The upcoming ‘India AI Impact Summit 2026’ will position the country as a landmark global destination that will shape the future of responsible and inclusive Artificial Intelligence (AI), experts have said. According to an IT Ministry statement on Tuesday, the 38th episode of ‘Digital India Ask Our Experts’ highlighted the ‘India AI Impact Summit 2026’ in the national capital from February 16-20.

Experts explained how the Summit is built around the three guiding pillars or ‘Sutras’ of People, Planet and Progress, with focused working groups or ‘Chakras’. The discussions and outcomes from these groups are expected to influence AI policy, skilling strategies and implementation across India and the Global South, said the ministry.

They also highlighted opportunities for youth, startups, women innovators and learners from Tier-2 and 3 cities, including AI and Data Labs, global challenges, pitch fests and the ‘YUVAI Global Youth Challenge’. “Viewers were informed about the ‘India AI Impact Expo 2026’, to be held at Bharat Mandapam from February 16–20, which will demonstrate how AI solutions are transforming sectors such as education, healthcare, agriculture and governance,” the ministry statement said.

It further stated that citizens raised questions on AI infrastructure, open data access, healthcare datasets, startup participation, governance, inclusion of non-tech users, and online participation. Experts argued that IndiaAI is aiming for the creation of open, secure, and inclusive platforms that would allow participation from individuals, small teams, and public sector organisations.

During a talk with Indian AI startups at his residence at 7, Lok Kalyan Marg, Prime Minister Narendra Modi encouraged AI startups to utilize AI for societal benefits. He strongly backed the idea of making AI affordable, inclusive, and transparent.

Calling his interaction with the youngsters “memorable and insightful”, he urged them to use AI for the betterment of society. PM Modi also lauded the AI-based startups for working in myriad fields ranging from e-commerce to material research to healthcare.

Kerala Cabinet gave the green light to the revised guidelines for the 'Connect to Work' scheme on Wednesday. The 'Connect to work' scheme is the main way through which the government intends to improve youth employability by providing structured skill development combined with financial assistance.

The Chief Minister's Office (CMO) had an official communication about the matter, the new rules require that applicants must be permanent residents of Kerala, between 18 and 30 years old, and their annual family income should be less than Rs 5 lakh.

The main target group of the scheme is the youth who are either currently receiving skill training or plan to do it at educational institutions recognised by the government such as government institutions, public sector units, private training centres, universities and deemed universities, or at the same time preparing for competitive examinations conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC), Staff Selection Commission (SSC) as well as recruitment tests for the armed forces, banks, railways and other central and state agencies.

The cabinet meeting chaired by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, decided that scholarships would be awarded to the first five lakh eligible applicants under the revised framework. Each selected beneficiary will be given a monthly scholarship of Rs. 1, 000 for 12 months.

The amount will be directly transferred to the beneficiaries bank accounts through the Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) system to ensure transparency and timely disbursal.

The Employment Department is given the responsibility of the executing agency for the Connec to Work scheme and the applicants may submit their applications through the official portal eemployment.kerala.gov.in.

The government stated that the programme is designed to raise the young peoples self, confidence, keep their desire to learn going and improve their employability through regular skill development. Besides, the officials said that the programme's goal is to give financial stability during the vital transition period from education or training to employment.

Due to the growing competition for jobs both in the government and the private sector, the revised scheme will be able to provide the much needed support to the candidates from economically weaker families. The government is sure that the initiative will solve the problem of unemployment as well as create a more skilled, resilient, and future, ready workforce in the state.

For decades,education systems across the world have focused almost exclusively on academic performance. Grades ranking competitive exams and outcomes became the definition of success. Somewhere along the way student wellbeing was treated like a nice to have rather than a necessity.That era is over.

Today Mental health curricula in education are no longer optional.They are essential. As students navigate academic pressure, social media overload identity struggle and an increasingly uncertain future.Schools are now rethinking and moving forward to handle mental health ,manage emotions and build resilience. Schools cannot focus only on marks and results while ignoring how students are actually feeling.Student wellbeing matters just as much as academic success,especially at the stage where students are making life shaping decisions.

What Students Are Really Dealing with-  Stress is not new,but the intensity has changed .Many students feel anxious about the future,scared of disappointing their parents, or exhausted from trying to meet impossible standards. Some feel lonely even when surrounded by people.Other struggle silently,thinking something is wrong with them. The truth is simple.Nothing is wrong with you.The system just has not taught you how to deal with pressure. This is where mental health education becomes important. It helps students understand that emotions are normal, stress is manageable and asking for help is not weakness.

What Is a Mental health Curriculam- A mental health curriculum is not about diagnosing problems or forcing students to share personal details. It is about learning skills that help in everyday life. It teaches students how to understand emotions instead of ignoring them.They teach you to handle exam pressure and academic stress.Mental Health Curriculum helps to build confidence and self awareness,develop emotional intelligence.These skills not just help you just in exams,it teaches you to handle family relationships and future career.

Why Student Wellbeing Impacts Learning Outcomes- Student wellbeing is not separate from education,it is the foundation of it. Research consistently shows that students with strong emotional and mental health support better focus and memory,improve academic performance ,strong motivation engagement and reduce behavioural issues.Marks matter but they are not everything they understand when they know to balance emotions.Emotional intelligence is what helps students to stay calm during exams bounce back from poor results and communicate their feeling clearly.

Class 12th is a turning point.Decision made here shape future paths,but students cannot make healthy choices if they are not emotionally overwhelmed.Ignoring mental health leads to burn out self doubts and long term stress. Supporting mental health creates confident, balanced students who can handle challenges without breaking under pressure.Mental Health Curricula in education exists to remind students that success does not come at the cost of wellbeing.You are allowed to aim high and take care of yourself at the same time.

You are not weak for feeling stressed.You are human.Education should teach you how to succeed without losing yourself in the process.

What needs to be changed- mental health should be integrated ,not isolated.It should be accessed regularly in the schools ,every child is different and has different levels of emotional intelligence and handling behavioral skills. However schools must access the child behavior,emotions quotient and the reaction and responses they give when they are appearing  in the exams, or attending the school in the normal life.Schools initiate to include mental health as curriculum so students will understand that studying mental health curricula is as important as  maths or science is.

At Edinbox,conversations around mental health education, emotional intelligence and student wellbeing aim to support students beyond textbooks,helping them grow into confident learners and resilient individuals.

Considering the opposition that students raised on account of observing Saraswati Puja in West Bengal on January 23, 2026, the National Testing Agency (NTA) has made a significant move. The agency has revealed that the candidates of the state who were to appear in JEE Main 2026 (Session 1) on January 23 will now have the option to appear for the exam on another date within the same session.

With this step, pupils will not be compelled to attend the test centres on the day of Saraswati Puja. NTA has confirmed that the students will be able to pick a convenient day from the exam schedule that is officially released. The change of date for the test will be notified to the candidates directly.

Decision Taken Respecting Religious Sentiments

The NTA pointed out that the choice was taken in view of the religious sentiments of the students as well as the difficulties in practice that they might face. Saraswati Puja is a very important festival in West Bengal and a great number of students participate in the religious ceremonies of the day. Giving an alternative date for the exam is thus being considered as a support measure for the students.

Helpline Available for Student Assistance

If any candidate has questions or concerns regarding the revised date, they can directly contact the NTA through the following channels:

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Helpline Number: 011-40759000

City Intimation Slip Released, Admit Card Awaited

The NTA has already released the city intimation slip for JEE Main 2026 Session 1 on January 8, 2026. Through this slip, candidates can check the city where their examination centre will be located.

Students are now awaiting the release of the admit cards, which are expected to be issued soon.

JEE Main 2026 Session 1 Exam Dates

The JEE Main 2026 Session 1 exam dates are as follows:

Paper 1: January 21, 22, 23, 24, and 28, 2026

Paper 2A: January 29, 2026

How to Download JEE Main 2026 City Intimation Slip

Candidates can take the following steps to download their city intimation slip:

Go to the official website: jeemain.nta.nic.in

Click on the link named JEE Main 2026 City Intimation Slip

Enter your application number and password

Your city slip will appear on the screen in PDF format

Download it and take a printout for future reference

The Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research (IISERs) will implement a flexible, learner-centric higher education system through multiple entry-exit pathways while preserving academic standards and the research-oriented character of IISER programmes, officials said on Tuesday.

These topics were discussed at the third meeting of the IISER Standing Committee, chaired by education minister Dharmendra Pradhan in New Delhi on Tuesday.

Pradhan was also the chairman of the 13th National Institutes of Technology, Science Education and Research (NITSER) Council meeting on Tuesday, during which he deliberated on industry, aligned curricula, accreditation, entrepreneurship, and emerging technologies.

The IISER Standing Committee is responsible for overseeing academic, research, and policy matters of IISERs. At the same time, the Council of NITSER acts as the highest, level policy, making and governing body for all 31 NITs, seven IISERs, and the Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology (IIEST), Shibpureach of which has been designated as an Institution of National Importance under the NITSER Act, 2007.

According to officials, the IISERs will implement a flexible, learner-centric higher education system through multiple entry–exit pathways while preserving academic standards and the research-oriented character of IISER programmes

“This would involve the option of multiple entry and multiple exit, re-entry and completion, permitting the students to undertake a one-semester experiential internship focused on research, innovation, industry or entrepreneurship, in lieu of a regular classroom semester, with academic credits assigned upon completion and evaluation,” said the education ministry in a press statement.

IISERs are planning a full, scale review of their PhD programmes. They will identify gaps, compare with global best practices, and suggest reforms that would make doctoral training more compatible with the needs of the industry and the national priority missions.

In order to increase their societal impact, the IISERs will open up their research and innovation ecosystem to the public by opening research parks, incubators and domain, specific Centres of Excellence (CoE) in Biotech, Healthcare, Quantum Computing, Advanced Materials, Energy & Climate Change, Agri, Food Technologies, Rare, Earth and Critical Minerals, etc. These measures are in line with the overall mission of Viksit Bharat and Make In India to create a knowledge, driven economy by harnessing innovation, human capital and sustainability, through the development of indigenous technology in various fields, the ministry said.

According to the ministry, each IISER will establish its own Section 8 company to strategically propagate national and international priority research, bridge academic research potential with industry partners, attract philanthropic, CSR, government and private funding. “The company would be steered by a Board comprising eminent academicians, corporate leaders, Technology Transfer Office (TTO) representatives, industrialists, innovation ecosystem stakeholders,” it said.

IISERs proposed introducing admission quotas for International Olympiad performers and exploring a sports quota for undergraduate programmes, while also planning support measures to help students from Bharatiya Bhasha-medium backgrounds transition to the medium of instruction at IISERs.

Standing Committee members also released the five-year and 10-year vision statement of the IISERs. The 5-Year Vision (2030) includes: scale enrollment to more than 21,000 students across IISERs, establish 7 thematic CoEs, boost NIRF rankings, foster research parks and incubators, joint programs, lateral entry and exit in courses, double publications and patents filings, enhance internationalization and Internal Revenue Generation (IRG) through research and executive courses by 50%. The 10-Year Vision (2035) includes: Build on CoEs with joint PhDs, emphasize startups/translational research, create extension campuses and joint international campus, launch health sciences schools, achieve indigenous high-end instrumentation, break into global top 500 (target top 100) rankings, establish “Brand IISER” worldwide.

At the 13th NITSER Council meeting preceded by the third meeting of the Standing Committee of IISERs, members discussed aligning curricula, assessments, academic programmes, and research with emerging technologies such as Industry 4.0, green hydrogen, AI, quantum technologies, semiconductors, and advanced manufacturing to support India’s goals of Aatmanirbhar Bharat and Viksit Bharat by 2047. Members proposed specialized PG and M.Tech programmes and 360-degree PhD reforms including industry-led and product-based research. All NITs and IISERs agreed to complete external peer reviews within a year and actively participate in NAAC accreditation, while promoting inclusivity through Bharatiya Bhashas and AI-enabled multilingual learning for diverse students.

“NITs will restructure their courses based on emerging technologies, and a new curriculum will be introduced next academic year to meet national needs and achieve the goals of Aatmanirbhar Bharat. There will also be a paradigm shift in PhD programmes with achievements will no longer be measured solely by publications and citations, but greater emphasis will be placed on product-based research that addresses real-world problems,” Pradhan said.

The council also emphasised building strong innovation and entrepreneurship ecosystems, directing 13 NITs without incubation centres to set them up immediately and at least 10 NITs to establish research parks without delay.

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is scheduled to unveil the Union Budget 2026, 27 on February 1. The Budget Session of Parliament commences on January 28 and the second half is scheduled from March 9 to April 2. The President will deliver the address to Parliament on January 28 and the Economic Survey will be laid on January 29.

