a higher level of tertiary
educational attainment within a society
25
not only raises the incomes for those with
tertiary education but also for those with
lower educational attainment (Moretti,
2004).
Higher levels of educational attainment
can have notable effects on social equity
for disadvantaged groups too and
cultivate a level of egalitarianism.
Evidence from the OECD shows that there
is increasing access to ter tiary
educational opportunities for
economically and socially disadvantaged
groups worldwide (OECD, 2008). Once
admitted to a graduate programme, the
monetary returns from higher education
for circumstantially disadvantaged
students are nearly equal to advantaged
students which levels the field for them
(Oreopoulos & Petronijevic, 2013).
Women, specifically, are more likely to
access higher education generally
among OECD countries and once
educated are likely to participate more in
the workforce (OECD, 2023). Within the
women cohort, individuals with tertiary
education are likely to have higher
employment rates than individuals with
lesser attainment and the male-female
gap in employment rate is the narrowest
at the tertiary-educated levels (OECD,
2023). Jobs requiring higher education
attainment typically have lower entry
barriers for disadvantaged groups and
can be a vital force for empowerment and
participation. Higher education also
legitimizes the success of members of
3. This includes central and state expenditure. This includes the expenditure on technical
education excluding which the expenditure on higher education accounts for nearly 0.62% of
GDP and $15.3 billion as of 2021. USD-INR exchange rate is assumed to be ₹ 80.
the disadvantaged groups enabling them
to access the social benefits of their
achievements. Finally, higher education
can elevate the level of engagement and
confidence of the disadvantaged groups
in interaction with the surrounding society
enabling them to develop and access
greater opportunities for equity.
Fiscal Benefits:
Level of educational attainment also has
some positive fiscal effects for the
governments. Higher educational levels
also generally mean higher tax revenues
from these individuals for the public
exchequer. Further, tertiary-educated
individuals are less likely to access
welfare programmes freeing up critical
public resources for improved targeting.
As a major area of expenditure for the
public exchequer, nearly 1.57% of the GDP
in India as of 2021 amounting to nearly
$38.9 billion 3 (Ministry of Education,
2022), higher education is an area which
must be transformed to enable effective
and impactful allocation of precious
public resources in a Viksit Bharat.
26
related skill levels and education (Schwab
& Zahidi, 2020). Improved performance in
these global measures of socioeconomic success will require
improvement in the higher education
system.
International
Commitments and
Rankings:
Higher education is also integral to India’s
international developmental
commitments like the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs). SDG-4 seeks
to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality
education and promote lifelong learning
opportunities for all” by 2030 and
includes specific targets related to
access, equity, affordability, and quality
for tertiary education (SDG Targets 4.3,
4.4, 4.5, and 4.b). Higher education can
also contribute significantly to achieving
other SDGs. This requires a focus on
higher education on the journey to allround development. Higher education
also has a significant influence on many
global indicators of development status
like UNDP’s Human Development Index
(through expected and mean years of
education parameters), UNDP’s Gender
Development Index (through expected
and mean years of education, wage ratios
and workforce participation rates),
WIPO’s Global Innovation Index (through
the tertiary education, research and
development, knowledge workers,
innovation linkages, knowledge creation
sub-pillars) among others (UNDP, 2022;
WIPO, 2023). Higher education was also a
major part of the now-discontinued
WEF’s World Competitiveness Report
through multiple priorities and indicators
Within these contours of the
Transformation Model, we
believe, lie the
transformational solutions
which will have the
potential of creating an
impactful change in the
journey to Viksit Bharat
by reorienting India’s
higher education sector.
27
Overview of the Current Situation of
India's Higher Education Sector
4
The endeavour of transforming India's
higher education system for Viksit
Bharat must be informed by a clear
understanding and assessment of its
current situation. The evolution of a
nation's higher education system is
shaped by a complex interaction of
social, economic, governance, and
(increasingly) global forces. The extant
landscape of Indian higher education,
along with the peculiar features and
challenges resulting from the legacy of
its development, should be the starting
point for its transformation.
system in many different ways like
community attitudes towards higher
education, limited supply of teaching
resources, and skewed educational
decisions.
While the participation in the higher
education system in India has been
increasing, it remains modest as
compared to most developed countries.
As per AISHE, the tertiary GER (for the 1823 age group) as of 2021-22 stands at
28.4, an improvement from 23.7 in 201415. UNESCO (2024) even reports a slightly
higher tertiary GER for India at 32 for
2022. In comparison, the average tertiary
GER for HICs as well as OECD countries is
79, while for China it was 72. The low
levels of tertiary participation are also
reflected in India’s school life expectancy
at the tertiary level, which is a mere 1.58
years, less than the global average of 2.03
years. It is also lower than the HIC
aggregate (3.83 years) and individual
advanced countries like Australia (5.19
years), the US (4.18 years), the UK (3.61
years) as well as China (3.33 years). While
accessibility and financial constraints are
usually the most common reasons for low
enrolment rates, complex dynamics of
social signaling on the value of education,
perceptions of socio-economic utility, and
policy prioritization among others can
Attainment and
Participation:
As compared to advanced countries, the
tertiary education system in India
operates in an environment of overall low
educational attainment. Currently, overall
tertiary attainment for India for the 25-64
years age group is around 13% as
compared to the OECD average of 40%. It
can be as high as 63% in Canada, 56% in
Japan and around 50% in the US and the
UK. The mean years of schooling for an
average Indian currently stands at 6.57
years; while for the US, it is 13.58 years.
Low levels of attainment in society can
affect the context of the higher education
4. Data in this section is primarily sourced (or calculated) from All India Survey of Higher Education (Ministry
of Education, 2023), NSSO’s 75th Round Survey on Household Social Consumption on Education in India
(National Sample Survey Organization, 2020), UNESCO UIS.Stat (UNESCO Institute of Statistics, 2024)
unless mentioned otherwise. For the US, it is based on Digest of Educational Statistics (National Centre for
Education Statistics , 2021). For the UK, it is based on (Higher Education Statistics Agency, 2023).
28
also have an impact on the GER.
There is also a significant dichotomy
between participation at the tertiary level
and lower levels of education. The GER
for secondary level (as per UNESCO
definition) is nearly double (at around 79)
that of the tertiary GER, while the GER gap
between India and advanced countries is
much lower than tertiary education. This
dichotomy is also reflected in the
n a r ro w e r g a p b e t w e e n I n d i a a n d
advanced countries in school life
expectancy at secondary levels (5.47
years as compared to HIC average of 6.87
years) where India’s performance is
actually higher than the global average
(4.92 years) in this case. Expansion of
school education has been (and
continues to be) a global priority for a long
time, especially in the developing world.
