NEP 2020 and Institutional Ranking
Sri Aurobindo believed that a good education builds a strong foundation in the mind and that a university can only provide some materials for education. He also believed that the education system should be dismantled and replaced with a National Education system. This new system, in his view, should incorporate the inheritance of the past, the gains of the present, and the potential of the future.
The Role of Rankings in Higher Education
Rankings serve as an important tool for assessing an institution’s academic, research, and infrastructural quality. They influence factors such as student recruitment, funding, partnerships, and institutional growth. Institutions that consistently perform well in rankings enjoy greater prestige, recognition, and financial stability, making rankings a crucial aspect of their success.
India has a historical legacy of renowned learning centers like Nalanda, Takshashila, and Vikramashila. These institutions were hubs of knowledge, attracting scholars worldwide. While formal ranking systems did not exist in ancient times, these institutions were recognized for their academic excellence and intellectual contributions.
NEP 2020 and Higher Education Transformation
NEP 2020 introduces a new framework for higher education institutions in India, classifying them into three categories:
- Research Universities – Focused on research and innovation
- Teaching Universities – Primarily engaged in high-quality teaching
- Autonomous Degree-Granting Colleges – Offering specialized academic programs
This classification calls for ranking institutions to align their methodologies with NEP’s vision rather than continuing ownership and program-based classifications.
NEP 2020 also envisions the transformation of regulatory bodies into professional standard-setting organizations. It proposes merging multiple regulatory bodies into a single Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) to streamline governance and academic oversight.
Institutional Ranking Systems in India
India’s institutional ranking framework primarily includes:
- National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF)
- National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC)
These rankings influence funding allocations, institutional recognition, and public perception. They evaluate institutions based on parameters like teaching, learning, research, graduation outcomes, outreach, and inclusivity.
NEP 2020 encourages institutions to focus on critical thinking, innovation, and holistic student development. However, traditional ranking systems may not fully capture these qualitative aspects, as they rely on quantitative academic metrics.
The Global Perspective and Indian Rankings
NIRF was developed partly to counter global university rankings such as:
- QS World University Rankings
- Times Higher Education Rankings
- Shanghai Rankings
These rankings often fail to consider India’s unique academic context. NIRF aims to provide a more localized and relevant assessment. However, NEP 2020 advocates a holistic approach to rankings, incorporating:
- Interdisciplinary learning
- Critical thinking and creativity
- Pedagogical innovations
While NIRF includes faculty qualifications and research output, it does not emphasize the quality of student-centered teaching methodologies promoted in NEP 2020.
Challenges and the Way Forward
NEP 2020 promotes multidisciplinary institutions, encouraging universities to integrate diverse fields of study. However, traditional ranking systems categorize institutions based on specific disciplines, reinforcing silos rather than fostering integration.
Additionally, institutions catering to regional languages and community-specific education may not receive adequate recognition due to the one-size-fits-all approach of current rankings. NEP 2020 calls for a more inclusive and flexible ranking methodology that aligns with India’s evolving educational landscape.
The ranking of institutions is also tied to regulatory approvals from various bodies, such as:
- University Grants Commission (UGC)
- All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE)
- Council of Architecture (for architecture programs)
- Medical Council of India (for medical education)
- Pharmacy Council of India (for pharmacy institutions)
NEP 2020’s vision challenges this fragmented approach, advocating for integrated universities that break down subject-specific barriers.
Conclusion
NEP 2020 represents a transformative shift in Indian higher education. Ranking systems must adapt to align with its objectives by moving away from ownership-based classifications and embracing mission-driven assessments. The rankings should evolve to support multidisciplinary education, research, and holistic learning—ensuring that institutions are evaluated based on their true contributions to education and society.
As India moves towards its education goals for 2047, rankings must evolve beyond traditional metrics to reflect critical thinking, innovation, and lifelong learning. By aligning institutional rankings with NEP 2020, India can create a more relevant, inclusive, and future-ready education system.
