The latest National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) rankings highlight a critical need to align with the provisions of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
As India’s higher education system transforms, the NIRF must evolve to reflect the NEP’s emphasis on restructuring institutions based on their core missions rather than the current ownership-based classification.
NEP 2020: Restructuring Higher Education
The NEP 2020 aims to reshape India’s higher education landscape by consolidating and restructuring Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). One of its key principles is to promote multidisciplinary education, encouraging institutions to break away from traditional academic silos. Instead, the NEP envisions large, integrated universities that foster holistic learning by blending different fields of study. The policy introduces three categories of institutions: research universities, teaching universities, and autonomous degree-granting colleges, all with distinct missions focused on research, teaching, or a balance of both.
However, the current NIRF methodology categorizes institutions based on ownership (public or private) and specific programmes such as engineering, medicine, or law. This rigid classification inadvertently hinders the development of multidisciplinary universities, going against the NEP’s vision of a flexible and integrated higher education system.
The NIRF: A Benchmark in Transition
Since its inception, the NIRF has become a vital tool for assessing the quality of higher education in India. It not only influences public perception but also plays a significant role in funding allocations, institutional recognition, and entrance exam seat distribution. Moreover, the NIRF was designed to offer a local ranking system that better reflects India’s unique educational context, compared to global rankings like QS and Times Higher Education.
The NIRF evaluates institutions based on parameters such as teaching, learning resources, research, and inclusivity. While these parameters are consistent across categories, the weightage assigned to each varies. For instance, colleges place greater emphasis on teaching and learning (40%), while research universities balance teaching and research equally (30% each).
Aligning NIRF with NEP: A New Methodology
To align with NEP 2020, the NIRF must reconfigure its methodology, shifting away from ownership and programme-based classification. A revised framework could tailor the weightage of parameters to match the missions of research universities, teaching universities, and autonomous colleges. For research universities, a 60% weightage on research would reflect their role in driving innovation, while teaching universities would focus more on learning outcomes (45%). Autonomous colleges, which serve as a bridge between research and teaching, would emphasize both teaching (45%) and graduation outcomes (30%).
This restructured approach would allow the NIRF to evaluate institutions more accurately, reflecting their core missions and contributions to society as envisioned by the NEP. Additionally, this shift would encourage institutions to adopt multidisciplinary approaches, facilitating the development of holistic education environments.
The Future of Indian Higher Education
By adopting NEP-aligned ranking criteria, the NIRF can further India’s goal of becoming a global education hub. The NIRF would not only help create a more meaningful assessment of HEIs but also support the NEP’s broader objective of developing world-class, mission-driven institutions. As India’s higher education sector evolves, this alignment will play a crucial role in driving excellence and fostering innovation, ensuring that the future of education is both locally relevant and globally competitive.