The education sector has been setting up a high expectation from the Budget, hoping for initiatives that can raise the quality, increase the access, and bring education to the level of being globally competitive. Teachers point out the role of private universities as partners in national development and propose that the government should grant incentives for the collaboration of industry, academia, entrepreneurship, and faculty development.

Professor Kulbhushan Balooni, Vice, Chancellor of Birla Global University, said, "The Union Budget 2026, 27 must accord the status of strategic partners in the development of the nation to private universities. The government ought to empower such collaborations by providing a suitable policy and fiscal framework that would stimulate synergy, entrepreneurship, and faculty development. Private universities, by virtue of their large student base, are well, placed to impact the higher education system of India positively. We anticipate that the Budget will contain progressive and enabling measures."

"As India progresses towards the vision of Viksit Bharat 2047 by PM Modi, the Union Budget 2026, 27

needs to consider education as a strategic investment for sustained and inclusive growth. It would be critical to have balanced budget allocations for higher education, including faculty development, digital infrastructure, entrepreneurship, and research, to produce skilful leaders capable of realising this vision, " said Jaiswal.

The Centre has urged the Andhra Pradesh government to adopt a public-private partnership (PPP) model to modernise and expand the state’s healthcare infrastructure, particularly in underserved rural and semi-urban areas.

In a letter to State Health Minister Satya Kumar Yadav, the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare conveyed that working more with the private sector will be the quickest and most effective method to address the current gaps in healthcare delivery. The ministry pointed out that PPP initiatives can greatly enhance the availability, quality, and efficiency of medical services throughout the state.

"The Centre has advised Andhra Pradesh to widely adopt the PPP model for fast, tracking the expansion of the healthcare sector and to strengthen the service delivery mechanisms, " a government statement read on Wednesday.

As per the ministry, nuclear medicine services, mobile medical units, dental clinics, radiology facilities, and cancer day care centres are some of the key areas where PPP can be implemented. The Centre has proposed the engagement of private partners through contracts of five to ten years, thus, permitting long, term infrastructure development and operational stability.

The letter also highlighted issues with specialised care in smaller towns. It pointed out that people living outside major cities still have very limited access to nuclear medicine facilities for cancer diagnosis and neurological disorders. The Centre therefore proposed that district, level hospitals should be provided with facilities to offer services such as PET, CT scans, SPECT imaging, radiotherapy.

Besides that, the ministry drew attention to the shortage of staff and lack of proper infrastructure at community health centres (CHCs). Through a public, private partnership (PPP), the ministry suggested the upgrading of primary, level dental services across the State of Andhra Pradesh and considered it a matter of public health need.

On cancer care, the ministry stated that the PPP model is particularly suitable for setting up day care cancer centres, which offer treatment without the need for prolonged hospital stays. The Centre aims to ensure nationwide coverage of such centres by 2027–28. Fourteen cancer day care centres have already been sanctioned for Andhra Pradesh under this initiative.

The move aligns with the Centre’s broader strategy to improve healthcare access, reduce patient load on government hospitals, and encourage private sector participation in public health services.

After prolonged deliberations and mounting pressure from states, the National Board of Examinations (NBE) officially announced a significant reduction in the NEET-PG percentile criteria for admission to postgraduate medical courses, including MD and MS. The decision came after the completion of two rounds of counselling, with a large number of seats remaining vacant across the country. Candidates from the general and EWS categories in the 7th percentile too will now be considered eligible for PG medical admission, equivalent to 103 marks in NEET-PG. For General, PwD category candidates, the qualifying percentile was dropped to 5 percentile (approximately 90 marks). Interestingly, candidates from SC, ST, and OBC categories will now be eligible at 0 percentile, which means getting, 40 marks.

After the change in the percentile, it was clarified by the officials that candidates, who want to take part in the next counselling rounds under the relaxed criteria, need to register again.There have also been demands that candidates who did not secure their preferred courses in the first two rounds be allowed to participate in the fresh round.

Local seats registration in Gujarat will probably start on Thursday and the detailed admission time, table will be unveiled very soon.

In Gujarat only, there are about 642 seats that remain empty as a result of candidates not reporting, admissions not being confirmed, seats newly approved and seats that have not been converted.

The earlier eligibility criteria —50th percentile (general), 45th percentile (PwD), and 40th percentile (reserved categories) — were applied for the first two rounds of counselling.. However, despite this, over 20,000 PG medical seats remain vacant nationwide. In Gujarat alone, around 642 seats are currently vacant due to non-reporting by candidates, unconfirmed admissions, newly approved seats, and non-converted seats.

The development is expected to significantly influence the next phase of PG medical admissions across Gujarat and other states.

The Government of Sikkim has collaborated with the Indian Council of Medical Research's National Institute for Research in Reproductive and Child Health (ICMR, NIRRCH) to conduct a detailed study on the state's decreasing birth rate, as per the officials.

A two day project coordination meeting was convened on January 6 and 7 at ICMR, NIRRCH in Mumbai to review the study's scope and execution. The study is meant to track fertility trends in Sikkim and examine the readiness of the state health system to manage the problems related to a low birth rate.

The study titled "Rapid Assessment of Fertility Trends, Determinants and Preparedness of the State Health System in Sikkim to Address Low Total Fertility Rate (TFR)", is supported by ICMR, NIRRCH and it is being conducted with technical guidance from ICMR, NIRRCH and the International Institute of Health Management Research (IIHMR), in association with the Government of Sikkim and other partner institutions.

The study aims to identify the factors responsible for the falling fertility rates and the decision of families to have fewer children in the state, officials said, adding that it would also look at the ability of hospitals and health services to meet the needs of infertile couples as well as reproductive health generally.

At the meeting, which was chaired by Dr. Geetanjali Sachdeva, Director of ICMR, NIRRCH, Dr. Anushree Patil, Scientist, F and Head of the Clinical Research Division at ICMR, NIRRCH and the study's principal investigator, was involved in a very detailed discussion with the teams of ICMR, NIRRCH and IIHMR.

The Sikkim government delegation was led by Rohini Pradhan, Additional Secretary-cum-Programme Director of Sikkim INSPIRES under the Planning and Development Department, who is also the study’s co-principal investigator. Senior doctors, academics and research staff from state hospitals and educational institutions were also present.

During the meeting, participants finalised the project plan, timelines and institutional roles, identified study locations across Sikkim, and approved data collection tools. To formalise the collaboration, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between ICMR-NIRRCH, IIHMR, ICMR-RMRCNE and the Government of Sikkim.

In its Golden Jubilee year, Maharshi Dayanand University (MDU), Rohtak, upon receiving Gold Category Award in implementation of NEP by Haryana State Higher Education Council is preparing a National Education Policy (NEP)-aligned reform blueprint that could introduce a more flexible framework tentatively titled ‘Design Your Degree’.

The proposal, which is in the process of being recast so as to align with Indian context and regional needs, is mainly targeted towards giving students more freedom of choice in their studies without diluting the academic structure. The university intends to execute the programme with the academic and technical assistance of the Centre for Curriculum Design and Development (CCDD), MDU, which will be the main referral for programme design, outcome mapping, credit architecture and common assessment frameworks.

Officials conveyed that the plan is to move away from overly exam, focused education to a model in which the emphasis will be on projects, portfolios, internships and community, based assignments for both learning as well as evaluation. Students would be able to select elective baskets and skill tracks aligned with their interests and career plans, enabling combinations across disciplines—ranging from entrepreneurship and business innovation to data analytics, AI-enabled applications, communication skills, tourism, sustainability and creative domains.

The proposed structure is expected to include clear credit pathways, defined prerequisites and academic advising, so students can build majors/minors and competency-based skill outcomes in a systematic way. University sources said the CCDD will develop standard templates for course outlines, project rubrics and quality assurance mechanisms to maintain uniformity across departments while still allowing innovation.

MDU officials have declared the proposal to be just one aspect of a whole revamp plan to celebrate the Golden Jubilee year which would integrate classroom learning with real, world problem, solving and employability.

The proposal also intends to tighten the connection with industry and public institutions in Haryana so that students get to associate their academic pursuits with the local issues like heritage and tourism, entrepreneurship, sustainability, digital services and community development.

A comprehensive plan with all the aspects such as pilot departments, elective baskets, assessment formats and rollout timelines is under preparation and will be submitted to the statutory bodies for approval according to the university norms.

Tripura Chief Minister Manik Saha on January 9 announced that his government is planning to establish a dedicated health university to strengthen and streamline medical education in the state.

Addressing the media, Saha said Tripura currently has three medical colleges, one dental science college, three nursing colleges and one para-medical college, all of which are affiliated with Tripura University. He said the proposed health university would oversee and run these medical institutions, marking a significant step in the state’s healthcare and education reforms.

“The three medical colleges together offer 350 MBBS seats. We have already applied to the Centre for permission to increase 100 additional MBBS seats at the Agartala Government Medical College (AGMC), and we are hopeful of a positive response,” the Chief Minister said.

Highlighting Tripura’s broader progress in higher education, Saha noted that several premier national institutions are already functioning in the state, including the National Forensic Science University (NFSU), National Law University (NLU), Indian Institute of Information Technology (IIIT) and the National Institute of Technology (NIT). “The days are not far when Tripura will emerge as an educational hub of the Northeast,” he asserted.

The Chief Minister also spoke about the state’s efforts to attract investment, stating that the second edition of the ‘Prabashi Tripurabashi Summit’ witnessed the participation of around 70 potential investors and entrepreneurs. He said many people originally from Tripura, now well-settled in various professional fields abroad, attended the summit at their own expense.

“The participants were encouraged by the initiatives taken by the state government and expressed keen interest in investing in Tripura,” Saha said, adding that such engagements reflect growing confidence in the state’s development trajectory.

The proposed health university, along with expansion of medical seats and increased investor interest, is being seen as part of the government’s long-term vision to position Tripura as a centre for quality education, healthcare and economic growth in the region.

The National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (NCAHP) has officially informed the University Grants Commission (UGC) regarding the fresh set of eligibility criteria for admissions to undergraduate programmes in allied and healthcare fields that will come into effect from the 2026, 27 academic year. This move aims to unify admission standards across India’s allied health science education landscape.

According to the changed rules, NEET UG will be the only method by which one can get admission to the core programmes like Bachelor of Physiotherapy (BPT) and Bachelor of Occupational Therapy (BOT) without any exception. Candidates will have to take the National Eligibility, cum, Entrance Test (UG) as the first condition along with fulfilling the academic requirements of Class 12 with Physics, Chemistry and Biology (PCB) and the minimum aggregate marks.

However, admission to psychology, related programmes, especially Bachelor of Psychology (BPsy) and Bachelor of Medical and Psychiatric Social Work (BMPSW), will be through university or institute, level entrance tests. These tests will give universities an opportunity to select the best students from a variety of educational backgrounds as psychology courses generally get students from science, arts, and commerce streams.

For several other allied healthcare degrees such as optometry, medical radiology and imaging technology, medical laboratory science, nutrition and dietetics, emergency medical technology and more, Class 12 academic performance will continue to determine eligibility. These programmes typically require candidates to have studied PCB (or PCB/Mathematics where applicable), with some courses also mandating English at the higher secondary level.

NCAHP’s proposed framework reflects its broader strategy to standardise allied and healthcare education under a central regulatory framework established to elevate quality and ensure uniformity. However, final implementation depends on state councils and universities adopting these standards.

Students planning admissions for 2026-27 should prepare accordingly, particularly for NEET UG if targeting physiotherapy or occupational therapy, and keep track of university-specific test notifications.

Deciding between state-level forensic science entrance exams and national-level exams such as AIFSET can be like being at your career’s turning point. Your Class 12 results are out, and you still have dreams of solving crimes in a lab, but the burning question in your mind is, “Which exam assures me a future?” You’re an Indian student with dreams of becoming a forensic scientist, and you’ve probably searched the internet late into the night for something like “AIFSET vs state forensic exam 2026” or “best entrance exam for BSc Forensic Science India,” with your heart pounding with excitement and confusion. This article will put an end to all your confusion with a comparison that relates to your journey and what’s best for you and other aspiring forensic scientists.

State exams keep your world regional, whereas national platforms such as AIFSET provide opportunities across the nation without the pain of not having the opportunity of moving out of your home state. Additionally, for most students pursuing actual forensic opportunities, national exams have the advantage, but it’s better to find out what suits you best. Know the difference between the two before jumping to conclusion.