Tertiary education has acquired focus
relatively recently. The accumulated
effects of the efforts and resources put
into pre-tertiary education have partly
contributed to the dichotomy through
differential access and affordability.
Moreover, this reflects the distinctive
position in an individual’s life when the
decision to opt for tertiary education is
taken. Faced with a much higher
opportunity cost of not joining the
workforce and social expectations
associated with the typical age of such a
decision, individual choices emanate out
of complex processes. Further, the
dichotomy is also a result of the
availability of multiple educational (and
work) pathways at this juncture unlike
lower levels of education which are more
regimented in their progression.
29
India’s tertiary education system is
distinctive for the wide diversity in HEI
typology which is likely to undergo a
fundamental transformation over the next
few years. Different types of HEIs like
central and state universities, affiliated
colleges, Institutes of National
Importance (INI), standalone colleges,
specialized universities etc. constitute
the national tertiary education system in
India. Unlike most advanced countries,
India has until now been dominated by the
“affiliated college” model with the nearly
4 5 , 4 7 0 c o l l e g e s a t t a c h e d to 3 5 8
universities delivering a bulk of higher
education services accounting for nearly
72% of the student enrolments. Attached
to universities, the affiliated colleges have
limited opportunities on various critical
aspects like curriculum, evaluation etc.
National Education Policy 2020 (NEP2020) aims to phase out the affiliated
college model over the next fifteen years
to create multi-disciplinary and
autonomous HEIs which would reshape
the landscape of tertiary education
considerably. Currently, universities show
a relatively larger presence at postgraduate and doctoral levels. A major
proportion of PhD enrolments (87.6%) are
hosted at the universities along with
n e a r l y 5 0 % o f t h e p o s t - g ra d u a t e
enrolments.
Size and Composition:
Within the above context, the current
footprint of the Indian higher education
system is very large and has been
expanding at a rapid pace. A swift spurt in
tertiary enrolment in the last two decades
has significantly swelled the tertiary
system in India. By enrolment, the Indian
system is currently the second largest in
the world (after China) servicing nearly
43.3 million students. Between 2014-15
and 2021-22 alone, the total enrolments
increased by 26.5%. India is also home to
nearly 1,168 universities (with over
45,000 affiliated colleges) and 12,000
stand-alone institutions. About a third of
these universities and nearly a fifth of the
affiliated colleges were added after 201415. Over the last five years, 53 new
universities, 1284 new colleges, and an
enrolment of 1.3 million students was
added to the national tertiary system
annually on average. In comparison, the
US had around 3,799 degree-granting
institutions with an enrolment of 18.6
million students.
In terms of degrees awarded in 2022, the
Indian higher education system turned
out nearly 10.7 million students. In
comparison, the US turned out nearly 3.1
million tertiary students (excluding
certificate and associate degrees); while
the UK conferred over 0.91 million tertiary
students.
30
Diversity is also seen in the management
of HEIs with private sector involvement
expanding rapidly. Like other levels of
education, the expansion of the private
sector is a major area of change in the
landscape of tertiary education. However,
the presence of private sector (in terms of
share of enrolments) is the maximum at
the higher education level among all
levels of education in India. The rapid
expansion of the tertiary capacity and
enrolment in the last two decades has
been mostly supported by the private
sector. The private sector is, however,
more present at the college level than at
the university level. Among the
universities, nearly 59% are publicly
managed, either by the central
government (20.5%) or the state
governments (38%). These public
universities accounted for nearly 73.7% of
the university enrolments. Among
affiliated colleges, only 21% were
government-managed while the rest were
private. In terms of enrolment, however,
government-managed colleges account
for nearly 35% of the students. A similar
pattern of private-sector prevalence is
apparent for stand-alone colleges with
around 76% being privately managed. In
comparison, almost half of the HEIs in the
US are publicly controlled while
accounting for nearly 75% of the overall
enrolments. The role of the private sector
in augmenting state capacity and
delivering educational efficiency can be
31
important for greater tertiary attainment;
however, the balance with other factors
becomes critical. Private HEIs are
generally more responsive to market
demands and can allow quicker
reorientation of graduate output. Private
institutions also tend to be less equitable,
costlier, and may yet lack quality.
Leveraging the potential of private HEIs in
achieving national roles is possible
through deliberate policy and regulatory
mechanisms.
Proliferation of the affiliated college
model has meant that the tertiary
education system in India is fragmented.
Indian (non-university) HEIs are typically
smaller than those around the world. The
average size of an affiliated college is 708
students. In some states like Bihar,
however, it can be as high as 2,000
students. At 588 students per college,
private colleges tend to be even smaller
than public colleges (1150 students).
However, the average size of the student
body at the universities is 8,294 students.
In comparison, HEIs in the US are sized at
around 4,800 students per institution,
while the UK universities have an average
student body of 7,800 students.
The size of a HEI becomes relevant in
terms of scaling the infrastructure,
f a c i l i t i e s , a n d t e a c h i n g t a l e n t by
concentrating the students. China has
adopted this approach for its tertiary
system. The universities in China tend to
be bigger with an average student body of
around 13,200. The scale benefits,
however, must be seen in the context of
the potential negative effects on the
quality and access of HEIs. NEP-2020
seeks to develop larger (more than 3,000
students) HEIs over time to harness these
benefits.
32
doctoral degrees. The UK conferred over
0.52 million graduate and 0.34 million
post-graduate degrees. This indicates
lower uptake or capacity for advanced
tertiary education. Various factors like
differential employment linkages, quality,
presence of research opportunities etc.
can have an impact on this ratio.
The divergences with advanced countries
are even starker at the doctoral level. The
post-graduate to doctoral enrolment ratio
for India was 24.76; while for the UK it was
only 5.33. India produced nearly 32,558
PhDs in 2022. On the other hand, the US
and the UK conferred a doctoral5 degree
to nearly 1,90,000 and 23,000 students
respectively. Doctoral enrolments often
reflect the focus on research as well as
the size of the potential teaching pool
quality for the higher education system.
Attracting, retaining, and supporting
doctoral talent creates a spectrum of
benefits for the HEIs. Performance at this
level of education is essential for building
a high-performing education system in
the modern economy.
Level Patterns in Higher
Education:
Entry-level tertiary education has a
dominant presence in the Indian higher
education system as compared to other
developed countries often at the expense
of advanced tertiary education at postgraduate levels. In India, the highest
number enrolments (34.1 million) are at
the undergraduate levels accounting for
nearly 79% of the overall enrolments. A
more modest 5.2 million (12.5% of total)
were enrolled at the post-graduate level,
while another 0.21 million students were
e n ro l l e d f o r P h D p ro g ra m m e s . A
substantial 6.7% were also enrolled in
diploma programmes. Reclassified into
only two groups viz. undergraduate and
post-graduate, the undergraduate share
in enro lments will be 86. 7%. Fo r
comparison, undergraduate students in
the US account for a relatively lower 83%
of the student body; while for the UK, it is
further lower at 71%.
