ministry of human resource development · 2018. 4. 3. · halaya, aru ripura, jam sh and utt iables...
Post on 01-Sep-2021
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
(DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION)
BACKGROUND NOTE
FOR THE MEETING OF
STATE SECRETARIES OF HIGHER /TECHNICAL EDUCATION
ON TWELFTH FIVE YEAR PLAN
Date: 22nd July, 2013 Time: 10.30AM to 5.30PM
Venue : Planning Commission Conference Hall (Room No. 122)
Yojana Bhavan, New Delhi
Meeting of State Secretaries of Higher / Technical Education on Twelfth Five Year Plan
& Review of Annual Plan 2013‐14
Jointly organized by Planning Commission and Department of Higher Education, MHRD Conference Hall (Room No. 122), Yojana Bhawan, New Delhi 22nd July 2013
Time Session
Monday, 22nd July 2013
10:30 – 11:00 Opening Remarks Member, HRD Secretary, Planning Commission Secretary, Higher Education
11:00 – 13:00 State Higher Education in the Twelfth Plan Presentation: (1) Holistic and Strategic Approach in the 12th Plan by Adviser, Higher Education; (2) State Perspective / Strategic Plans by JS Higher Education; (3) State wise disaggregated targets by VC (NEUPA)
Discussions
13:00 – 14:00 Lunch Break
14:00 – 17:00 Review of Annual Plan 2013‐14 Issues about Ongoing Central Sector / Centrally Sponsored Schemes
(A) Consolidation of new institutions set up during XI Plan [AS(T) and JS(CU&L)]
(B) Skill Building [JS(CU&L) and JS(TEL)] (C) Issues relating to Quality, including Accreditation, NMEICT, Research &
Innovation [AS(T), JS(TEL) & JS(HE)] (D) Issues relating to Equity [JS(ME) & EA} (E) Database of Higher Education [DDG}
Chair: Secretary, Higher Education Remarks: Chairman, UGC, Chairman, AICTE and concerned officers of Ministry
Feedback and Remarks by State Secretaries
17:00 – 17:30 Wrap‐up & Concluding Remarks Member (HRD) / Secretary, Higher Education
Schedule
I.
Appro
quantum
(access,
the stat
achieved
process
The Sta
resource
process
non‐neg
to beco
institutio
by state
the sche
them fo
fulfilling
achievem
achievem
the inte
RashStrat
oach RUSA will fu
m of funds fo
equity and e
tes and inst
d. The State
of planning
te Higher E
es to the inst
In order to
have to be m
gotiable prer
me eligible
onal governa
es, filling facu
eme an initia
or complying
g the prereq
ments viz‐a‐v
ments again
nded outcom
State
htriya Utegic P
und the insti
or the states
excellence).
itutions on
e Higher Edu
and evaluat
ducation Co
titutions.
realize the
made by the
requisites, i.e
for funding
ance reform
ulty position
al, preparato
g with the a
uisite a‐prio
viz the targe
st the target
mes.
Higher Edu
Plan
RUS
Futu
UchchaPlannin
tutions unde
and institut
The State Hi
the basis o
ucation Coun
tion, in addit
ouncils will b
e intended o
states. Som
e., commitm
g under RUS
s, creation o
ns (or a com
ory amount c
a‐priori requ
ori commitm
ets. Future fu
ts. The emp
States and
States cr
cation Coun
ns evaluated
SA funds allo
ure grants d
atar Shng for S
er a few key
ion will be th
igher Educat
f these nor
ncil (discusse
tion to other
be the key
outcomes, c
me of these co
ments made b
SA. These pr
of State High
mitment to
can also be p
uirements. O
ents, the sta
unds flows w
hasis would
RUSA: App
institutions
reate and su
ncil enters iAutho
d on the bas
ocated und
ependent u
hiksha AStates
y component
he norms tha
tion Plans wi
ms as well
ed in follow
r monitoring
institution a
certain prior
onditions wi
by the states
rerequisites
er Education
do so within
provided to t
Once eligible
ates will rec
would be dete
be not only
proach
s meet prere
ubmit State
nto a agreeority
sis of norms
er specific c
upon previo
Abhiya
ts. The yards
at will reflect
ll capture th
as the targe
ing sections
g and capacit
at the state
r commitme
ll be in the n
s as well as i
include aca
n Councils, fu
n a fixed tim
the state gov
e for fundin
ceive funds o
ermined bas
y on physical
equisites
Plans
ement with
s and criteri
component
us utilisatio
an
stick for dec
t the key res
he current po
ets that nee
) will undert
ty building fu
e level to ch
ents towards
nature of a‐p
nstitutions,
ademic, sect
unding comm
me frame) et
vernment to
ng under RU
on the basis
sed on outco
l output, but
RUSA Missi
ia
ts
on
iding the
sult areas
osition of
ed to be
take this
unctions.