Key Differences: Reach, Recognition, seats and Environment 

The State forensic exams (such as Karnataka’s State-Level Forensic Entrance or similar ones in Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu) are comforting almost like being near home in Bengaluru while pursuing your studies. They are less competitive: 1-2 hour exams on Class 12 fundamentals (Physics, Chemistry, Biology), with far fewer candidates (thousands instead of lakhs), and seats in State labs or universities. Cutoffs? Doable at 60-70% if you’re good in the State. But let’s be honest, there are very few seats available (maybe 20-50 in the entire State), placements are largely government-oriented (low-paying lab jobs at ₹20-30k), and your reputation doesn’t travel beyond State lines.

National exams such as AIFSET turn the tables: 1 hour online, forensic basics (crime scene, toxicology, fingerprints syllabus as per actual lab work), and are accepted by 180+ institutes all over India (from Himachal to Tamil Nadu). Competition? Yes, it’s there, but so is the seat assurance (with AIFSET at least) and other benefits: top performers get admission to top private universities with 90%+ placement (₹5-8 LPA in cyber forensics, DNA labs). And the emotional high? Empowering, to say the least, to be able to tell your parents that you've qualified an actual All-India exam, and not just a state quota.

List of top Forensic Science EntranceTest

Top National-level Forensic Science Entrance Test

• NFAT (National Forensic Aptitude Test): For National Forensic Sciences University (NFSU) campus admission, this exam is a must. 
• AIFSET (All India Forensic Science Entrance Test): For 180+ top private universities like LPU, GD Goenka, etc. offering forensic science courses, this exam is the best.
• CUET (UG/PG): This is the common University Entrance Test for many central universities (NTA).

Top State-level Forensic Science Entrance Test

• Maharashtra (MH CET)
• Punjab (PU CET UG/PG)
• Karnataka (KCET / University-Specific Tests)
• West Bengal (WBJEE / MAKAUT Admissions)

The Emotional Why: Future-Proofing Dreams

Don’t forget that spark you had when you first saw CID or read about the forensics in the Aarushi case? State exams quench that spark locally, safe, but small. AIFSET ignites it nationally, connecting you with mentors, internships in cybercrime teams, and people who think big. Going national gives you the freedom to learn in Bhubaneswar or Gujarat and come back home with a job.

But yes, if your family obligations bind you or your wallet screams “zero risk,” state exams are the way to go. But for the 80% of Indians who are ambitious and aspiring, AIFSET’s wider syllabus helps develop courtroom-ready skills, transforming “what if” regrets into “I made it” pride.

Go for National-level Entrance test for better Options

State exams are for the conservative; AIFSET is for the bold with more seats, better preparation for a forensic field that is constantly evolving (AI in ballistics, DNA phenotyping) and great mentors in top universities. Visit the official AIFSET portal for more information and free consultation. 

NIFT entrance is one of the most sought-after entrance exams in India and more than 25,000 aspirants attend the exam every year but only 4,000 seats are available, thus the acceptance rate is 10-15% usually. Even the most committed fashion design students find this difficult. Preparing for NIFT makes you a world class designer but the multi-stage process tests both endurance and creativity. All India Design Aptitude Test (AIDAT) provides a better route which has 35-40% selection in over 15 different colleges, making design admissions more accessible for passionate creators.

1. Brutal Competition: One Seat for Seven Applicants  

NIFT's competition is one of the toughest. With only one seat per seven applicants, the CAT Creative Ability Test demands a percentile of ninety-five or higher in order to proceed to the Situation Test. NIFT gets more than 20,000 registrations for B.Des seats in 28 campuses every year. It is a common heartbreak for students after spending months sketching that raw talent is not the sole factor to achieve the top 1000 rank which can give admission to Delhi or Mumbai campuses. AIDAT offers more seats with cutoffs of 90-120/150 marks, giving students more scope to achieve.

2. Three-Stage Marathon: Creativity and Endurance Tested  

NIFT's three-stage format defines its difficulty. CAT (50% weightage) tests 120-minute creativity under pressure. GAT (30%) covers quantitative ability, general knowledge, and analytical reasoning subjects design students often neglect. Situation Test (20%) demands 2-hour 3D model-making from everyday materials. Only the top 10% advance past Stage 2. AIDAT's single 90-minute test eliminates multi-stage attrition.

3. GAT Academic Rigor Overwhelm Creative Students  

Many artistic aspirants are caught off-guard by the GAT's academic demands. NIFT's GAT syllabus contains 20% general knowledge/new affairs and 15% logical reasoning, much far from ordinary sketchbooks. In the year 2025, the exam also focused on the history of fashion and sustainability, requiring months of rote studying in addition to drawing practice. Students who focused on these areas lost marks valuable for creativity. AIDAT emphasizes 70% visualization/observation that directly rewards design aptitude without heavy academics.

4. High Cutoffs Crush Talents

High cutoffs at premier campuses crush dreams. NIFT Delhi requires CAT less than 500, Mumbai top 800 and Situation Test score more than 65/100 for the general category. With only 3,000 UG seats across specializations, the best 1% grab prime locations. Preparing for NIFT for 8-12 months might coincide with Class 12 board exams, which will disturb the education of the students. AIDAT's single sitting format during the month of April is the way for students to better balance their academics and exam preparation.

5. 8-12 Month Prep Cycle Burns Out Students

NIFT preparation timeline demands January- June crash courses post-Class 12, but competitive students start Class 11. 10,000+ practice sketches, GAT theory, and material practice consume 2,000+ hours. NIFT 2026 (likely Feb/March) clashes with Class 12 boards. Students who are passionate and balancing academics are at risk of burnout. AIDAT's 3-6 months fits alongside schoolwork.

NIFT has built up the legacies dominating Lakme Fashion Week, but passionate designers increasingly choose AIDAT for assured fashion design courses at various campuses. With no multi-stage elimination and more choices of colleges, AIDAT is the smart backup for NIFT aspirants.

Design career aspirants face a clear choice between NIFT (the most popular design entrance test) and AIDAT (100% online aptitude test, opening creative career options faster). NIFT 2026 application registration opens December; AIDAT registrations are open. Passionate students must choose the right entrance test as per needs and caliber. .

Forensic science careers attract thousands of Indian students in 2026. AIFSET (All India Forensic Science Entrance Test) emerges as the preferred national entrance exam for BSc and MSc Forensic Science programs. Students appreciate its simple format that has a 1 hour test duration consisting of 100 MCQ questions and 100% online exam mode with only 2000 rupees registration Fees. Unlike the state exams which limit access to local colleges or private university exams which charge higher fees, AIFSET ensures that college admissions of 100% are verified throughout India through a single application.

AIFSET Provides National Access to Forensic Programs

The exam tests basic Class 12 knowledge making it accessible for science students. The eligibility for the course is Class 12 PCB/PCM with 50% marks for undergraduate and BSc degree for postgraduate programs. Physics, Chemistry, Biology or Mathematics form 60% of questions while General Knowledge and Logical Reasoning cover the remaining sections. No negative marking favors consistent performers. Students like the fact that centralized counseling takes care of multiple college applications and travel expenses.

One Fee Opens Up Multiple Career Paths

₹2000 to include application for 100% partner colleges providing specialized forensic training. Graduates pursue careers as crime scene investigators, cyber forensic analyst, DNA expert, document examiner and government FSL officer. Partner institutes provide crime scene reconstruction labs, DNA analysis equipment and cyber forensic workstations that are essential for today's work in the field of investigation. Top rank holders are given scholarships for a considerable reduction in tuition costs.

Simple Preparation is Equal to School Syllabus

AIFSET is also in full sync with NCERT syllabus for Class 12 covering 80% content. Students do their preparation with 2 hours of daily self study with the help of standard text books, lucent gk book and basic reasoning practice. Full-length Mock tests help to achieve scores above 70/100 securing prime college seats No need for expensive coaching - previous toppers confirm that school level preparation is enough for success.

AIFSET Eliminates State Exam Limitations

State forensic college exams limit the students to single institutes of their region. Private universities require individual applications for the exorbitant sum of ₹3000-5000 each under no guaranteed placement. AIFSET solves these problems by national merit-based selection. Odisha, Bihar, UP students access programs from Gujarat and Haryana purely on the basis of performance in the examinations, and not on the basis of local quotas.

Registration Timeline 

Applications are open until November 28, 2025 with exams occurring in July of 2026. Admit cards come out in June followed by counseling in August. 50K students compete each year so early registration is crucial. The online version of the test makes it possible to participate from any remote area removing the travel barriers altogether.

In short, AIFSET 2026 is the most efficient way for forensic science aspirants to start their journey. Single fee, National Scope, Verified Colleges, Simple syllabus, all what students need for safe careers in the growing investigation sector of India. Science graduates who aim to work in crime-solving fields get unbeatable value with this simple national entrance test. 

Visit AIFSET portal today for more information and free consultation. 

In 2026, social media is governed by fake news. Every day India is fighting with deepfakes, political propaganda, and health conspiracy theories, and to fight these,true & skilled journalists are needed. You need to be in a position to check facts and tell the truth; that is why an MA in Journalism and Mass Communication (JMC) will prepare you to do so. Besides, jobs are well-paid- 6 to 15 lakh per annum post-graduation. In this article, you will get to know why it is important to study MA JMC and how to pursue it from the top colleges in India.

Journalism Fights Fake News in 2026 India

The fake news catches fire within a few seconds. WhatsApp forwards influence voting; Twitter storms ruin lives. MA JMC educates on such fact-checking methods like reverse image search and source verification. You get to know how to detect AI-generated lies. Aspirants of  JMC learn how to:

• Trace manipulated images (InVID tool)
• Verify videos frame-by-frame (Amnesty Forensic First Aid)
• Cross-check claims across 5+ databases
• Write Articles and draft content professionally
• Hunt news like a pro

Scope After Journalism in India

Once the students complete the course, they are eligible to pursue a career from top media houses like The Hindu or NDTV and expose scams. It is projected that demand increases 25% per year. In the absence of talented reporters, society will drown in propaganda. Your degree will have a point- to make, so don’t get distracted, pursue journalism if you feel that’s what you want to do. Remember, this field is not getting replaced by AI anytime soon, nor will the authenticity. 

Higher Salaries are Offered after MA JMC

Graduates of MA JMC have higher salaries in comparison with BA graduates. In major cities such as Delhi, Mumbai, Freshers receive 4-6 lakh. The 2 years experience attracts a salary of 8-12 lakh. Top roles pay ₹15 lakh+. Here’s how much on an average different professionals earn: 

​Reporters: 6-10 lakh with the news channels.

• Content Strategists: 7-12 lakh in online companies.
• PR Managers: 8-15 Lakh to corporates.
• Anchors: ₹10-20 lakh on TV.

In cities like Bangalore and Hyderabad, there is a 20% additional pay on the bilingual skills. Freelancers make 10 lakh and above through YouTube, podcasts. 

Can Introverts Succeed in Journalism? Low-Interaction JMC Jobs Explained

Journalism can be a decent option for introverts, but not all aspects of it are the right fit. Many introverts do great in this field since they listen well, think deeply and write clearly. These are important skills in good reporting. However, most journalism jobs require talking to people on a regular basis, which can be exhausting to introverts.

JMC provides opportunities for jobs where you don't have to meet strangers each and every day. Data journalism is perfect-you work alone on numbers and computers to provide charts and stories. Copy editing refers to checking other people's writing via email, not face-to-face talks. Fact-checking involves the use of online tools and databases without having to meet anyone. The SEO content strategy includes keyword research and planning that is mostly done through team chats. Research analysts prepare background reports for news teams without actual interviews.

But yes, even these silent jobs have someone coming in contact with some. You may make 2-3 phone calls a week or go for team meetings. Newsrooms can be overwhelming places - open offices and constant chatter. Many introverts get around this by working from home as freelancers or working at digital-first companies.

Introverts are successful because they are smart in the role choice. Skip TV reporting, political beats or crime journalism, these require a lot of face-to-face work. Just focus on data, editing, or research instead. Learn skills in excel, AI or fact-checking tools to prove your value without networking.

Answer yourself honestly: would you email five people you don't know well once per week for information? If yes, journalism fits. If that sounds like a lot of work, have a go with technical writing instead that's similar pay (₹6-12 lakh) with almost zero interaction with people.

Remember, this is your life to shape, if you like the journalism field and still can't change your introvert nature, it is FINE. Don’t let people decide what you can and cannot do. Many successful journalists who are introverts found their niche. You don't have to alter your personality, you just choose roles that fit your strengths. 

However, finding your strengths alone can be a lot more challenging than having a mentor to guide you. For this, you need to pursue MA JMC from the right college that aligns with you. There are many entrance exams that help you gain admission 

How To Study Journalism in India via GMCET? 