The undergraduate to post-graduate ratio
(6.5) for India was higher than both the US
(4.9) and the UK (2.44). Among the 10.7
million degrees awarded in 2022, 7.75
million students graduated out of the
Indian higher education system at
undergraduate level. It also turned out
nearly 1.77 million post-graduates. On the
other hand, the US turned out nearly 2.1
million graduates, 0.86 million postgraduates, and nearly 0.19 million
5. In the case of US, doctoral degrees include professional qualifications in medicine and law. Adjusting for
these areas of study, the US still turns out nearly 90 thousand doctoral degrees.
33
with a degree in health professions, social
sciences, and engineering have a major
presence. In the UK, business and
management degrees along with medical
subjects and social sciences are the
major fields at the undergraduate level. In
both the US and the UK, degrees in
business and management, health
professions, and education are the major
fields at the post-graduate level. At the
doctoral level, however, engineering and
education are the biggest contributors to
6
doctoral turn-out in the US. This pattern,
while reflective of the non-specialization
preference, is also a result of the difficulty
of choosing narrow educational
pathways early in the careers. Fast
changing demands of the market can also
disincentivize the choice of narrower
areas of study. A need for greater balance
between generic and specialized content
may thus be necessary at the higher
education level. NEP-2020 has sought to
pursue this path through a multidisciplinary curriculum and institutions
allowing greater flexibility to students in
terms of choosing their courses.
The skew towards general education is
also reflected in the orientation of HEIs
which creates a foundation for greater
multidisciplinary education. A large
proportion of the universities (56.4%) are
general in terms of curriculum with
technical universities (16.5%) and
medical universities (7%) constituting the
second and third largest categories. The
Discipline Preferences in
Higher Education:
In terms of fields of study, the Indian
higher education system is also skewed
toward general disciplines (like arts,
commerce, and science). More than a
third of the enrolments at the
undergraduate level were in the discipline
of arts followed by science (14.8%),
commerce (13.3%), engineering (11.8%),
and education (5.2%). At the postgraduate level, social science was the
most popular discipline accounting for
about a fifth of the enrolments followed
by science (14%), management (14%),
and commerce (10%).
There are over 230 programmes offered
by Indian HEIs but the basic BA, BSc, and
BCom (including respective Honours
programmes) degree contribute nearly
27% of the enrolments. Even among the
degrees awarded, at the undergraduate
level as well as the post-graduate level, a
similar pattern of discipline preference
was visible. At the doctoral level, however,
science (22.7%) and engineering (19.2%)
are the largest disciplines followed by
social science (14%) and management
(13.4%). In the US, the liberal
arts/sciences degree accounts for nearly
two-fifths of the associate degrees and
along with health professions and
business account for nearly 70% of the
degrees awarded; while for the bachelor’s
programme, a business degree along
6. After adjusting for the law and medical professional degrees
34
bulk of affiliated colleges (60%) are also
general, followed by those specializing in
teacher education, engineering, and
nursing. Stand-alone colleges are more
likely to be specialized with polytechnics,
teacher training, and nursing colleges
contributing the largest share.
Institutional specialization has the
benefits of scale and concentration of
knowledge and talent which are likely to
translate into better quality. A HEI is more
often than not likely to excel in one area of
knowledge than all. Many of India’s best
performing HEIs are focused on one
discipline. However, this can limit the
overall reach and efficacy of investment
while restricting student options. The
multi-disciplinary HEIs envisaged under
NEP-2020 will thus play a major role in
transforming this aspect of tertiary
education landscape.
STEM enrolments in India are higher than
many advanced countries but related
outcomes are muted. The enrolment in
STEM fields at all tertiary levels was
around 25.6% of the overall enrolments
for India. In terms of graduate out-turn,
UNESCO reports a higher STEM share of
29.33% for India. This is higher than both
the US (20.07%) and the UK (22.26%).
However, the benefits of the STEM
enrolment may be skewed by the general
undergraduate science degree (BSc)
which accounts for nearly 50% of the
STEM enrolment and may not deliver the
quality required for improved outcomes in
the field. This is reflected in the general
underperformance in various STEM
indicators related to research and
development, publications etc. STEM
educational attainment is increasingly
being considered critical for economic
success of nations in the modern global
economy. It is a source of
competitiveness, technological advance,
and workforce flexibility. The place for
STEM in higher education is set to rise and
will have to be addressed proactively.
35
teaching positions in India are at the
lecturer/assistant professor level, while
professor-level positions constitute only
10%. Only 0.8% are visiting teachers. In
comparison, in the US, professors
constituted nearly 22.4% of the faculty
which was distributed almost evenly over
different levels of teaching positions.
In India, there are also around 1.2 million
non-teaching staff employed in HEIs
which makes the teeth-to-tail ratio for
HEIs to 1.325. As one of the most critical
components of the tertiary system, the
adequacy of teachers and maintenance
of their standards is important for
success of the system. A range of
demand-side factors like lack of financial
re s o u rc e s , d e l ay s i n re c r u i t m e n t ,
mismatches in openings and skills,
inadequate career progression,
overburdening with non-academic
responsibilities etc. can affect the
situation of teaching staff. Further,
supply-side factors like lack of subject
competencies, mismatch in pedagogical
and subject skills, withdrawal due to
inadequate compensation, lack of
familiarity with technological tools etc.
can result in sub-optimal outcomes. As
one of the biggest expenditure heads in
the spending on education, the situation
of teachers can be a source of significant
efficiencies and effectiveness.
