Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Assessing the Quality of Higher Education Institutions in India:An Alternative Framework


Affiliations
1 Internal Quality Assurance Cell, Department of Economics, Goa University, Taleigao Plateau, Goa 403 206, India
2 Department of Economics, Goa University, Taleigao Plateau, Goa 403 206, India
3 Department of Economics, Mumbai University, M.G. Road Fort, Mumbai 400 032, India
 

Various stakeholders use the ranking of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) as a measure of quality. This is evident from numerous ranking efforts – both of the government (National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) of the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD), the National Academic Accreditation Council (NAAC) and the National Board of Accreditation (NBA)) and the private sector. Developing countries like India should assess the academic quality by working with parameters that are globally acceptable, transparent to all stakeholders and not amenable to the control of lobby groups. One such parameter is publications in reputed international journals indexed by databases like Scopus and Web of Science is also considered by the NIRF. However, in contrary to the NIRF method, we propose that instead of considering the total publications the computations should be based on the publication rate (number of publications per teacher) to control the faculty size bias. Besides using the NIRF 2017 data, we observed that higher density of Ph D students increases both the number and the quality of publications and HEIs that invest more, tends to have a higher publication rate. Therefore, we conclude that the Indian HEIs should increase the number of Ph D students and access better funding in order to improve their global presence.

Keywords

National Institutional Ranking Framework, Publication Rate, Ranking HEIs, Scopus.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Hazelkorn, E., Rankings and the global reputation race. New. Dir. High Educ., 2014, 168, 13–26.

  • Cattell, J. K., American men of science: a biographical directory New York, Bowker, 2nd edn., 1910; https://archive.org/details/americanmenofsci03catt

  • Amsler, S. S. and Bolsmann, C., University ranking as social exclusion. Br. J. Soc. Educ., 2012, 33(2), 283–301.

  • Usher, A. and Savino, M., A global survey of university ranking and league tables. High Educ. Eur., 2007, 32(1), 5–15.

  • Altbach, P. G., The globalization of college and university rankings. Change Mag. High Learn, 2012, 44(1), 26–31.

  • Prathap, G. and Gupta, B. M., Ranking of Indian Universities for their research output and quality using a new performance index. Curr. Sci., 2009, 97(6), 751–752.

  • Farla, K. and Simmonds, P., REF 2014 Accountability Review: Costs, Benefits and Burden: Report by Technopolis to the four UK higher education funding bodies. Technopolis Group; 2015; http://www.technopolis-group.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/REF_costs_review_July_2015.pdf

  • Prathap, G., Excellence mapping of successful universities and research-focused institutions in India. Curr. Sci., 2016, 111(8), 1362.

  • Varian, H. R., Intermediate Microeconomics with Calculus: A Modern Approach, New York, W W Norton, 2014.

  • McFadden, D., Constant elasticity of substitution production functions. Rev. Econ. Stud., 1963, 30(2), 73–83.

  • Wooldridge, J. M., Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning; 2013, 5th edn,, p. 881.

  • Prathap, G., Mapping excellence and diversity of research performance in India. Curr. Sci., 2016, 111(3), 470–474.

  • Basu, A., Banshal, S. K., Singhal, K. and Singh, V. K., Designing a composite index for research performance evaluation at the national or regional level: ranking Central Universities in India. Scientometrics, 2016, 107(3), 1171–1193.

  • Broecke, S., University rankings: do they matter in the UK? Educ. Econ., 2015, 23(2), 137–161.

  • Soo, K. T., Does anyone use information from university rankings? Educ. Econ., 2013, 21(2), 176–190.

  • Mukhopadhyay, P., Sudarsan, P. K. and Tapaswi, M. P., Government’s ranking framework for higher education is biased towards larger institutions. The Wire, 2017 (cited 25 May 2017); https://thewire.in/139651/nirf-framework-biased-favour-large-heis/


Abstract Views: 489

PDF Views: 147




  • Assessing the Quality of Higher Education Institutions in India:An Alternative Framework

Abstract Views: 489  |  PDF Views: 147

Authors

Pranab Mukhopadhyay
Internal Quality Assurance Cell, Department of Economics, Goa University, Taleigao Plateau, Goa 403 206, India
Murari P. Tapaswi
Internal Quality Assurance Cell, Department of Economics, Goa University, Taleigao Plateau, Goa 403 206, India
P. K. Sudarsan
Department of Economics, Goa University, Taleigao Plateau, Goa 403 206, India
Kavya Sudarsan
Department of Economics, Mumbai University, M.G. Road Fort, Mumbai 400 032, India

Abstract


Various stakeholders use the ranking of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) as a measure of quality. This is evident from numerous ranking efforts – both of the government (National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) of the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD), the National Academic Accreditation Council (NAAC) and the National Board of Accreditation (NBA)) and the private sector. Developing countries like India should assess the academic quality by working with parameters that are globally acceptable, transparent to all stakeholders and not amenable to the control of lobby groups. One such parameter is publications in reputed international journals indexed by databases like Scopus and Web of Science is also considered by the NIRF. However, in contrary to the NIRF method, we propose that instead of considering the total publications the computations should be based on the publication rate (number of publications per teacher) to control the faculty size bias. Besides using the NIRF 2017 data, we observed that higher density of Ph D students increases both the number and the quality of publications and HEIs that invest more, tends to have a higher publication rate. Therefore, we conclude that the Indian HEIs should increase the number of Ph D students and access better funding in order to improve their global presence.

Keywords


National Institutional Ranking Framework, Publication Rate, Ranking HEIs, Scopus.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv114%2Fi06%2F1167-1173