Global Media Common Entrance Test (GMCET) is a national-level admission test for UG courses in journalism, such as BJMC, for more than 20 universities. The pattern is easier compared to IIMC/JET; it has an online test of 60 minutes and a fee of INR 1000. Here is the full step-by-step process:

Eligibility Criteria for GMCET

• 12th pass in any stream with 50% marks; SC/ST/OBC-45% marks.
• Age: No upper limit
• Final year & 12th students eligible
• 3-year Diploma holders (50% marks) also qualify.

Step-by-Step Application Process

• Click "Apply Now" at gmcet.org 
• Register with email/phone: Get login credentials
• Fill Form: Personal details, 12th marks, course preference (BJMC/BA Media). Upload: Photo, signature, 12th marksheet. 
• Pay INR 2000 (online/UPI) 
• Confirmation e-mail: Save credentials

Why GMCET Entrance Test For JMC? 

GMCET is a 100% online entrance test accepted at 100+ top private universities in India. By taking this entrance test, one becomes eligible for pursuing BAJMC or MA JMC as this test is designed to test one’s skills, intelligence and knowledge required. This ensures that the university has the filtered list of capable candidates, and candidates have the options of top media colleges that align with their intel. 

In summary, JMC offers real skills for India's information battle while GMCET provides an accessible entry point with solid career returns. Consider your passion for stories, comfort with irregular hours, and fact-checking mindset. If these align, you should surely take the step towards visualizing a career in this field. The decision rests on your goals because journalism rewards those committed to truth over trends, and willingness over formality. 

For more information about the courses, colleges, or free career consultation, connect with us via call 08035018499 today.  

The agricultural industry of India is a booming sector in terms of technology and employment. A B.Sc. (Hons) degree in Agriculture provides an opportunity to be an agri-preneur. With this 4-year degree, students learn new technology to achieve improved crops and farms. As the toxic techniques are dead and technology is on the increase, talented professionals are desired. The smokescreens of education such as AIACAT (All India Agriculture Aptitude Test) to gain admissions in the best colleges and start your life.

Top 5 Reasons to Pursue B.Sc (Hons) Agriculture in India 2026

Reason 1: Agri Boom is driven by High-Tech Innovation.

Today, agriculture requires drones, artificial intelligence and intelligent soil technology. A B.Sc. Agriculture is a degree that explores these tools. You will address water scarcity, land, and climate problems. B.Sc. (Hons) Agriculture programs are provided in top private universities such as SAGE University Bhopal, which has practical programs. Learn to apply expertise to solve practical issues using advanced solutions.

Reason 2: International Travel and Effect in Agri Development.

Approximately 75 percent of the global poor depend on agriculture as their source of livelihood. However, a good number of them are not modernly trained. B.Sc. Agriculture offers an opportunity to travel to third world countries. Assist in the development of sustainable farms, forests, and food. It is time to use the opportunity to change the world and discover the world in the process.

Reason 3: The High Demand of Young Farmers and Experts.

India requires new labor in agriculture. The baby boomers are retiring and this has created job vacancies. Occupations such as agronomist, horticulturist or fishery manager are well paid. The growth in demand will be realized when the population reaches 9 billion in 2050. Get ready through AIACAT and enter into high-wage prospects.

Reason 4: Change to Eco-Friendly and Animal Welfare.

There is pressure on green techniques among farmers. B.Sc. Agriculture is a course with a focus on animal care, eco-farming and land safeguarding. Find new ways of producing food without injuring it. This is the knowledge that is golden in the current world that is demanding sustainability.

Reason 5: Population explosion Gives Birth to Innovation and Employment.

India requires 345 million tonnes of foodgrains by 2030 (ICAR estimate). In 2019- 20, the production was 292 million tonnes. By 2025, Kirana stores will become digital and have traceable supply chains. B.Sc. graduates will become efficiently engineered by technology and research. Guarantee your position through exams such as AIACAT.

 What is AIACAT? Why Pursue B.Sc Agriculture via AIACAT 2026?

AIACAT  also called All India Agriculture Common Aptitude Test is a national level online admission test for B.Sc. and M.Sc. Agriculture in India. It has no negative marking, its duration is 60 minutes  only with multiple choice questions in aptitude, biology, chemistry, physics and agri basics. Exam 100 marks, in English, to be done via phone or laptop. Universities such as Parul University, Vivekananda Global University, Lovely Professional University accept AIACAT scores. Fee INR 2000 (non-refundable through UPI or card). An ideal match with Class 12th agri career seekers.

​Eligibility: 10+2 with 50 per cent in Physics, Chemistry, Biology or Agriculture in any recognized board. An age restriction is subject to university regulations. It is less demanding than ICAR tests and is geared towards actual qualification of being a successful farmer.

Step-by-step: How to register  for AIACAT 2026.

Getting started is simple. To reserve the seat, do as follows:

1. Register Online: Go to the official AIACAT portal and register. .
2. ​Download Admit Card: It is available 48hrs before the exam date.
3. ​Appear: 60-minute online multiple choice questions test. Agricultural science, practice aptitude, and basics. No negative marking for wrong answers.
4. Check Results: Check the result on the portal and download it. Book counselling slot next.
5. Counselling and Admission: Select your college, complete paper work and enroll. Get admitted in undergraduate Agriculture courses after paying the provisional admission fees.

​​Scope in India After B.Sc. Agriculture

• Agri-Preneurship
• Agriculture Officer
• Field Officer
• Extension Officer
• Farm Manager
• Production Manager
• Agriculture Research Scientist
• Plantation Manager
• Quality Assurance officer
• Research & Development Officer
• Agriculture Loan Officer
• Business Development Manager
• Operations Manager in Fertilizer Units
• Subject Matter Specialist in KVK, Krishi Vigyan Kendra

B.Sc. Agriculture via AIACAT is an easy pathway to build a career in agriculture. Students who are confused about their career or want an evergreen career should consider a B.Sc Agriculture course. AIACAT offers free consultation, visit its portal and call on the given number before taking the big decision of your career. 

Computer science courses such as AI, Data Science, Cybersecurity and quantum computing in 2026 are the high demand courses. They are also your passport to a salary of ₹10-20 lakhs right after college. As the tech market globally and in India is blowing up (1.4 million AI professionals will be required by the end of the year), choosing the right course will guarantee consistent employment at companies like Google, Infosys, or a startup. The skills learnt via these courses have changed the lives of students and made them future-proof, irreplaceable and highly demanded. These courses when chosen via entrance exams like GCSET ensures quality education needed to build a lucrative career. Let’s look at it closely. 

Top Courses to Pursue in 2026

AI and Machine Learning

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) dominate all of the trends in the report, whether it is chatbots and self-driving cars to predictive tools that run everything, including healthcare and e-commerce. The requirements are high due to the demand of professionals who develop with Python, TensorFlow, and LLMs (e.g., ChatGPT clones). AI engineers in India receive 15-30 lakh early careers, and roles such as AI Specialist or Data Scientist are booming in Bengaluru and Hyderabad. Future-wise? By 2030, AI will reinvent 85% of jobs- begin today with B.Tech CSE or online certs, and you’ll always be in demand.

Data Science and Analytics

Data Science is in consistent high demand because every business operates based on data. Python, SQL, and tools such as Tableau are taught in this course to transform raw numbers into intelligent decisions, which are ideal in e-commerce giants such as Flipkart. Salaries? 12-25 lakh (freshers), and over 2 million opportunities are expected in India by 2026 for these professionals. It is flexible to BCA or MSc IT degree holders, a mixture of statistics and code. It is a favourite of counsellors who like fast wins: 6-month bootcamps get jobs more quickly than college degrees.

Cybersecurity: Protect the Digital World, Earn Big.

The level of cyber threats is exploding because of AI hackers and requires specialists in ethical hacking, cloud security, and forensics. Cybersecurity employment in India increased by 30% in 2025 and reached 10-22 lakhs for positions like Security Analyst. Banks and IT companies are recruiting all the time with laws such as the DPDP Act. Small-time diplomas or M.Tech specialisations are the stars here - low-entry, high-paying, particularly in the emerging tech centres in Gujarat.

Cloud Computing and DevOps

Cloud skills (AWS, Azure) and DevOps automation are also must-haves because companies get rid of previous servers. Forecast 9-18 lakhs Cloud Architects, scalable apps demand up by 40% in 2026. Perfect fit in MCA or B.Sc IT students- practical projects will give you a job within a short period.

Quantum Computing

Quantum Computing emerges as a top in-demand course, blending physics, CS, and cryptography to solve impossible problems like drug discovery or climate modeling, in seconds. With India investing ₹6,000 crore in quantum tech (National Quantum Mission), jobs for Quantum Developers hit ₹20-40 lakhs, surging in startups and giants like IBM-Qiskit or TCS. In addition, future demand skyrockets as quantum hardware matures by 2030. This skill future-proofs you against classical limits.  

Future-proof Courses Salary and Demand

How to Pursue These Courses?

One can easily pursue B.Tech CSE/IT, BCA, MCA courses anywhere in the country via the right computer science entrance test. GCSET is becoming an ideal pick of GenZ because it is a 1-hour online MCQ paper (100 questions, no negative marking) at home, with no registration fee, at 2000 rupees only. It is not as stressful as CUET, provides access to partner schools with scholarships, and is even compatible with 2026 deadlines. Thousands of people are eligible effortlessly, enrol today and reserve your place in these top courses.

So, don't think  much; you have the list, you have the intel, pursue AI/Data Science via GCSET, and be overwhelmed with opportunities. Your future self will be thankful--you need to begin training those skills. 

FAQs

Q: Best for beginners? 

AI/Data Science bootcamps.

Q: Why GCSET? 

Affordable, online, targeted for CS

Q: Easy Computer Science Course? 

Comparatively, Cloud Computing and DevOps

Q: GCSET scores accepted by? 

100+ top universities

The long-running debate over India’s entrance examination system appears to be reaching a decisive turning point. The central government’s proposed SAT-based admission model is not just a move towards phasing out major national-level exams like NEET, JEE, and CUET—it is an attempt to reshape the entire education ecosystem under a new framework. If implemented, this could be considered the biggest reform in Indian higher education in decades.

The goal of this new system is pretty straightforward: to lessen student stress, limit the coaching culture dependency, and bring school education back to the main focus. This method is in line with the essence of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which has always highlighted school- based assessment and conceptual learning.

Will This Model Alleviate Student Burden?

Scheduling the SAT twice in the Class 11 proposal seems like a fair compromise. Besides one more chance to better their scores, students, when their Class 12 board results are combined, could see the admission process gradually becoming more integrated, transparent, and school centric.

In the past, the whole pressure of competitive examinations has been on after Class 12. By distributing this burden over two years, the new system could significantly reduce mental stress among students.

Can the Coaching Culture Really Be Curbed?

India's coaching industry has practically evolved into an education system parallel to the formal one. Kota and Hyderabad, Delhi, and Patna are cities that draw hundreds of thousands of students every year.

Higher stress, financial issues, and the steady stream of news about student suicides have regularly exposed the flaws of this system

Measures in the new framework like cutting down coaching hours, not allowing students under 16 years to attend, and school related exams can reduce the influence of coaching centres. Such a change would be welcomed by society and parents alike.

A Transformative Step for Rural and Marginalised Students

The biggest challenge in Indian education has always been equal opportunity. When coaching is expensive and access to big cities is limited, rural and economically weaker students are naturally left behind.

The new system could significantly narrow this gap. NCERT-based assessments, in-school preparation, and fair percentile-based allocation could make the admission process more inclusive.

Is Uniformity Across State Boards Possible?

This is perhaps the most critical challenge. India's state boards vary greatly in their syllabi, assessment patterns, and difficulty standards. In case the SAT syllabus is based on NCERT, state boards will need to overhaul their curricula to keep the students at the same level.

The change will be possible only if the states are empowered with a major role and given sufficient time to execute the plan.

What Do Experts Say?Many experts are of the opinion that this model can lighten the students' stress load, however, they also regard syllabus alignment as the biggest problem. They see it as a great chance for students from rural areas and tell teachers to start preparing for the change now.

Some educators feel the system could help end rote learning, but they also stress the importance of uniformity across state boards. In their view, this reform could improve mental health, offer financial relief, and enhance teaching quality.However, they also suggest pilot projects first to full, scale implementation.

Educators' optimistic responses notwithstanding, they also show that they are cautious about the challenges of execution.

The Bigger Picture

The main purpose of the new admission system is fundamentally good and it can bring about a number of benefits, such as student stress reduction, school education getting its due, and decreasing reliance on coaching institutes.