Staff in Higher
Education:
Quantity and quality of teaching staff in
the tertiary education system in India
generally underperforms the advanced
countries and is also highly uneven. There
are over 1.59 million higher education
faculty members in the country. In
comparison, the US had around 0.8
million full-time faculty members, while
the UK had around 0.2 million full-time
faculty members. The pupil-teacher ratio
(PTR) for all HEIs nationally is around 23
for regular students. In the case of
universities, it stands at 18. The OECD
average PTR for tertiary education is
around 15.6 with a much lower ratio for
the US (13.5) and the UK (13). In India, the
distribution of teachers and quality is also
very lumpy with higher ranking colleges
having a high concentration of quantity
and quality. The average number of
faculty is around 645 for the NIRF overall
top 100 HEIs, but for the remaining HEIs it
was a more modest 162. For NIRF top 100
colleges, the average faculty size was
173 but for remaining colleges it was only
71. A fourth of the total faculty was
employed in the NIRF overall top 100
HEIs, while they also accounted for nearly
35% of the PhD faculty. The disparity was
only marginally less stark in the case of
colleges where the NIRF top 100 colleges
accounted for 17% of the overall faculty
but hosted nearly 22% of the doctoral
faculty. About 68% of the tertiary
36
HEI in the QS rankings is 147 (IISC in
2016). In the case of the THE World
University Rankings 2024, only one
university ranked among the top 500 (IISC
in the 201-250 band). In comparison, 83
and 107 US universities are listed in the
QS and THE top 500 rankings in 2024
respectively, along with 49 and 53 UK
universities. In 2024, 29 and 32 Chinese
universities also made to the top 500 of
the QS and THE rankings respectively.
Within the sub-categories for these
ra n k i n g s , t h e ra n ke d I n d i a n H E I s
performance was highly varied.
Quality:
The quality of the Indian higher system as
measured by global rankings is limited
and can be highly uneven within the
country. In terms of global rankings,
Indian HEIs have a sparse presence. The
QS World University Rankings 2024
enumerated 11 Indian HEIs among the
world's top 500 universities and none in
the top hundred. Of the 11 ranked HEIs,
seven were IITs and one was IISC. All the
ranked HEIs were publicly managed. The
highest-ever rank achieved by an Indian
SCORES AS PER QS WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS 2024
India Last in World 500th
World Best India Best in
(University
Top 500
Top 500 (IITB) (IIT
(MIT)
of Delaware)
Indore)
Overall Score
100
51.7
25.2
23.2
Academic Reputation
100
55.5
5.6
10.2
Employer Reputation
100
81.9
4.3
7.9
Faculty Student Ratio
100
18.9
33.3
6.9
Citations Per Faculty
100
73.1
94.4
59.1
International Faculty Ratio
100
4.7
2.3
36.3
International Student Ratio
88.2
1.4
1.1
13.7
International Research Network
94.3
8.5
1.2
28.2
Employment Outcomes
100
47.4
8.4
19.8
Sustainability
95.2
54.9
2
31.8
37
SCORES AS PER THE WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS 2024
World Best
World 500th
(University
of Oxford)
India Best in
Top 500 (IISC)
(National Yang Ming
Chiao Tung University)
Overall Score
98.5
55.9–58.6
45.4–49.0
Teaching
96.6
62.9
44
Research Environment
100
57.8
44.3
Research Quality
99
53.9
52.9
Industry
98.7
96
99.9
International Outlook
97.5
31.1
41.4
India’s own HEI quality measurement systems shows
significant divergences among Indian HEIs and their quality.
A
B
C The National Assessment and Accreditation Council
UNIVERSITIES 55 41 4 (NAAC) system, a more comprehensive quality system than
annual rankings, has (till 2023) only accredited about twoCOLLEGES
21 67 12 fifths of the universities and a quarter of the colleges
(including affiliated and standalone colleges) indicating a
limited coverage of quality assurance. A quality dichotomy between accredited
universities and colleges is also apparent. While about 55% of the universities were
categorized in the top-most grade (A), only 21% of colleges were graded thus. The high
variability in quality can be seen in the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF)
also. In the overall category for NIRF-2023, the highest-ranking HEI (IIT-M) scored an
overall score of 86.69 with the scores for the 100th HEI (Christ University) almost
halved to 45.65. Even among the NIRF rankings, IITs and other INIs remain dominant.
Public HEIs and larger HEIs tend to perform better in overall category. Most top ranked
institutions, however, perform relatively poorly on Research and Professional Practice
and Perception parameters as compared to others. (National Institutional Ranking
Framework, 2023) (KPMG, 2023).
NAAC ACCREDITATIONS
GRADES AS OF 2023
HEI SCORES AS PER NIRF-2023
NIRF OVERALL 1ST
NIRF OVERALL 100TH
Total Score
86.69
45.65
Teaching and Learning Resources
86.45
52.14
Research and Professional Practice
89.88
18.96
Graduation Outcome
87.22
67.20
Outreach and Inclusivity
63.59
69.84
Perception
100
39.05
38
This pattern of variable and lumpy quality generally emanates from the policy choice
of creating a few public institutions that are of high quality with focused investments.
These “centres of gravity” for higher quality tend to attract the best of resources,
teaching talent, and students. Most INIs fall in this category. While this choice enables
effectiveness of resources and creates role models for other institutions, it can also
lead to limited progress in quality of other institutions. This also severely constraints
supply for students which can lead to a mismatch with demand, increase the cost for
competing for limited seats, and forge new psychosocial dynamics. Admissions to
these institutions are aspirational and highly competitive. Nearly a third of secondary
and higher secondary students report taking coaching classes. The equity principle
may also be affected due to disadvantages of economic status. The dichotomy of elite
and mass institutions (in terms of quality) has defined many aspects of India's
educational landscape and remains its prominent feature.
Outcomes:
The relative advantages of higher
education over other levels are
undoubted, however the expected
outcomes may not always be fully
realized. The scale of outcomes realized
for individuals is generally dependent on
academic success, which in itself is a
result of many complex factors. The
record of Indian students in terms of
academic success is mixed. Level of
foundational skills like reading and
numeracy, which are outcomes of the
lower levels of the education system, can
have a big impact on student
achievement. Pass percentages vary
widely between levels and gender. For
undergraduate courses, the pass
percentage stands between 48-53%.
Women tend to have a higher pass
percentage except in diploma and
integrated courses. Around 5% of the
individuals enrolled in courses are likely to
d ro p o u t b e f o re c o m p l e t i o n . T h e
knowledge and skills gained even after
completing tertiary education may not
bring adequate expected benefits for
individual and structural reasons.
Employment rates for tertiary educated
individuals are lower as compared to
other OECD countries at all levels. A
significant propor tion of college
graduates are known to lack skills which
are required by the market affecting their
employability. Further, sorting patterns
based on institutional credentials and
socio-economic status can create
inequalities of outcomes.
39
colleges. Privatization also showed a
significant regional skew with larger and
more developed states showing a
relatively larger presence of private
colleges; while smaller states were more
likely to have a more balanced or publicleaning landscape. In the case of
enrolments, however, the picture is more
mixed with the private-public ratio being
less stark (except for Andhra Pradesh). In
some states like Madhya Pradesh,
Jharkhand, and West Bengal, public
colleges were servicing more enrolments
even while being fewer in number. States
like Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh
have nearly 90 universities each with a
significant number of state private
universities. Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu,
and Karnataka have a large number of
private deemed universities. Some states
like Tamil Nadu, Delhi, Kerala, Gujarat, and
Andra Pradesh have higher levels of PhD
enrolments relative to their
undergraduate pools. The regional
diversity of landscape thus creates
different challenges for transforming the
higher education system and calls for a
tailor-made approach.