hannelize
s reform
priori and
for them
toral and
mitments
tc. Under
o prepare
USA after
s of their
omes and
t also on
ion
Prerequisites A cornerstone of RUSA will be the stipulation of a set of prerequisite, certain commitments
that must be made by the state government as well as institutions in order to be eligible for
receiving grants under RUSA. This is an essential element of strategic central funding. These
conditions are in the nature of categorical policy imperatives which would ensure that the higher
education in the country is guided on desirable paths by all states.
The prerequisites are at two levels, commitment given by states to center and the
commitment given by institutions to the states. Unless these commitments are fulfilled, the states
and institutions will not be able to avail of grants under RUSA. The states are expected to fulfill the a‐
priori requirements and also honour the commitments made towards certain conditions which must
be fulfilled during the course of RUSA implementation.
Planning Under RUSA, a perspective plan (State Higher Education Plan) for higher education in the
state is to be drawn up for a spread over a period of ten years which would be reviewed after five
years. The perspective plan is required to be broken down into annual plans with detailed planning
and budgeting exercise to fix the annual targets for program implementation and the required
budget for them. To effectively implement and monitor the activities during the year, each
implementing agency in the State is required to prepare a plan of action. This should indicate the
physical targets and budgetary estimates in accordance with the approved pattern of assistance
Prerequisites
For the States
State Higher Education Council
State perspective Plan
State contribution to higher education in terms of GSDP
State funding commitment – share and timeliness
Agreement to create separate fund for RUSA
Filling faculty positions
Affiliation and examination reforms
Governance/administrative reforms
Institutional governance (administrative) reforms
For the Institutions
Academic reforms and inter and cross disciplinarily
Examination reforms
Affiliation reforms
Separate project management teams
Perspective planning
Equity commitments (esp aided sector)
Commitments on research and innovation efforts
Mandatory faculty recruitment and improvement
Establishment of Management Information System
Regulatory compliance
under the RUSA. These should cover all aspects of the program activities for the period from April to
March each year, and are sent by each State/ UT to the Ministry of Human Resources Development,
GoI for approval well before the start of the year. It is important that the action plan is realistic,
practically implementable and correlates the physical outputs with the cost estimates.
Bottom up Approach RUSA follows a ‘bottom up’ approach for planning and budgeting. The process begins at the
institutional level, which prepares the “Institutional Action Plan” based on inputs/ discussions with
the multiple – stakeholders within its jurisdiction and sends to the State Higher Educational Council
(SHEC). In addition, the SHEC should also engage in consultation with multiple stakeholders across
the State taking into account regional requirements as also requirements in keeping with equity and
access concerns (especially underserved and backward districts). These Action Plans are then
aggregated to form a State Higher Educational Plan (SHEP). All SHEPs are reviewed and compiled to
estimate the next year's fund requirements for program implementation activities under RUSA.
This requires setting up of planning teams and committees at various levels i.e. at
Underserved and backward districts, regional zones, educational institutional level through active
participation of multiple stakeholders which will help perform both planning and on‐going
monitoring functions. The process of giving inputs and consolidation of plans will be through a
bottom up approach.