However, this change is far more than simply a matter of an examination, it demands a fundamental re-thinking of the way students are taught, how the teachers will be prepared, and the whole administrative machinery of education. The model will only be viable and sustainable if the government opts for the phased implementation, first through pilot projects, and later in partnership with the states.

The choice of 2027 as the deadline is certainly a bold move, however, it could very well be the beginning of a new era for the Indian education system.

When scientists first saw a Platypus in 1799, they named it a hoax. Duck bill on a beaver body with venomous spurs? Absurd. Yet this evolutionary odd ball has survived 110 million years - through asteroid strikes and ice ages that killed giants. Secret? Perfect niche mastery. It preys when it's blind, by just using electroreceptors, swims where predators can't follow and combines reptile-mammal characteristics no one else has. That’s exactly what a small university dominating global rankings is– a Platypus.

Your small university or tier-2/tier-3 college in Lucknow, Coimbatore or Jaipur has similar skepticism. Less funding than IITs. Smaller faculty pools. No global brand. But the Platypus Effect is the proof of small wins through ruthless specialisation.

Global Rankings Don't Reward Size, They Reward These 5 Metrics

QS World University Rankings 2025 (1,500+ institutions): 40% academic reputation 20% citations per faculty 20% faculty-student ratio. Times Higher Education 2025: Teaching quality 29.5%, weight heavily on research impact. NIRF India 2025: Teaching resources (30 points), Research Productivity (30 points), Graduate outcomes (20 points).

So, how do small universities climb the rankings in the world? The truth is that all three measure current output and not historical prestige or what your university has achieved earlier. NIRF 2025 data shocked everyone because 42 Universities crashed India's top 100, mostly from ranks 51-200. A jump in score of 3.99 = 40 rank position gained. Small universities are faster when they work on focusing exactly like a platypus would usually do.

Small Universities Must Become a Platypus

We all know about Phineas and Ferbs, and you are surely aware of how their pet platypus kept being their lucky charm, right? Perry was a detective in the show who was thought to be a quiet animal but did things no one expected. That’s exactly what these creatures did in the real world! 

Have you ever thought how could this species defy the law of nature and survive? Experts believed these creatures couldn’t last longer in this evolving world but Platypus Perry is a dopey looking pet that somehow outsmarts supervillains every day. Tier-2/3 colleges have Perry's agility advantage. You teach 80% of India's graduates in cities building real infrastructure and resources in defense, agriculture, manufacturing, not just Bengaluru’s IT unicorns.

UPES has climbed 250 QS positions owning energy engineering. Graphic Era University specialized in niches of hill states of tech. Madan Mohan Malaviya University (Gorakhpur) leaped NIRF bands by focused research. These aren't flukes, they're Platypus Effect Execution. 

How Can a University Improve its Ranking: 5-Steps to Take

Instead of accepting your fate of being an autonomous or local university and googling things like “how small can a university be,” start acting like a platypus and gradually become Perry the Platyus defying all the perceptions of growth, and achieve global recognition.  It is not an impossible task; you need to take just 5 fundamental steps:

1.  Pick Your Driver (Niche Dominance That Crushes Giants)

Forget about copying IIT curriculums. Search "university niche specialization success" - same story everywhere. Rural university? Own agri-biotech where there is no elite to bother? Industrial city? Rule advanced manufacturing. Tier-2 tech hub? Fintech, drones, cyber security.

UPES proves the math: Target 5 publications per department annually in your niche. Launch 1-2 research centers. Citations are on balloons within 18 months, pulling all the ranking metrics up. Giants spread thin across 50 disciplines. You go deep in 3-5 where you can actually win. This isn't theory, it's how small universities actually beat others in world rankings.

1. Smart Global Moves (International Clout Without Millions)

QS/THE international outlook = 10% of score. You beat lumbering giants here.

How? 

1. Email 10 professors worldwide doing adjacent niche work
2. Propose co-authored papers (they want Indian collaborators too)
3. Host 2-3 funded international PhDs in your research center
4. Your deal closes in 3 months. IITs take 2 years.

Result: International co-authorship metrics skyrocket across all systems

3. Faculty = Your Rocket Fuel (Research Productivity Blueprint)

NIRF data: Phd faculty share jumped 28% (2017) to 48% (2025) in climbing universities. Small unis make rockstars faster than tier 1 inherits them.

Execute:

• Biweekly journal clubs (acquaint students with research talk)
• Conference travel grants ($1K/each moves metrics)
• Writing groups + editing support (most papers die here)
• Publication bonuses (25K/paper works)
• HODs: Start by your top 3 researchers. One department's progress drives the institution.

4. Graduate Outcomes: Your Invisible Weapon

All rankings obsess over placements. Recruiters ask "Can they deliver Day 1?" not "IIT or tier-3?" Your local advantage dominates here. Map district-level hiring needs. Secure 5-10 employer pipelines for live projects and internships. Track alumni 3 years out, publish their success stories aggressively. Tier-2 placement rates hit 60-70% through relationships, boosting NIRF graduation outcomes (20 points) dramatically. 

5. Data Dashboard or Die

Assign two staff to track monthly NIRF score calculators, QS citation trajectories, 3-year alumni employment rates, and international paper pipelines. Calculate your exact NIRF/QS/THE scores today. Set department targets. Conduct quarterly reviews. Cambridge University of Kashmir's 2025 plan proves this math works.

Will Local Universities Get Rankings Even If Gen Z Skips Daily College?

Ranking disregards the number of students in the classroom - they are pursuing what students attain after getting their degrees. The 20 point graduation outcomes section of NIRF addresses median salary, PHD admissions, and employer response 3 years later. The QS employer reputation surveys also place one question to the hiring managers, which is whether they would re-hire their graduates again. Halls of lectures that are empty do not enroll.

Years ago physical attendance as a measure was killed. The Choice-Based Credit System created by NAAC already includes the exposure hours in the industry, online modules, and capstone projects as equals to the classroom time. Your student of mechanical engineering in Coimbatore who spends his mornings at a local plant of TVS and afternoons writing automation systems That is all academic credit according to the 2023 rules.

There is a latent advantage to the tier-3 colleges. Students are local residents who have to commute over short distances and are employed on part-time basis by local employers. The B.Tech final-year student who was working night shifts with the district pharma unit as he studied theory online? NAAC gives those hours of practice 3 times the credits on outcome-based learning.

Reorganize Gen Z reality

Introduction of "Work-Learn Degrees" that will have students attending partner companies 60 percent of the time, and campus 40 percent of the time. Local steel mills, garment factories, automobile parts, they must have good juniors at once. One semester of actual productive line work is equal to three years of textbook knowledge on the scores of employer perception.

District-level hiring maps beat national placement cells.. The graduate of your local civil engineering school doing the bridges on the state PWD has exponentially more NIRF weight on him than an attendee at a daily meeting. VCs: recruit one placement officer that will be familiar with all the owners of the factories within 50km. Publicize alumni wages on a per company basis, rather than percentage basis. Earnings information is more reputable than attendance certificates.

Gen Z skipping routine classes hands you outcome-based ranking dominance. Everyday college was no longer possible because employers began recruiting through GitHub profiles and LinkedIn projects. Construct the system that rewards them on what they actually accomplish. Rankings are after graduate success stories and not roll call sheets. 

What Deans, HODs, VCs of Local Universities Need To Do For Dominating Rankings?

HODs begin with the department meeting at 9 AM. Assign clear paper quotas by discipline - Computer Science gets five Scopus papers this year, Biotech wants to have four Q1 journals. Schedule weekly biweekly research huddles in which faculty share paper drafts and receive immediate feedback. Before lunch: One targeted email to a professor overseas who is working on related research. One department doing so generates institutional momentum. NIRF research scores jump 15-20 points if faculty are serious about it.

Deans declare money for research seed funding Monday afternoon. Launch dashboards for citations, international work and alumni placements by department. Faculty growth trumps new buildings for QS, THE and NIRF rankings. Recruiters hire graduates that deliver rather than campus architecture.

VCs dedicate 5% of the operating budget to research operations immediately. Personal one international partnership calls your position an opening door. Celebrate first publications through public assemblies and press releases. Visible ranking improvements come in 24 months through execution, not aspiration. NIRF 2025 showed 42 universities got into the top 100 through focused action.

Rankings are for doers, not dreamers. HODs create momentum. Deans are engine builders of research. VCs deliver results. Small universities move upward by acting Monday morning.

How to Apply for World Rankings (As Small/Local University) (Do This NOW)

Stop waiting for "prestige." Rankings reward action. Download QS Stars rating system (perfect for small universities) - they rate niche excellence even if you're unranked. Submit THE Impact Rankings (1,500+ small universities qualify)—your agri-tech center scores high. NIRF registration opens up in March - upload teaching metrics, research output, even starting from zero. ARWU (Shanghai Rankings) accepts research-focused submissions using publication records only.

Week 1 action: Assign two staff to calculate some existing NIRF/QS scores using the public methodology documents. 

Week 2: Sign up for QS Stars + THE Impact. 

Week 3: Launch niche research center 5 paper target 

Small universities witness between 20 - 40 jumps in positions Year 2 when they treat rankings as operations not dreams. And universities searching "how small universities apply QS rankings," same steps are to be followed everywhere.

Your River Is Waiting, Dive-in Or Let Others Rule It

Gladwell proved that underdogs win 64% with adapted strategy. NIRF 2025's fastest climbers? Tier-2/3 universities. Nazarbayev University gained World Recognition from the same focus. 2025 saw small universities jump when they were focused. 2026 is execution time.

The Platypus Effect isn't theory. It's biology. It's rankings math. It's UPES jumping 250 QS positions. It's 42 NIRF universities are in the top 100.

Leaders googling “how small universities dominate global rankings” are seeking for hope and you are now holding the playbook. So, stop apologizing for being small or local. Rule your river. Execute without mercy. Rankings will follow! 

Rankings ke piche mt bhago, kabil bano aur rankings apke piche bhagengi! (Rancho, 3 idiots)

Walk into any Indian university today and you can sense two strong currents in the air. One is excitement. Artificial intelligence, automation and new digital tools are expanding what students can build, design and publish—often in weeks, not years. The other is anxiety. Job markets are uncertain, business cycles are unpredictable, and many roles are being redesigned faster than degrees can update themselves.

In that tension sits the most urgent question for higher education: what is a university preparing a student for, really? If the answer is only “a job,” the institution is already behind the curve. But if the answer is “a life of value creation under uncertainty,” then the university’s core mandate changes. It must teach people how to innovate—not occasionally, not as a hobby, and not only in engineering and management, but across disciplines and across the entire functioning of

the university.

That is why the idea of an “innovation university” matters. It is not a new centre with a new logo. It is a campus-wide operating system—leadership, culture, incentives, assessment, resources and partnerships—designed to make new ideas routine and execution normal.

From “Entrepreneurial University” to “Engaged University”: An Indian Upgrade

Globally, innovation in universities is often framed through the lens of commercialization: patents, licensing and high-tech spin-offs. That “entrepreneurial university” model has value, but in much of India the deeper opportunity lies elsewhere. The more relevant shift is toward an “engaged university”—one that still participates in economic growth, but stays rooted in regional problem-solving, sustainability and community partnership.

This is not a philosophical preference; it is a pragmatic reading of India’s innovation terrain. Many of the country’s most urgent innovation needs are not only breakthroughs in labs, but solutions that work at scale in real conditions—affordable healthcare delivery, climate resilience, learning outcomes, safety, skilling, MSME productivity, and governance services that reach the last mile.

In such contexts, universities can act as protected “shelters” where students, faculty, communities and NGOs co-create frugal and inclusive innovations—solutions designed to be affordable, adaptable and accessible.

When a university internalises this mission, it stops behaving like a “people factory” and starts behaving like an anchor institution: a reliable idea generator with the ability to change outcomes beyond the campus walls.

Innovation Is Not an Event. It Is a System.

Many campuses already host hackathons, startup weekends and innovation festivals. They create noise, photographs and short-term energy. But without a system, the energy dissipates after the event. The document you shared makes the central point clearly: innovation succeeds when universities build mutually reinforcing enablers, not isolated activities.

That is the logic behind the 10Square Model, which frames innovation culture as ten interacting levers that together turn a campus into a “cradle of new ventures.” The lesson is not to chase ten separate projects, but to design a connected ecosystem where one reform amplifies the next.

The Model for Future Universities

The model explicitly warns against checklist thinking: the power lies in systemic interaction. Consider one practical example from the same framework. Leadership may publicly encourage risk-taking, but that message remains rhetorical if assessment continues to reward only memory and compliance. The moment a university changes evaluation to give credit for prototypes, pitches and documented learning from failure, the culture becomes real.