Regional Variations:
There are significant state-wise
variations in India’s performance in the
higher education sector in almost all
aspects. The participation in the higher
education system is highly uneven across
states. The tertiary GER in India was
highest in the UTs of Chandigarh (64) and
Puducherry (61). Among major states;
Delhi (49), Tamil Nadu (47), Kerala (41.3)
had some of the highest tertiary GERs;
while Assam (16.2), Chhattisgarh (17.4),
Bihar (17.8) reported the lowest tertiary
GERs. Over the last five years, an
improvement has been observed in
tertiary GER in almost all major states
with some states like Madhya Pradesh,
Bihar, Kerala etc. showing bigger gains.
Access and distribution of HEIs also
show significant regional divergences.
Based on the age pool of 18-23 years, the
college-population density nationally is
around 300 colleges per million
population. States like Bihar, Jharkhand,
7
Delhi, Tripura, Assam, and West Bengal
report a density of less than or equal to
150 colleges per million; while other
states like Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh,
Telangana, Kerala, and Himachal Pradesh
have a density higher than 450. States like
G u j a ra t , M a h a ra s h t ra , K a r n a t a k a ,
Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu
have a relatively greater presence of
specialized colleges than other states
apart from the general curriculum
7. Due to large presence of non-affiliated institutions
40
women have a lower (42%) share in
enrolment. They outnumber men in
general sciences stream at all levels; but
remain grossly underrepresented in
engineering and technology streams at all
levels.
Women are also more likely to drop out at
the graduate level than men. Women are
underrepresented in teaching positions
with only 77 female faculty for every 100
male faculty. Ensuring an equal share for
women in the higher education system is
highly desirable. Equitable participation
of women in the higher education system
is also central to achieve the socioeconomic goals as the marginal impact of
greater women participation in education
can be much higher.
Gender Equity:
In terms of equitable opportunities and
outcomes for women, the higher
education system presents a mixed
picture. The tertiary GER for women was
marginally higher than men (28.5 and
28.3 respectively) and the improvement
in GER in the last five years for both
genders has been in lockstep. The pattern
of higher female GER was prevalent
across most major states except Odisha,
Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan etc.
Within disadvantaged groups, a higher
female tertiary GER is also observed
among SCs; however, in the case of STs, it
is marginally lower by 0.5 points.
However, in terms of absolute numbers,
fewer women are enrolled in tertiary
education (915 for every 1000 men). It is
only at the post-graduate levels that
women outnumber men in terms of
enrolment. Women also outnumber men
when only enrolments in affiliated
colleges are considered indicating some
constraints of physical mobility as
colleges are more likely to be situated
geographically closer.
Gender patterns are also reflected in
course choices. Women enrolments tend
to be higher in programmes like general
degrees, education, architecture, nursing,
dentistry etc. at the undergraduate level,
while the general post-graduate
programmes also tend to attract higher
female enrolments. In STEM fields,
41
smaller states, ST-GERs are marginally
higher than overall tertiary GER. For most
states, the improvement in the overall GER
over the last five years is reflected in
comparable improvements in the SC-GER
and ST-GER.
SC students accounted for around 15.4%
of the total enrolments, while ST
enrolments contributed around 6.3%. SC
and ST enrolments have grown faster
(25.4% and 41.6% respectively) than the
overall growth in enrolments (18.1%)
between 2017-18 and 2021-22.
Affirmative action policies, including
reservations, have enabled to improve the
equity of participation for the
disadvantaged groups. However, this
does not always ensure equity in
outcomes as compared to other groups
(Frisancho Robles & Krishna, 2012).
Social Equity:
Among the historically disadvantaged
groups of SCs and STs, educational
participation and outcomes remain
generally lower than average even in
midst of large variations. For SCs, the
tertiary GER was lower by around 2.5
points nationally as compared to the
overall tertiary GER. In the case of many
small states, however, the SC-GER is
higher than the overall GER along with the
major states of Maharashtra and Gujarat.
Major negative gaps in SC-GER as
compared to average are seen in states
like Karnataka, Kerala, Himachal Pradesh.
STs have a tertiary GER lower by almost
7.2 points nationally vis-à-vis overall GER.
In some states like Madhya Pradesh,
Karnataka, and Maharashtra, the gap can
be higher than 10 points; while in some
42
course choices also. A rural student is
less likely to take up a technical course as
compared to a general course. She is also
more likely to take a humanities course
after 10th standard in lieu of a science or
commerce course. A rural student taking
up a professional course is half as likely
as an urban student to opt for engineering,
medicine, or law course; but is more likely
to take agriculture, education, or
vocational courses.
Students8 from rural areas are more likely
to move to urban areas for education; but
almost a third of those who move from
their original residence remain in rural
areas. While students from urban areas
are also likely to move to other urban
areas within the state for education,
nearly two-fifths of those who move are
likely to go to other states. The urban-rural
geography of higher education is critical
in terms of expanding access to higher
education. The factors shaping this
aspect may lie within the tertiary system
(provider choices, quality etc.) as well as
outside (transport, proximity to job
markets, perceptions etc.).
Urban-Rural Differences:
There appears to be a notable rural-urban
divide in terms of attainment, access, and
outcomes of higher education. There is a
clear divide on attainment levels with the
tertiary attainment (15 years and above)
in urban areas (21.7%) being nearly four
times higher than rural areas (5.7%). For
the 15 years and above age cohort, while
the average years of schooling
completed by an urban person was 10.9
years; for a rural person it was only 9
years. For 25 years and above, the urban
rate remained almost the same (10.8) but
dropped to 8.4 in the case of a rural
person indicating the legacy effects of
lower tertiary participation. While the
rural-urban distribution of institutions
and enrolment is not available, the agespecific attendance ratio for 18-23 years
for rural areas was lower than urban areas
by almost 14 points.
Disadvantages of economic status are
aggravated by the urban-rural disparity.