The States and SHECs should function not merely as agencies to aggregate the institutional
plans at state level. They are required to consider the entire state as a single unit of planning. Their
role is more towards ensuring a balanced development of higher education in the entire state. The
state plan must include strategies to address spatial and geographical gaps, perspective discipline
planning etc. The state has to identify un‐served/under‐served areas and make special provisions for
the new institutions to come up in those areas. The plans must also address the problem of
institutional congestion and have a strategy to deal with the same. Similarly, state must also look at
the state as a single entity to plan for affiliation reforms and creation of new universities etc.
Process of Preparation of Plans The Ministry of Human Resource Development is the nodal agency administering the RUSA
program. It receives the budget targets of participating states, reviews/ analyzes them & then gives
approvals & makes disbursements, and so the entire process runs through a two‐way mechanism:
“Budgetary Demands” emanating from Institutions to the MHRD, GoI by the state
“Budgetary Approvals/ Allocations” conveyed from MHRD, GoI to the State Treasury, which
in turn will allot it to the SHECs along with its matching share and in turn to the institutions.
Resou
States. T
addition
states w
basis of
will be t
more re
Categor
Special CategorStates
Other and UTs
and vul
inaccess
districts
urce AlloThe MHRD
The overall a
nal weightag
with weak so
norms and
the scheme
sources to th
ry S
ry ANS
States s
Under RUSA
nerable gro
sible areas, l
.
cation follows nor
allocation is
e has been a
ocio‐econom
further ince
for resourc
he States wh
States
Assam, ManNagaland, MSikkim, Him
A socio‐demo
oups; district
eft wing aff
Prepar
rm and perf
made on th
assigned to t
ic and healt
entives will b
e allocation
hich are critic
nipur, MegMizoram, Tachal Prade
ographic var
ts with adv
ected distric
ation of Stat
formance‐ba
he basis of s
the States to
h indicators
be provided
to different
cal for achiev
halaya, AruTripura, Jamesh and Utt
riables like r
erse educat
cts etc. are c
te Plans
ased approa
student popu
o ensure enh
. Further, re
on the basi
t category o
ving the obje
unachal Prammu & Kasarakhand
ural/urban d
tion indicato
considered w
ch to alloca
ulation (18‐2
hanced alloca
esources will
s of perform
of States. Th
ectives of RU
CenCon
adesh, shmir,
90:
65:
distribution;
ors; difficult
while allocat
ate funds to
23) of the st
ation of reso
be allocate
mance. The f
his approach
USA.
nter: Sntribution
10
35
proportion
, most diffi
ting resource
o various
tates. An
ources to
d on the
following
ensures
tate
of SC/ST
cult and
es to the
Resource Envelop The Resources allocated to a particular state for any given financial year is termed as the “Resource
Envelope”. The resource envelope for a Financial Year consists of:
Uncommitted Unspent Balance.
GoI Allocation (BE) proposed for the year.
State Share Contribution due for the year.
Institutional Higher Educational Plan The Institutional Higher Educational Action Plan depicts the resource requirements at
institutional level as well as at its sub units for program implementation in terms of infrastructure,
HR, procurement, schemes execution etc. and provides an overall budget required for the Institution
to execute those activities. The Institutional Governing Structure is responsible for the preparation
of IHEAP that needs to be done by constituting a Planning team responsible for providing overall
guidance and support to the planning process.
State Higher Education Plan After submitting the Institution Plans to the SHEC, they are to be reviewed in detail at the
state level and finalized through extensive meetings/ discussions with the various stakeholders. The
requirements for all the areas/institutions are clubbed with the State level budgetary requirements
to form the State Higher Education Plan. This annual SHEP will help the states in identifying and
quantifying their targets required for program implementation for the proposed year. However
while sanctioning the resources, MHRD would ensure that these plans are organically linked to the
overall perspective plans. Therefore, a perspective plans in the required template would be the
guiding document to ensure that over all objectives of the state plans are not lost sight of.