In innovation, what gets measured gets done. Leadership: The First Campus Innovation Tool Innovation dies first in fear—fear of being judged, fear of failing, fear of “wasting time” on something that will not be graded. Your document makes a direct link between positive, participative leadership and the psychological safety that allows students and faculty to pursue bold ideas.

This is where many Indian institutions can act immediately without waiting for new buildings or large budgets. Leadership can normalise experimentation by making it visible and safe—by celebrating attempts, rewarding learning, and treating failure as data rather than disgrace.

Universities that do this are not lowering standards; they are changing the standard from “perfect answers” to “credible problem-solving.” 

Admissions and Branding: Recruit Innovators, Not Only Toppers

Most universities market programmes. Innovation universities market problems worth solving. That is a subtle but decisive shift in admissions and public communication. Instead of presenting only infrastructure and placements, campuses can showcase real challenges sourced from local industry, civic bodies, hospitals, schools and NGOs—then show how student teams worked on them.

This approach also changes admissions logic. An innovation-oriented admissions track can recognise portfolios, projects, hackathon participation, creative work and community problem-solving evidence—not as “extra-curricular,” but as valid indicators of future value creation.

Scholarships become a strategic tool in this ecosystem. The document highlights a reality that Indian families understand deeply: the biggest barrier to pursuing entrepreneurship is often financial risk. Targeted entrepreneurship scholarships create a “runway” that de-risks early venture work, while also providing “smart capital” through networks, mentorship and credibility.

Curriculum: Make Innovation a Graduate Attribute, Not an Elective

Most institutions treat innovation as a course students may opt into if they have spare time. The innovation university treats it as a graduate attribute—something every student should practise, regardless of discipline.

The practical implication is straightforward. Every programme can be designed with a staged innovation pathway: early grounding in innovation methods, then discipline-based studios, then live problem labs, and finally a capstone project that produces something tangible—a prototype, a policy design, a service redesign, a validated venture idea, or an impact solution with measurable outcomes.

Interdisciplinary design is non-negotiable. Breakthrough ideas often emerge at intersections, and structured cross-major challenges create stronger ventures and more adaptable innovators. India already has institutional references for how this can scale. University-linked incubators such as IIT Bombay’s Society for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (SINE) demonstrate what happens when research, mentoring and venture support sit close to the student

journey.

The point for other universities is not to copy an IIT model wholesale, but to replicate the principle: make pathways visible, support consistent, and outcomes count.

Pedagogy: Shift from “Coverage” to “Creation”

Innovation cannot be taught only through lectures. It is learned through building—by stepping into messy problems, listening to users, testing ideas, and iterating quickly. Your document uses a powerful phrase for this: “organic learning.” It describes a shift away from lecture-hall transmission toward experiential discovery, where students engage directly with complex, unstructured real-world problems and learn the foundational entrepreneurial act of identifying and understanding a problem worth solving.

This is particularly relevant for Indian campuses because it aligns naturally with the country’s real needs. A municipal ward, a district hospital, a government school cluster, an MSME association, a farmer collective, a tourism cluster, a women’s self-help group—each can

become a learning partner.

In such settings, students learn to operate under constraints, build frugal prototypes, and measure what actually changes. The broader claim in the document is that such learning environments stimulate autonomy, intrinsic motivation and diverse perspectives, which are key conditions for creativity. In other words, the pedagogy is not “practical training” in a narrow sense; it is a direct route to innovation capacity.

Evaluation: If You Grade Only Exams, You Will Get Only Exams

Assessment is where the university’s true priorities become visible. If exams dominate, innovation becomes extracurricular—even if the institution runs events and builds centres. Your document’s “Multi Assessment” approach argues for assessment methods that can capture dynamic skills like creativity, risk-taking and practical problem-solving, which traditional exams and essays measure poorly.

It recommends authentic assessment through realistic tasks such as investor pitches, marketing plans, working prototypes, portfolios, public demonstrations, and structured peer and self-assessment. The deeper point is cultural: when venture creation itself earns academic

credit, students understand that innovation is not a side hustle. It is legitimate academic work.

For Indian universities, this is one of the most direct levers to pull because it does not require permission from the future. It requires courage in the present: to redesign rubrics and to trust documented learning and real outcomes.

The Innovation Policy Tailwind Is Already Here

Indian higher education does not have to invent a policy justification for this shift. The National Innovation and Startup Policy 2019 is explicit about the gap: “innovation is still not the epicenter of education,” and HEIs must enable a cultural and attitudinal shift so that innovation and startup culture becomes a primary fulcrum of higher education.

Similarly, the Ministry of Education’s Institution’s Innovation Councils (IIC) framework spells out what many campuses need operationally: conduct innovation and entrepreneurship activities, identify and reward innovations, organise interactions with entrepreneurs and investors, and create mentor pools for student innovators.

In other words, universities that move now are not acting “outside the system.” They are acting in alignment with the direction the system is already encouraging.

Technology and the Digital Campus: The “Central Nervous System” of Innovation

The innovation university is not only about new courses. It is also about the infrastructure of collaboration. Your document describes technology integration as the “central nervous system” of a scalable ecosystem—enabling virtual incubators, collaboration tools and modern venture development. This matters because innovation is team sport. Students need shared workspaces, version control for ideas, rapid feedback loops, access to digital resources, and platforms that connect them to mentors and industry. When digital systems are absent or fragmented, innovation becomes slow and elite. When they are available, innovation becomes routine and inclusive.

Campus Operations as a Living Lab: Innovation That Starts at Home

A university that wants an innovation culture cannot run its own operations like a bureaucracy. The campus itself can become a living lab—especially through sustainability and service redesign.

The document points to green infrastructure as a pathway to turn campuses into living laboratories—renewables, circular waste systems, biodiversity and measurable resource efficiency—while inspiring eco-preneurship. It also suggests “innovation operations projects” where student teams improve energy, water, waste, transport, queue systems, library usage, alumni engagement and grievance redressal, with improvements measured and iterated.

This is a powerful cultural signal. When students see their university practising innovation in its own daily functioning, they stop treating innovation as theatre and start treating it as normal work.

Linking Learners to Economy and Society: The Innovation Corridor

The engaged university’s ambition is to connect learning with the economy and society in sustained ways. The document describes this as building an “innovation corridor” through problem-solving internships, MSME clinics run by faculty-student teams, co-created projects with NGOs and government departments, and pipelines that connect prototypes to incubators, investors and markets.

India’s strongest campus ecosystems show what happens when this corridor becomes an institutional habit. IIT Madras, for instance, announced in December 2025 that its incubation cell had incubated 511 startups, crossing the 500 milestone with a combined valuation of over ₹53,000 crore and more than 11,000 direct jobs, illustrating the economic impact of sustained support structures. At IIT Bombay, SINE launched an incubator-linked deep-tech VC fund in December 2025, explicitly designed to provide early-stage risk capital to deep-tech startups emerging from academic and research institutions.

These examples are not meant to intimidate non-IIT campuses. They are meant to clarify the mechanism: consistent mentoring, structured pathways, supportive policy, and credible financing options turn student ambition into durable outcomes.

A Final Word: The Campus Must Change Before the World Forces It To

The heart of the argument in your document is simple and hard to ignore: innovation is not a festival. It is a habit. And habits are built through what a campus rewards daily—what it teaches, how it evaluates, how it mentors, how it funds risk, and how it connects students to real problems in society.

India’s universities can either remain reactive, updating courses after industries have already moved on, or they can become the country’s most reliable “future factory,” where every learner learns to build, test, rethink and deliver value. The institutions that make this shift will not only improve placements. They will produce citizens and professionals who can design solutions under uncertainty, create enterprises and services, strengthen communities, and make the economy more resilient. In a time when change is constant and certainty is rare, that may be the

most practical definition of education itself.

The author is the Chief Mentor of Edinbox and works as a Director with the Techno India group of Kolkata, along with being the Principal Adviser of the Kolkata based university of the group.

India’s campuses are expanding faster than the promise of stable, meaningful work. Degrees are multiplying, aspirations are rising, and yet the ladder into “viable jobs” is not growing at the same rate. Official estimates have placed the unemployment rate for youth aged 15–29 years at 10.2% in 2023–24, a reminder that the transition from education to employment remains uncertain for a large section of young Indians. Global assessments on India’s youth employment situation also underline the scale of the challenge and the need for better education-to-work pathways.

In this environment, entrepreneurship cannot be treated as a hobby for a few business-school students with family backing. It has to become a campus-wide way of learning—an applied, practical literacy that any student can pick up, regardless of discipline. The real value is not only in producing founders. It is in producing graduates who can spot problems, build solutions, test them with real users, price them responsibly, sell ethically, manage cash flows, hire teams, and scale what works—or shut it down intelligently and learn. This is the new baseline.

That is also the direction of national intent. India’s National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 explicitly pushes higher education institutions towards research and innovation through start-up incubation centres, technology development centres, and stronger industry linkages. The Ministry of Education’s National Innovation and Startup Policy (2019) goes further, outlining how institutions should structure governance, infrastructure, intellectual property practices, and startup support as a system rather than a one-off initiative. 

But policy text does not automatically become campus culture. What converts intent into outcomes is an operating model: leadership that signals permission to try, pedagogy that rewards building, and infrastructure that reduces early risk. The attached document argues for exactly this shift—moving from occasional entrepreneurship events to an integrated campus design that reliably produces new ventures and problem-solvers.

Entrepreneurship must stop living inside one department

Most universities still treat entrepreneurship as if it belongs to management education. The result is predictable: students in law, media, design, agriculture, humanities, and the pure sciences either stay out or feel they do not “qualify” to build ventures. Yet the next wave of

Indian entrepreneurship is unlikely to be only tech startups. It will be a mix of sustainability businesses, local services, value-added agriculture, affordable healthcare solutions, creative economy ventures, education innovation, rural platforms, and compliance and logistics

services—domains where non-business students are often closer to the real problem.

The easiest reform is structural: entrepreneurship pathways must be visible to every student. This means entrepreneurship minors that cut across departments, credit-bearing venture projects that count toward graduation, and problem-solving studios where students learn to build solutions rather than write only examinations. A final-year venture project, properly supervised, can replace the traditional “project report” with something far more employable: a prototype, customer validation, early revenue, and a credible narrative of learning.

This is where global precedents matter, not as aspirational name- dropping but as proof of method. In places like MIT and Stanford, entrepreneurship is not a single course. It is a culture supported by multiple centres, programs, and long-term networks. Indian universities do not need to copy that scale immediately, but they do need to adopt the underlying idea: entrepreneurship must be normal on campus, not exotic.

The pedagogy that works begins outside the classroom

Entrepreneurship is rarely learned through lectures alone. Students need ambiguity. They need field exposure. They need to attempt, fail, modify, and try again. The attached framework emphasizes “learning by building” as the default mode—problem-based learning where students

engage with real communities, institutions, and markets and then shape solutions through iteration.

Consider how different campus life becomes when a semester is organised around one neighbourhood or one district problem. A student team might work on waste segregation and discover that behaviour change is harder than technology. Another team might attempt a mobility solution and realise that operations and partnerships matter more than an app. A health innovation team might learn, within weeks, that trust and affordability are their first barriers, not engineering.

This is also where the idea of the “engaged university” becomes powerful, particularly for India and the broader Global South: universities cannot only chase commercialisation in the narrow sense; they must also build mission-driven innovations that solve social and environmental problems through local partnerships.

That approach is not charity. It is strategic, because India’s future venture opportunities will increasingly sit inside sustainability, inclusion, and public problem-solving.

An incubator is not a room; it is a repeatable system

Many campuses announce incubation centres with a ribbon-cutting, and then the room remains underused. The reason is simple: incubation is not furniture. It is a pipeline and a system. A functional entrepreneurship ecosystem includes pre-incubation for idea discovery, mentor networks, IP and legal support, prototyping facilities, seed grants, investor access, alumni support, and clear institutional policies.

India has strong examples of what “system” looks like. IIT Madras Incubation Cell, for instance, reported crossing the 500-startup milestone and has stated that it has incubated 511 startups with significant valuation and job creation figures, alongside a steady annual pipeline in FY 2024–25. This did not happen because one building was inaugurated. It happened because the ecosystem was built to run continuously: screening, mentoring, deep-tech support, and structured pathways to market.