There is a significant difference in tertiary
attendance for lowest quintile of
expenditure (as an indicator of economic
status) for rural areas which was nearly
half of the lowest quintile in the urban
areas. In rural areas, the Gross
Attendance Ratio for the highest quintile
of expenditure was nearly three times
that of the lowest quintile; but for the
urban areas, it was a relatively lower 2.75
times. The disparity is reflected in the
8. Includes tertiary and non-tertiary students
43
most tangible return for the higher
education service providers, cost of
education can shape choices and
attitudes in many different ways. Cost is
the strongest channel through which
market forces work in the education
sector. It also has a direct impact on the
equity of higher education by creating
barriers. The cost factor has become even
more important since the expansion of
the private education sector. On one hand,
while recovery of costs by HEIs is
desirable to make them self-sustaining
and trigger a virtuous cycle of investment
into the education sector; on the other
hand, affordability is essential to protect
open and equitable access to the tertiary
system. Cost, thus, has impact on the
state and structure of higher education
across multiple outcomes and will be a
critical aspect of India's education
system.
Cost of Higher Education
and Financial Aid:
Cost of general tertiary education in India
is comparable with advanced nations but
location, choice of course, and
institutions can have a significant effect
on affordability. In 2017-18, average
annual cost for a general undergraduate
course was around ₹14,624 which
amounts to around 13% of GDP per
capita. In the same year, the annual cost
of a general undergraduate course in the
US was around 10.8% of the GDP per
capita. It is notable that the annual cost of
a general undergraduate degree is only
marginally higher than higher secondary
level (₹13,845). Higher secondary
education in urban areas tends to be
costlier than a graduate course on
average. A technical/professional course
at the tertiary level is four times costlier
than a general course. The expenditure
incurred in public institutions at graduate
level is around half of the private (aided
and unaided) colleges, for general as well
as technical/professional courses.
It is obvious that cost is a function of
many variables including location, level,
course, institution, quality and has
many components including tuition
fees, boarding costs, study
material, other expenditures etc.
As the most tangible negative
payoff of opting for higher
education for students and as the
44
Financial aid to enable affordability is
available to a section of the tertiary
student body but there is more room for
broader access. Nearly 7.5% of the
individuals studying at the tertiary level
received free education, with a higher
9.1% in rural areas and 5.5% in urban
areas. This is the lowest proportion of
free education among all levels of
education in India. However, around 19%
of the tertiary students also report
receiving scholarships, with a higher
23.2% in rural areas and 15.7% in urban
areas. Generally, this is the secondhighest propor tion of scholarship
beneficiaries among all levels of
education after non-tertiary diploma and
certificate courses. In this financial year
alone, post-matric scholarships worth
more than ₹1,100 crores were disbursed
through the National Scholarship Portal
and many state governments provide
their own scholarships in addition.
However, as compared to the US where
nearly 63% of first-time undergraduates
received aid in the form of grants, there
remains significant room for expanding
the financial aid programmes. Further, the
structure and eligibility of the financial aid
programme can be optimized for
furthering the goal of best education for
all as financial need may be variable
across level of education, phase of life,
gender, nature of programme etc. A
comprehensive financial aid system will
have to be complementary to the tertiary
system.
Investment in Higher
Education:
Public expenditure on tertiary education
in India normalized for the size of GDP is
comparable with advanced countries,
however the differences in absolute size
of the economy and enrolments results in
a wide gap in available resources. For
international comparison, in 2020, public
expenditure on tertiary education as a
percentage of GDP was around 1.5% for
India as compared to 1.51% for the UK
and 1.81% for the US as per UNESCO
data. Average public funding to tertiary
education in OECD countries is around
1.1% of the GDP. In absolute terms,
however, India’s public expenditure on
tertiary education was around $43 billion
as compared to the US which spent $386
billion and the UK which spent $48 billion
for much smaller student populations. As
a percentage of total government
expenditure on education, ter tiary
education accounted for 35% of the
spending in India, while it was
comparable 33% for the US and 30.5% in
the UK.
As of 2020-2021, the total government
expenditure on education was budgeted
to be around ₹ 9.19 lakh crore; of which
higher education accounted for 13.3%
and technical education accounted for
another 20.5%. In 2021-22, as a
percentage of GDP, spending on higher
education was about 0.62% of the GDP,
45
and combined with technical education it
was around 1.57% pointing to an
increasing trend. Public expenditure on
tertiary education is a critical feature of
most major economies since it is
i m p o r t a n t to l eve ra g e t h e h i g h e r
education sector for national priorities.
Governments tend to be the biggest
financers of tertiary education in OECD
countries with nearly four times as much
spending as private sources. Over the
next few years, with its resources and
mandate to fill gaps, the public sector will
continue to play a major role in the higher
education sector. Public expenditure is
thus one aspect of the public sector’s
commitment to the sector and can be
relatively most impactful for national
goals.
Nature, composition, and quality of public
investment in tertiary education in India
are notable for their peculiarities and can
affect the evolution of the system. A
major proportion of the public investment
in India is in the nature of revenue
expenditure. In advanced countries,
nearly 8-9% of the public spending is
capital expenditure. This affects the longterm returns of the investment by limiting
spending to short-term uses. The relative
prioritization of public expenditure for
lower levels of education is also apparent
in India.
The public spending on secondary
education is just marginally higher than
secondary education. In the OECD
countries, the public expenditure for
tertiary education tends to be 1.4 times
higher than secondary education. India
also routes a greater proportion of public
funding through private channels. Nearly
41% of India’s government spending on
higher education through education
departments was for “assistance to
u n i v e r s i t i e s ” a n d “a s s i s t a n c e t o
government colleges”. Another 27%
accounted for “assistance to nongovernment colleges”, just above half of
the proportion of assistance to public HEI.
For OECD countries, public expenditure
through private institutions is only about a
fourth of that through public institutions.
46
Policy and Regulatory
Landscape:
Focus on Research:
Research as a critical area of the higher
education system still remains below its
potential with limited representation for
India in the global landscape and is
mostly clustered in few institutions.
India’s overall research and development
(R&D) expenditure remains at around
0.65% of the GDP; while high income
countries spend nearly 2.9% of the GDP
on R&D. China also spends around 2.4%
of GDP on research.
This underperformance is also reflected
in the number of researchers and
publications. India has only 260
researchers per million while highincome countries and China report nearly
4400 and 1687 researchers per million
respectively. As per NIRF-2023, India’s
share (over the period of 2019-2021) in
the global scientific publications is just
4.81%. In engineering, however, India
notably contributes around 7% of the
global publications. There is a significant
concentration of publications in top
ranking institutions in India. Around 1.4%
of the overall HEIs produce nearly 26% of
the Indian publications emanating from
this HEI category. Over 64% of the
publications by HEIs in the NIRF overall
category came from the top 100 HEIs. In
the case of colleges, however, NIRF sub100 colleges contributed nearly twothirds of the research papers. The
absolute output was also moderate and
The higher education sector is majorly
influenced by a myriad of stakeholders,
with the central and state governments
being most prominent. Central and state
governments are the two most important
and influential stakeholders in the system
with a major presence in policy, resource
allocation and execution. As higher
education is a part of the Concurrent List,
both the Center and the states exercise
control over the sector. A gamut of
regulatory bodies at the central level like
the University Grants Commission and
professional education bodies like the
AICTE and many state level legislations
have an impact in the respective areas.