Key considerations while drafting SHEP Some of the key aspects, which must be considered for preparation of SHEPs, are given
below:
Funds released under RUSA do not lapse at the close of the Financial Year but are carried
over to the next Financial Year in the form of committed and uncommitted unspent
balances.
Clear demarcation of Committed Unspent and Uncommitted unspent balances has to be
made. The states need to show the quantum of usage of funds in the previous year and the
quantum of unspent funds lying with them. The previous year funds lying with the states
need to be clearly demarcated and shown under the heads:
Committed Unspent Funds: These funds are meant for those activities for which
implementation have already started, are underway, or have been administratively
approved but not implemented fully. These balances need to be indicated by the state
activity wise while proposing the SHEP for the next Financial Year. The State/UT may also
provide the estimated timelines for utilization of committed liability, preferably within next
two quarters.
Uncommitted Unspent Funds: The funds lying with Institutions which could not be
committed for utilization during the year should also be worked out and incorporated in
State level unspent balances.
Ceiling on Civil works: A portion of state funds is used on civil works. Ideally the proportion
of civil works would not cross 60% of the total resource requirements. This can be relaxed in
exceptional cases with the approval of the Mission Authority. Also, all the civil construction
work should be taken up only after including the manpower & equipment requirements so
that a large portion of public funds is not blocked in unutilized buildings.
Ceiling on Program Management Costs: A maximum of 4% of approved SHEP may be spent
on program MMER activities (management, monitoring, evaluation and research) such as
hiring of consultants coming under the ambit of program management, monitoring and
evaluation, audit expenses, mobility support, office expenses, purchase of computers, office
furniture & fixtures, fax machines etc.
State's Share: The states participate with the centre in funding the RUSA program. States are
required to contribute 10% to 35% of the total amount released. It should be ensured that
all along the state expenditure on health increases in real terms and there is no substitution
of the state expenditure by Central expenditure.
Format of SHEP Another important aspect of the budget is the format in which it is presented. The format
should be crisp, well defined and easily decipherable at all levels. For this, Ministry prepares the
framework and guidelines for preparation of SHEPs that will be circulated to the States and UTs each
year for submission and approval of their Budget for the forthcoming year. These guidelines aim to
reduce the size of the framework and demand of information from the states, so as to make SHEPs
less bulky without compromising with the strategic inputs and other essential information. The new
format of SHEP will be made available online on the Mission website. As per the format, following
are the broad contents of the SHEP:
Executive Summary
Outcome analysis of last SHEP
Policy and Strategic Reforms in Strategic Areas
Conditionalities
Scheme/ Program under RUSA
Monitoring and Evaluation
Financial Management
State Resources and Other sources of funds
Priority projects if other resources are available
Approval Process The Project Approval Board at GoI level undertakes detailed review of the SHEPs submitted
by the states. It will also assess the performance of the State and look at the targets that have been
set. The SHEP will then be approved by the PAB (in case any changes are made the states will make
the changes and resubmit the same to PAB) and funds will be released to states accordingly.
Timelines The Financial Year beginning from 1st of April is the commencement date of the Annual
Project Implementation Plans. Hence, the budget needs to be approved and communicated at all
levels before this date. This implies that it needs to be sent for approval and consented at all levels
of authority before 1st April. The success of budgeting exercise is dependent on adherence to time
schedules. Delays in submissions and approvals can delay the finalization of the SHEPs. Hence, RUSA
will specify the dates by which submissions and approvals need to be carried out. The tabular
representation of the time schedule to be followed is given below:
Detailed Timelines (to be intimated to States at the start of the project)
Activity Timeline
Communication of Resource Envelop to Institutions by SHEC
Submission of Institutional Plans
Receiving of SHEP in MHRD
Pre‐appraisal meeting
Discussion at National Steering Committee/PAB
Approved RoPs sent to the SHEC after the approval at GoI
Transfer of first installment of money to SHEC
Receipt of Expenditure Statement/MHRD review
Transfer of second installment
Revision of Budget After the finalization of the SHEP, the states can place an additional demand for funds for
any specific purpose to the Ministry. After review and feedback from the concerned program
divisions, the Ministry may approve or disapprove the request. In case of an approval, a
letter/corrigendum shall be issued to the state notifying the approved amount and the subsequent
change in the RoP of the state.