IIT Bombay’s SINE offers another signal of maturity. In December 2025, IIT Bombay reported that SINE launched an incubator-linked deep tech VC fund (₹250 crore) to back early-stage deep-tech startups—an example of how campus incubation is moving into serious capital and commercialisation pathways. At IIM Ahmedabad, the entrepreneurship continuum (IIMA Ventures, formerly IIMA-CIIE) explicitly positions itself as a system that studies, educates, incubates, accelerates, and invests. At IIM Bangalore, NSRCEL has built a visible national brand in incubation and structured entrepreneurship programs, signalling how management institutions can anchor ecosystems that serve students and the broader society.

The point is not that every university must become an IIT or an IIM. The point is that every university can become a reliable entrepreneurship platform if it designs for repeatability rather than events. 

Use what already exists: IIC and AIM are national scaffolding 

A common mistake is to assume that each institution must build everything from scratch. India has already created national scaffolding that campuses can leverage quickly. The Ministry of Education’s Institution’s Innovation Council (IIC) program, for example, is designed to conduct innovation, IPR, and entrepreneurship-related activities in a time-bound fashion, reward innovations, host workshops and interactions with entrepreneurs and investors, and build mentor pools and networks. When used seriously, IIC can become the campus operating system for innovation calendars rather than a compliance checkbox.

Similarly, the Atal Innovation Mission (AIM) has built the Atal Incubation Centre (AIC) network, and AIM itself reports scale indicators including the number of AICs and startups supported. For universities that are still building internal incubation capacity, partnering with nearby AICs is a practical bridge—especially for specialised lab access, early mentoring, and network credibility.

The national startup policy (2019) strengthens this message by framing entrepreneurship as an institutional responsibility, including governance structures, IP ownership, licensing, and equity-sharing mechanisms. Universities that implement these systems do not merely produce startup “stories.” They produce a steady pipeline of ventures, internships, live projects, and industry collaborations.

The invisible factor: psychological safety and leadership permission

Even with infrastructure, most students hesitate because entrepreneurship feels socially risky. They fear embarrassment, academic penalties, and the suspicion that entrepreneurship is a distraction from “real” education.

This is why the leadership signal matters. The attached framework argues for positive leadership as a core ingredient: university leaders must create psychological safety for risk-taking and make intelligent failure respectable.

In practical terms, this can mean flexible attendance and evaluation policies for active founders, formal leave-of-absence options that allow students to build ventures without losing their academic future, and public celebrations of attempts, not only of winners.

When leadership explicitly says, “Try,” student participation rises. When leadership says, “Only placements matter,” entrepreneurship becomes theatre. 

Teach the craft, not only the motivation 

Many campuses run inspirational talks, pitch competitions, and startup weekends. These create energy. But energy alone does not build companies. What builds companies is craft.

Students need structured, step-by-step capability: customer discovery, market validation, pricing, sales, unit economics, compliance, contracts, hiring, and team leadership. The attached model emphasises skills training as a direct driver of entrepreneurial confidence and competence.

It also points to blended learning as the right delivery mode, because founders cannot always attend conventional schedules and because entrepreneurship knowledge is often best learned in short, tool-based modules. When universities deliver micro-credentials in these areas, hosted on the LMS and supported by hybrid mentoring, they make entrepreneurship learning accessible at scale. The output is not only startups; it is also better employability, because students learn how markets work in real time.

Change assessment, and students will change behaviour

Universities often say they value innovation, but they still grade students primarily through memory-based exams. That mismatch kills entrepreneurship learning. A serious reform is to change assessment design. The framework in the attached document calls for multi-assessment—grading authentic outputs like prototypes, portfolios, demonstrations, investor-style pitches, peer feedback, and iteration discipline.

When a demo day replaces an end-term exam in one course, the classroom becomes a studio. When students get academic credit for incubation milestones, they can justify venture-building time to families and peers.

This matters enormously in India, where social expectations around education are high and “wasting time” is a real fear. Reduce early risk: scholarships and micro-grants are not charity

For many students, the barrier is not ideas. It is the cost of risk. Even modest support can change outcomes because it buys time for validation and prototyping. The attached model treats scholarships and micro-grants as key enablers because they de-risk early exploration and validate entrepreneurial talent.

On campus, this can be structured as milestone-based prototype grants, founder scholarships that combine tuition support with mentoring obligations, and alumni-funded “student angel circles” that make the first cheque feel possible. The strongest versions of these programs are not open-ended. They are disciplined: small funding, clear deliverables, rigorous review, and strong mentoring.

Sustainability is not a side theme; it is a venture frontier

If universities want entrepreneurship to be relevant to India’s next decade, they should look closely at sustainability. Energy, water, waste, mobility, livelihoods, and climate-resilient infrastructure are not only public policy topics; they are business opportunities.

A powerful idea in the attached framework is “green infrastructure” as a campus lever: when a campus becomes a living lab—renewable energy monitoring, circular waste systems, water auditing, sustainable procurement—students get a real-world testbed for green ventures.

The university becomes the first customer, the first dataset, and the first validation site. That is how sustainable entrepreneurship becomes practical rather than rhetorical.

Interdisciplinary teams are where the real startups are born

Most successful ventures sit at intersections. Technology without design fails. Design without distribution fails. Distribution without compliance fails. Compliance without product-market fit fails.

The attached framework highlights interdisciplinary collaboration as a structural driver of innovation.

Universities can operationalise this through cross-school challenge labs, mixed-team venture courses, shared co-working spaces, and joint teaching where faculty from business, engineering, humanities, and design co-own outcomes.

This approach also strengthens campus employability, because interdisciplinary teamwork is exactly what modern organisations demand.

Measure what matters, and tell a stronger story than rankings

A final weakness across many universities is measurement. Rankings rarely capture the full value of entrepreneurship, especially social entrepreneurship and community innovation. 

Campuses need their own dashboards: teams formed, prototypes built, ventures registered, revenue earned, jobs created, IP filed where relevant, grants won, follow- on funding secured, and measurable social or environmental outcomes. The attached model emphasises institutional “scaling up” through continuous improvement and outcome tracking, not through occasional publicity.

In a jobs-scarce era, the most credible university brand will be built not only on placement brochures, but on documented venture outcomes and community impact.

The editorial bottom line: the campus must become India’s most reliable launchpad

India does not need every student to become a founder. But India does need every graduate to become venture-capable, because the economy increasingly rewards those who can create value, not only those who can seek roles.

The path is visible. Policy frameworks exist. National scaffolding exists through IIC and AIM. Indian examples show what is possible when ecosystems are designed as systems rather than events. The remaining work is cultural and operational: to embed entrepreneurship in curriculum, pedagogy, assessment, leadership signals, and campus infrastructure so that it becomes routine.

When that happens, universities stop being waiting rooms for jobs and start becoming factories of solutions. In a country as young and ambitious as India, that is not an optional upgrade. It is the next definition of what a university is for.

The author is the Chief Mentor of Edinbox and works as a Director with the Techno India group of Kolkata, along with being the Principal Adviser of the Kolkata based university of the group.

Between reform momentum, trust deficit, and the race to stay relevant

As 2025 closes, Indian higher education looks bigger than ever—andmore uneasy than ever. Participation is rising, aspirations are rising faster, and the everyday “rules of the game” feel less predictable to students, teachers, and institutions. The system is being pushed to do several difficult things at once: redesign its regulatory architecture, restore confidence in accreditation after a credibility shock, respond to a jobs market being reshaped by AI, and compete globally for learners and faculty—while also navigating the hard realities of India’s federal politics.

What made the year feel different is that the big headlines were not about shiny new campuses or fashionable programmes. They were about governance and trust: a proposed super-regulator, new norms that could normalise contract teaching, an accreditation scandal that forced a pause and rule changes, and an internationalisation push that is ambitious in intent but still thin in early enrolment outcomes.

Scale is real. So is the anxiety about outcomes.

India’s higher education system is now among the world’s largest—and its scale is no longer the debate. The question that is getting sharper is what this scale delivers: do graduates leave with learning and credentials that translate into mobility—jobs, entrepreneurship, research pathways,

or global opportunities—or do they leave with degrees that the market increasingly discounts unless backed by demonstrable skills?

A key tension shows up in mobility numbers. Foreign students in India remain modest, while Indian students going abroad have surged—turning “internationalisation” from a branding phrase into a competitiveness test. The document notes AISHE 2021–22 foreign- student enrolment at 46,878, and cites a policy brief that places Indian outbound mobility at over 13 lakh in 2024—an asymmetry that is hard to ignore.

This is not only about “brain drain.” It is also about the credibility of the Indian campus experience for an international learner: predictable administration, clear degree equivalence, housing and safety, academic support, and a visible route to employability. If those elements feel uncertain, permissions and MoUs alone do not convert into inbound demand.

Consider a simple, familiar campus example. A student in a tier-2 city may now access more courses than before—minors, skill modules, even micro-credentials—but still struggle to find a good lab, a stable mentor, or an internship pipeline. The system expands choice, but the student’s question stays stubbornly practical: “Will this degree move me forward?”

The biggest move of 2025: rewiring the regulator

The most consequential policy story—because it could shape the next decade—was the introduction of the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhisthan Bill, 2025 in Parliament on December 15, 2025. As summarised in the document, the proposed body is designed to replace UGC, AICTE, and NCTE, while excluding legal and medical education from its scope.

The political economy around the bill is as important as its administrative logic. The document points to the bill being sent for Joint Parliamentary Committee consideration, expected to deliberate until end-February 2026, and highlights concerns around centralised appointments and limited representation for states and teachers.

There is an honest argument for simplification: India’s higher education regulation has often been seen as fragmented, compliance-heavy, and duplicative. But the counter-argument is equally structural: a single super-regulator can become a single point of failure, especially in a

federal polity where state universities educate a large share of students and where higher education is politically sensitive.

So the crossroads insight is not merely “reform versus status quo.” It is the difference between smarter regulation and more centralised regulation, and that difference will be determined by the final bill text, rule-making, and whether institutional autonomy becomes substantive rather than procedural.

The faculty question: flexibility or a slide into permanent insecurity?

Even as the system debates architecture, it is wrestling with the labour market of teaching. The document notes that draft UGC regulations removed the cap on contract teachers, and also captures the anxiety this triggers: exploitation risks, normalisation of precarious employment, and the possibility that contractualisation becomes the default staffing model.

Yes, contract hiring can bring speed and flexibility—useful in fast- changing fields and in institutions trying to scale quickly. But the deeper risk is cultural: when teaching becomes a short-term gig, research careers become less attractive, mentoring becomes thinner, and

institutional memory erodes. The classroom may continue, but the university’s core promise—long-term academic community—weakens. In everyday terms, this shows up in small, painful ways. A department runs three new “industry-relevant” courses, but the faculty rotates every semester. Students lose continuity, projects become superficial, and recommendation letters become transactional because no mentor has actually watched a learner grow over time.

When accreditation loses trust, quality becomes everybody’s problem 

If regulation sets the rules, accreditation creates the trust layer that makes those rules meaningful. In early February 2025, that trust took a major hit. The document references a NAAC inspection committee bribery case that led to arrests, a multi-month pause in accreditation, and changes in inspection committee rules, while larger reforms remained pending.

This kind of episode is not a one-off scandal; it is a systemic risk. Once accreditation is perceived as gameable, it distorts everything downstream—student choice, employer confidence, institutional funding logic, and the legitimacy of quality claims. The document frames the core requirement clearly: quality assurance cannot become “more forms”; it

must become more credibility, built through auditability, transparency, and robust conflict-of-interest controls.

A practical analogy helps. If grading in a university is suspected to be manipulable, even honest students suffer because the value of everyone’s marks declines. Accreditation works similarly at the institutional level: once trust falls, even good institutions pay the price.

India’s federal fault line: reform is also negotiation

One policy lesson the year underlined is that education reform in India is never purely a central script. The document points to disputes linked to funding arrangements and prolonged litigation around vice-chancellor appointments in multiple states, creating institutional uncertainty that directly affects campus functioning.

When VC appointments stall, promotions and hiring stalls. When funding is delayed, infrastructure and student support weaken. When calendars slip, credibility suffers. This is not abstract politics; students experience it as delayed exams, missing faculty, and administrative drift. 

Internationalisation: permissions are not the same as Experience 

Internationalisation ran through 2025 as ambition and anxiety. The document notes that letters of intent were issued to foreign universities for campuses in Indian cities, but also flags the “first-batch reality”: the earliest foreign university campuses in GIFT City reportedly admitted only about 60 students in their first cohort.

At the same time, India is also experimenting with “knowledge export,” including an Indian management institution’s overseas campus launch with a small initial cohort—symbolically significant, but still early-stage in scale terms.