Many ministries and departments are
involved in controlling standards for
professional courses or providing
financial aid at both state and central
levels. Both states and the Center run
universities and colleges. However,
states contributed around 68% of the
public expenditure on university and
higher education; while in case of
technical education, states cumulatively
spent only marginally more than the
Center. The shared jurisdiction creates a
need for coordination of intent and
resources for optimizing the outcomes
over the next few years.
47
uneven. HEIs classified as research
institutions published nearly 1990 papers
per institution. Universities published
around 706 papers per college. Average
papers published by all NIRF-2023 overall
HEIs is around 377; while for colleges it
was a meagre 17 papers per college.
However, it is critical to note that a
significant share of the scientific
publications from India came from NIRFranked institution, which points to the
primacy of the academic sector in the
research output in India as compared to
t h e i n d u s t r y. T h i s h i g h l i g h t s t h e
importance of the higher education
sector in the research landscape of India.
A complex interaction of talent and
facilities drives the research output of the
higher education system with the
underlay of quality and resources. The
quality of research output is also
important as only the research advancing
the state of knowledge can deliver the
relevant social and economic outcomes.
Issues like IP rights, academic integrity,
and predatory publications can affect the
research function of the higher education
system significantly. Extension of
research is another critical aspect which
defines the utility of the research
function.
The newly created Anusandhan National
Research Foundation defines a new
epoch for Indian research and will
influence the area deeply over the years to
come.
Alternative Learning
Modes:
Off-campus modes of learning also form
a big part of higher education delivery in
India. Among the overall university
enrolments, nearly a third are enrolled in
open universities providing distance
education. In total, nearly 4.5 million of
the 43 million enrolments are enrolled for
the distance mode. New online
programmes and broader access to
facilities for internet-enabled distance
learning along with the expanding use of
MOOCs are changing the landscape for
tertiary education rapidly, a process
which was only accelerated by the Covid19 pandemic. The ease, efficiency, and
scale of delivering higher education
through these modes is a critical pathway
for rapid expansion of the tertiary system.
However, the nature of this expansion is
subject to the context of differential
access to the internet and technology
a l o n g w i t h t h e n e e d to m a i n t a i n
standards of learning.
48
engineering fields (National Science
Board, 2022). The quest for quality
education, better research facilities, as
well as other outcomes of studying in
foreign universities is obviously leading to
this massive outflow of talent. A complex
set of factors is also at work which drives
this situation which includes limited
domestic capacity in some fields, IP
regime issues, cultural preferences etc.
On the other hand, similar factors limit the
inflow of students to India. Good
education systems that attract the best of
talent from across the world enable the
countries to not just use their own
resources for national priorities but
expand the pool of human and financial
resources further. The dynamics of
internationalization will have a major
impact on the Indian tertiary education
system over the next few years.
Internationalization of
Higher Education:
Internationalization of tertiary education
is notably present but mainly as a oneway phenomenon in India emanating
from both positive and negative
preferences. As of 2022, nearly 46,800
international students studied in India.
Nearly three-quarters of these were
enrolled at undergraduate levels. The
biggest contributors to international
students were Nepal (13,126),
Afghanistan (3,151), the US (2,893),
Bangladesh (2,606), UAE (2,287) and
Bhutan (1,562). Nearly a tenth of these
international students were enrolled in
the B.Tech. programme, which was the
biggest contributor to international
students. In contrast, the outgo of Indian
students to foreign universities is
massive. Nearly 1.32 million Indians were
enrolled abroad as of 2022, with the
largest proportion of these being located
in the US (35.7%), followed by Canada
(14%), UAE (12%), Australia (7.7%), Saudi
Arabia (5%) and the UK (4.2%). A large
majority of the Indian students going to
US pursue post-graduate courses with
77% among these opting for science and
engineering courses.
Between 2000-2020, Indians accounted
for nearly 12.5% of the doctoral degree
awarded in the US to international
students with a significant share of
degrees being in the science and
49
This is but only a snapshot of the
multifaceted dynamics at play affecting
the higher education system in India.
There are other critical aspects like
content of the curriculum, industry
linkages, availability of facilities,
innovation and incubation, language of
instruction, pedagogical training,
evaluation systems, international
collaborations etc. with their own features
affecting the state of the higher education
system in India. The higher education
system also must be looked at in the
context of the global trends that are fast
reforming the milieu of the sector. These
include the access to large resources of
i n f o r m a t i o n t h ro u g h t h e i n t e r n e t ,
emergence of new areas like AI, strategic
importance of research etc.
50
Visionary Initiatives in
Higher Education Since 2014
Against this background, since 2014,
India has made great progress on the
front of higher education with improved
outcomes and visionary changes in this
sector. There has been brisk progress in
key indicators like enrolment, capacity,
gender parity etc., while research and
innovation have also shown accelerated
advance.
The most important reform in the higher
education sector which lays the
groundwork for all future activity in the
sector is the National Education Policy
2020. This policy seeks to “transform
India into a vibrant knowledge society and
global knowledge superpower through
broad based, flexible, multidisciplinary
education suited to 21st century needs”.
For higher education, it sets the target for
achieving a tertiary GER of 50% by 2035
while makes fundamental changes to the
landscape of the sector in the form of
flexible curriculum, multidisciplinary
HEIs, graded autonomy to colleges,
promotion of digital education, focus on
multiple entry/exit options etc.
Apart from this, structural reforms like the
establishment of the Anusandhan
National Research Foundation are
overhauling the sector in a major way.
Initiatives like the National Credit
Framework, National Higher Education
Qualification Framework, Academic Bank
of Credit have been launched for greater
fl e x i b i l i t y f o r l e a r n e r s . S W AYA M
regulations allowing learners to avail
credits through online and ODL learning
have been introduced. In order to enable
internationalization, regulations for
campuses of foreign HEIs in India have
been issued along with regulations for
'Academic Collaboration between Indian
and Foreign HEIs to offer Twinning, Joint
Degree and Dual Degree Programmes'.
Foreign universities have been permitted
to offer select courses in GIFT City in
Ahmedabad.
The World Class Institutions Scheme was
also launched under which 20 institutions
are slated to be developed as 'Institutes of
Eminence'. Further, initiatives like GIAN,
SPARC etc. have been leveraged to
improve varied aspects of higher
education. The National Scholarship
Portal has streamlined the process of
financial aid disbursement significantly.