The document’s central point is operational and unavoidable: internationalisation will rise only when India fixes the last mile—visa and mobility facilitation, degree equivalence, professional student services, housing, safety, predictable regulation, and employability outcomes. This is where institutions must move from announcements to “international student-ready” systems. An international learner is not only buying a syllabus; they are buying a life setup for two to four years. Any uncertainty—on paperwork, internships, safety, or post-study pathways—reduces demand sharply, regardless of branding. 

NEP at five: momentum on paper, strain on delivery 

By end-2025, NEP 2020 will be completed in five years. The document captures a critical interpretation: monitoring, deregulation, and digitalisation have advanced faster than academic reforms, while flexibility and choice remain constrained by staff shortages and infrastructure limitations, sometimes resulting in poor-quality course experiences. It also cites operational strain in implementing structural reforms like the four-year undergraduate programme, where administrative breakdowns, such as exam-paper delivery failures, became a public lesson in what happens when reform outpaces capacity.

The underlying message is simple: modularity and choice require advising systems, course design capability, assessment readiness, and staffing. Without these, flexibility becomes confusion. 

Professional councils push back, and remain outside the new architecture

A subtle but important detail is what the proposed new framework does not cover. The document notes that legal and medical education remain outside the bill’s scope, reinforcing that India is moving into a hybrid regulatory future rather than a single consolidated logic. It also notes sharper interventions by professional bodies, including a multi-year pause on new law schools and expansion by the Bar Council of India, and standardisation moves in allied health that will affect admissions and curricula. The implication is that coordination—rather than consolidation alone—will determine whether the ecosystem becomes clearer or more contradictory for institutions and learners.

2026: the “crystal gaze” and the hard choices ahead

The document frames three possibilities for 2026: a cleaner governance regime if the bill is redesigned for trust, a credible quality reset if accreditation becomes auditable, and internationalisation at scale if India fixes last-mile delivery rather than relying on permissions alone.

It also lays out three challenges likely to intensify. First, the AI-skills squeeze. The labour market tilt toward skills is already visible, and degrees will increasingly be valued when they come with portfolios, projects, internships, labs, and industry-validated Competence.

Second, the “contract trap.” If contractual faculty expands without safeguards, short-term savings can create long-term losses in pedagogy, mentoring depth, and research culture—exactly when the system needs stronger learning outcomes.

Third, reform fatigue and operational breakdowns. Reforms that change programme structures and assessment models can overwhelm under- resourced administration, unless phased rollouts and capacity-building become the default approach.

The real crossroads: permission-led reform or outcome-led rebuilding

The most compelling framing in the document is that the crossroads is ultimately a choice between two futures: a permission-led future with new regulators and frameworks but weak delivery capacity, and an outcome-led future with fewer headline reforms but deeper investments in trust, teaching careers, student services, and global-grade campus systems.

From that lens, the 2026 agenda becomes clear. Legitimacy must be designed into the new governance framework. Accreditation must become auditable, not just inspectable. Faculty careers must remain careers, not gigs. Internationalisation must be built as student experience, not only announcements. And AI-era curriculum realism must shift classrooms toward projects, internships, micro-credentials, and the ethics of new technologies—so degrees remain economically credible.

If 2025 was the year the pressure points surfaced loudly, 2026 could be the year India decides whether it will treat trust, teaching talent, and student experience as “implementation details,” or finally place them at the centre of reform.

The author is the Chief Mentor of Edinbox and works as a Director with the Techno India group of Kolkata, along with being the Principal Adviser of the Kolkata based university of the group.

India has spent decades exporting talent, sending millions of students overseas and watching top faculty and researchers build careers elsewhere. Now, a new NITI Aayog report, released in December 2025, argues that the next phase of India’s higher-education story must be about two-way flows: attracting international students and faculty, scaling cross-border research, and building globally networked campuses, without losing India’s cultural and intellectual identity.

The document, Internationalisation of Higher Education in India: Prospects, Potential and Policy Recommendations (Dec 2025) was prepared by NITI Aayog’s Education Division with a consortium led by IIT Madras, and it is explicitly framed as an academic/policy research output, not a binding policy statement. At the centre of the report is a concrete implementation blueprint: 5 thematic pillars, 22 policy recommendations, 76 action pathways, and 125 performance indicators an attempt to convert “internationalisation” from rhetoric into measurable delivery.

What the report means by “internationalisation” (it’s broader than foreign students) 

NITI Aayog’s framing treats internationalisation as a full-spectrum redesign of how Indian universities teach, research, partner, and present themselves globally. The report explicitly includes internationalisation- at-home, student/faculty mobility, international research collaborations, international student offices, offshore and onshore campuses, and Indian knowledge systems and intercultural fluency as part of the operating model.

This matters because India’s global footprint is not only an admissions challenge; it is also a systems challenge like visa processes, degree equivalence, credit transfer, campus support, safety, and the “soft infrastructure” that makes international learners and faculty feel welcome.

The targets: a push toward global medians by 2047

To create urgency, the report introduces time-bound targets for international student presence. It points to a goal of raising India’s “international student mobility intensity” to 1.0% by 2047, translating into roughly 8 lakh inbound international students (and about 22 lakh total international enrolments when accounting for multiple cohorts). The report’s underlying message is clear: India cannot become a credible global education hub without scaling inbound mobility significantly—and doing so requires coordinated action across education, home affairs, external affairs, and state governments. 

At-a-glance: the flagship proposals (and the “brands” the report wants India to build)

Each element above is drawn from the report’s policy recommendations

and implementation roadmaps.

Pillar 1: Strategy—build a national operating system, not scattered pilots

The report’s first move is to treat internationalisation as a whole-of- government, whole-of-system programme, not a set of disconnected MoUs. It proposes a comprehensive national strategy, including coordination mechanisms and measurable monitoring. A key strategy lever is the creation of Global Higher Education Hubs—regional ecosystems designed around STEAM disciplines and anchored in collaboration among universities, industry, government and society. This can be also criticised that the recommendations actually ignore the non-STEM disciplines, which in effect may also include management, law, communication, design, languages. The proposal explicitly suggests replicating hub models (including the “GIFT City approach”), creating incentives for high-potential Indian and international universities, and aligning hubs with national missions such as Digital India and Startup India. There are critics who explain with facts how the GIFT City of Gandhinagar has not been a success to boast

about.

The intent is not just student recruitment. These hubs are positioned as education-led innovation ecosystems that drive regional economic transformation and global reputation—i.e., internationalisation as industrial strategy, not only education policy.

Pillar 2: Regulation—reduce friction for people, programmes, and campuses

If strategy sets direction, regulation determines whether anything moves at speed. The report’s regulatory proposals focus on three bottlenecks:

1) Mobility permissions and administrative simplification

It calls for streamlined administrative procedures to enable smoother movement of students, faculty and researchers.

2) International branch campuses and eligibility rules

The report pushes for broadening eligibility and simplifying approval processes to make India a more competitive destination for foreign universities—moving beyond narrow filters and enabling faster decision cycles.

3) Co-located and “embedded” campus models

Instead of waiting only for standalone foreign campuses, the report proposes integrated/co-located campuses within Indian institutions—where foreign HEIs can plug into Indian public/private campuses through shared infrastructure and academic delivery. And to create a visible “proof-of-concept zone,” it recommends establishing GIFT IFSC as a model international education hub, expanding academic disciplines and aligning the ecosystem for global participation.

Finally, it argues that incentives matter only if rankings and reputational systems reward the right behaviours—hence the recommendation to revise NIRF to include internationalisation metrics aligned with NEP 2020.

Pillar 3: Mobility at scale—“Tagore Framework” for regional exchanges

Rather than only bilateral exchange MoUs (which often remain symbolic), the report advocates a multilateral architecture an Erasmus- like system adapted for regions such as ASEAN, BIMSTEC, or BRICS.

It even proposes a cultural-diplomacy identity for it: the “Tagore Framework,” taking into consideration the early internationalization of art and culture by Vishwabharati University at Shantiniketan, founded by the Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore.

The strategic subtext: India’s comparative advantage may lie in building Global South academic corridors that are structured, credit-recognised, and easier to navigate than today’s patchwork.

Pillar 4: Finance—new money, smarter instruments, and research-linked internationalisation

The report’s financing logic is blunt: internationalisation needs long- horizon funding, and India’s diaspora is an underutilised strategic asset. Bharat Vidya Kosh: a diaspora-led research sovereign impact fund. It proposes a National Research Sovereign Wealth Impact Fund—Bharat Vidya Kosh—a diaspora-led, government-matched trust-style vehicle to finance research, innovation and capacity-building. The model includes a proposed USD 10 billion corpus, split between diaspora/philanthropy and a government match.

Vishwa Bandhu Scholarship and Fellowship: prestige as policy To compete in global talent markets, the report recommends a flagship scholarship for international master’s students—Vishwa Bandhu Scholarship—modelled after global benchmarks. For researchers and faculty (especially diaspora), it proposes the Vishwa Bandhu Fellowship, designed to be globally competitive and administratively streamlined.

Erasmus Mundus, Ford Foundation Fellowships, Commonwealth Fellowships and many more are there as global illustrations of similar initiatives. Policy Recommendation 12: use existing global research money—systematically. A quieter but highly operational recommendation urges leading Indian central and state public universities to proactively tap bilateral and multilateral joint research funding programmes—by building internal capacity to access and manage such funds and by creating global consortia.

Pillar 5: Branding, communication and outreach—treat education as diplomacy

NITI Aayog’s report is unusually explicit that “internationalisation” is also a market-building exercise—with differentiated messaging for different countries.

It recommends developing country- and region-specific outreach strategies (BCO) based on Indian strengths, employer demand, diaspora influence, and trust signals.. Two notable “soft power” levers stand out: Indian Alumni Ambassador Network (“Bharat ki AAN”) to build credibility, mentoring pathways, and recruitment pull in target markets.

An annual flagship convening—Bharat Vidya Manthan—to position India as a global meeting point for higher education and research partnerships. The report also proposes a structured push for Global Academic and Research Exchange Programmes, including outward mobility schemes and institutional partnership engines, so exchanges become repeatable programmes rather than ad hoc arrangements.

And finally, it calls for revamping “Study in India” into a one-stop solution—reducing friction from discovery to application to onboarding.

Pillar 6: Curriculum and culture—internationalise “at home,” keep India’s intellectual signature

A key theme is that India should not chase global norms by flattening its identity. The report calls for building globally connected but culturally grounded institutions—linking internationalisation to India’s civilisational and knowledge traditions.

This shows up in three practical recommendations:

1. Internationalisation at home through curriculum redesign and campus practices (including language and cultural preparedness).
2. Build intercultural and foreign-language competence via national missions and institutional mechanisms.
3. Integrate global approaches with Indian philosophy and IKS, while promoting research addressing India’s socioeconomic challenges and giving global visibility to Indian knowledge systems across 

STEM and non-STEM.

The “student experience” shifts towards safety, housing, counselling, and belonging. One of the most implementable recommendations is also one of the most consequential: treat international students as a serious constituency with baseline global expectations.

The report recommends that universities adopt global standards for housing, campus safety, academic support, counselling, and cultural orientation, plus language assistance and mentorship to enable integration. This is not cosmetic. In global higher education, student satisfaction and word-of-mouth are major recruitment engines; without credible student experience, branding campaigns simply leak conversions. One of the biggest challenges for foreign students coming to India has been the hostile situation some of them have faced due to racism and due to public perception of the nations from which  foreign students have come.

The report’s strength is its operational clarity—named programmes, named actors, and measurable indicators. But three “watch areas” follow from the proposals themselves:

1. Coordination risk: many recommendations require tight synchronisation across ministries and states (especially visas, campus approvals, and safety standards).
2. Reputation and quality assurance: faster approvals and hub models will only work if quality signals remain credible.
3. Delivery capacity inside universities: several proposals assume capable International Relations Offices, sponsored research offices, and student services systems—capacities that vary widely today.

NITI Aayog’s report does not argue for internationalisation as a fashionable add-on. It frames it as a strategic necessity tied to Viksit Bharat 2047, backed by a full-stack programme architecture—from hubs and regulations to scholarships, diaspora financing, and student experience.

If implemented seriously, the proposals would reposition India from a country primarily known for outbound mobility to one that also hosts, convenes, and co-creates global higher education on India’s terms, with India’s identity intact. However, looking at the pace of implementation of NEP 2020, there are natural questions on the pace and extent of the limitations of these apparently clearly stated goals and perspectives by Niti Ayog.

The author is the Chief Mentor of Edinbox and works as a Director with the Techno India group of Kolkata, along with being the Principal Adviser of the Kolkata based university of the group.