All these measures have been adequately
supported by intent and resources. The
last 10 years have created a solid
foundation for taking the higher
education sector to new heights.
51
The stream of progress has
been constantly flowing in the
t e r t i a r y e d u c a t i o n s e c to r,
however, the aspiration for
creating a Viksit Bharat by 2047
calls for even loftier ambitions.
Through this inaugural
NationBuilding case study
competition, we invite the
youth of this country to build
on the progress since 2014
and collectively envision,
engage with, and enable the
nation's highest destiny of a
In order to leverage the higher education
system for enabling Viksit Bharat and to
make the higher education system
worthy of the nation's developed status, a
comprehensive transformation of the
higher education system will be required.
Viksit Bharat needs a world-class higher
education system.
Viksit Bharat status…
one transformation
at a time!
52
References
Barro, R. J. (2001).
Human Capital and Growth. The American
Economic Review, 91(2).
Booth, J., Miller, J., Halterbeck, M., & Conlon, G.
(2023).
The impact of the higher education sector on the
UK economy. London: London Economics.
Bouhajeb, M., Mefteh, H., & Ben Ammar, R.
(2018).
Higher education and economic growth: The
importance of innovation. Atlantic Review of
Economics, 1(2).
D'Addio, A. (2007).
Intergenerational Transmission of Disadvantage:
Mobility or Immobility Across Generations? Paris:
OECD Publishing.
Dee, T. S. (2004).
Are There Civic Returns To Education? Journal of
Public Economics, 88(9-10).
Department for Education (UK). (2023).
Graduate Labour Market Statistics.
Égert, B., de la Maisonneuve, C., & Turner, D.
(2022).
A new macroeconomic measure of human
capital exploiting PISA and PIAAC: Linking
education policies to productivity. Paris: OECD
Publishing.
Flabbi, L., & Gatti, R. (2018).
A Primer on Human Capital. World Bank Group.
Frisancho Robles, V. C., & Krishna, K. (2012).
Affirmative Action in Higher Education in India:
Targeting, Catch Up, and Mismatch. NBER
Working Paper No.17727.
Galan-Muros, V. B., & Alep Liu, B. (2023).
Higher education contribution to national
technological development. UNESCO.
Helliwell, J. F., & Putnam, R. D. (2007).
Education and Social Capital. Eastern Economic
Journal, 33(1).
Hoidn, S., & Kärkkäinen, K. (2014).
PROMOTING SKILLS FOR INNOVATION IN
HIGHER EDUCATION: A LITERATURE REVIEW ON
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROBLEM-BASED
LEARNING AND OF TEACHING BEHAVIOURS.
OECD Education Working Papers(100).
KPMG. (2023). National Institutional Ranking
Framework (NIRF) 2023:
Category Specific Ranking and Analysis. KPMG.
Ma, J., & Pender, M. (2023). Education Pays
2023:
THE BENEFITS OF HIGHER EDUCATION. New
York: College Board.
Marginson, S. (2016).
The worldwide trend to high participation higher
education: dynamics of social stratification in
inclusive systems. Higher Education, 72(4).
Ministry of Education. (2023).
All India Survey of Higher Education 2021-22. New
Delhi: Government of India.
Ministry of Eductaion. (2022).
ANALYSIS OF BUDGETED EXPENDITURE ON
EDUCATION 2018-19 TO 2020-21. New Delhi:
Government of India.
Ministry of Human Resource Development.
(2020).
National Education Policy 2020. New Delhi:
Government of India.
Moretti, E. (2004).
Estimating the social return to higher education:
evidence from longitudinal and repeated crosssectional data. Journal of Econometrics, 121(12).
NAFSA. (2023).
Economic Value Statistics. Retrieved from
NAFSA: https://www.nafsa.org/policy-andadvocacy/policy-resources/nafsa-internationalstudent-economic-value-tool-v2
53
Narayan, A., & Weide, R. V. (2018, June 3).
This is how your parents affect your social
mobility. Retrieved from World Economic Forum:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/07/inte
rgenerational-mobility-across-the-world-wheresocioeconomic-status-of-parents-matters-themost-and-least/
National Institutional Ranking Framework.
(2023).
India Rankings 2023. New Delhi: Government of
India.
National Sample Survey Organization. (2020).
NSS Report No.585: Household Social
Consumption on Education in India. New Delhi:
Government of India.
National Science Board. (2022).
Higher Education in Science and Engineering.
National Science Board, National Science
Foundation.
OECD. (2008).
Tertiary Education for the Knowledge Society:
Volume 1 and Volume 2. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2023).
Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators.
P a r i s : O E C D P u b l i s h i n g .
doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en
Oreopoulos, P., & Petronijevic, U. (2013).
Making College Worth It: A Review of the Returns
to Higher Education. The Future of Children,
23(1).
Ravi, S., Gupta, N., & Nagaraj, P. (2019).
Reviving Higher Education in India. New Delhi:
Brookings India.
Schofer, E., & Meyer, J. W. (2005).
The Worldwide Expansion of Higher Education in
the Twentieth Century. American Sociological
Review, 70(6).
Schwab, K., & Zahidi, S. (2020).
Global Competitiveness Report Special Edition
2020: How Countries are Performing on the Road
to Recovery. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
Suhonen, T., & Karhunen, H. (2019).
The intergenerational effects of parental higher
education: Evidence from changes in university
accessibility. Journal of Public Economics, 176.
UNDP. (2022).
2021/22 HDR Technical Note. United Nations
Development Programme.
UNESCO Institute of Statistics. (2024).
UIS.Stat.
United Nations, Department of Economic and
Social Affairs, Population Division. (2022).
World Population Prospects 2022, Online Edition.
New York: United Nations.
US Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2023).
Occupational Requirements Survey.
US Bureau of Labour Statistics. (2023).
Current Population Survey.
Vandenbroucke, G. (2023, October 5).
Schooling over Time and across Countries.
Retrieved from Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis:
h t t p s : // w w w . s t l o u i s f e d . o r g / o n - t h e economy/2023/oct/schooling-over-time-acrosscountries
WIPO. (2023). Global Innovation Index 2023:
Innovation in the face of uncertainty. Geneva:
World Intellectual Property Organization.
The NationBuilding Team has carefully gathered research for this case from reputable and credible sources.
Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information presented, recognizing the inherent
variability in dynamic data. However, the authors explicitly disclaim any responsibility, to the fullest extent
permitted by law, for the accuracy, completeness, or availability of the information provided in this case study.
Moreover, authors disclaim liability for any damages resulting from the use or reliance on the information
contained herein.
54
India’s Largest College Case Study Competition
www.nationbuildingindia.org