Draft State and Institutional Plan Templates
Executive Summary
A summary of the contents of the State Plan must be presented. The Executive summary can
cover the part performance, vision, key initiatives, main challenges faced etc.
Chapter 1: Introduction
Mission
A mission statement is fundamental to strategic planning. It is an assertion of an institution’s
raison d’être, or purpose, and should clearly define its ideals as well as the services it offers to
various stakeholders. It informs an institution’s financial planning, budgeting, staffing and academic
programming. One aspect of a mission statement relates to students, in terms of both institutional
commitments and expectations.
The mission statement should be a general statement of values, aims and goals of the
institution. An effective mission statement will be clear, precise and transparent about
commitments, long‐term goals and values. It usually includes a commitment to high standards and
levels of performance, discussion of the context of the institutional environment, recognition of
institutional obligations to the community, the nation and the world, and commitment to its
students. A mission statement ordinarily consists of two parts:
a high‐level preamble that encapsulates the gist of the institutional mission; and
a narrative portion that lists the particularities and elaborates on the implications of the mission statement in practical terms.
Vision
An effective vision statement is vital to a strategic planning process. A vision statement
describes what an institution aspires to become in the future and the values it enshrines. It captures
in detail what things could be like at the institution if it were functioning effectively and focuses on
the contribution the institution will make to society. In the long run, a successful strategic plan must
be premised on institutional values, such as:
Academic freedom;
Institutional autonomy;
High quality;
Equal access; and
Non‐discrimination (by race, ethnic affiliation, religion and gender) Goals
Institutional goals help translate the institutional vision and mission into action. Goals
should state clearly the conditions for institutional effectiveness, and the norms and expectations of
students and staff. They should present a broad statement of the aims of the institution. . The goals
must consist of clear statements based on objective criteria and capture the main targets that the
institution has set for itself.
Chapter 2: Background
Demographic Profile of the State
Population
Rural‐Urban spread
Higher Education Profile
GER across categories, across state
Qualitative comparison between various areas of the State
Private sector plan
SWOT Analysis
Key hurdles such as low access due to low income, large tribal population etc
Key strengths such as existence of strong education hubs, industry clusters etc
Academic Information
Type No of Universities
Central University
State University
Private University
Other degree awarding institution declared by University
Deemed University
Other
Total
Type No of Colleges
Government funded
Government aided
Private unaided
Autonomous
Other
Total
Type No of Colleges
Autonomous colleges
Affiliated colleges
Constituent colleges
Other
Total
Accreditation of Universities
Agency Status Score Range No of
Institutions
Not accredited Not accredited ‐
NAAC
Accredited and revalidated after 2007
A
B
C
D
Accredited but not revalidated after 2007
A
B
C
D
State Accreditation Authority
Accredited
A
B
C
D
Accreditation of Colleges
Agency Status Score Range No of
Institutions
Not accredited Not accredited ‐
NAAC
Accredited and revalidated after 2007
A
B
C
D
Accredited but not revalidated after 2007
A
B
C
D
State Accreditation Authority
Accredited
A
B
C
D
Faculty Status (Regular/On-Contract Faculty as on March 31st, 20XX)
Faculty Rank
No. of Sanctioned Regular
Present Status : Number in Position
by Highest Qualification
Total Number of regular
facultyinPosition
Total V
acancies
Total Number of contract
faculty in Position
Doctoral Degree Masters Degree Bachelor Degree
Engineering
Other
Engineering
Other
Engineering
Other
R C R C R C R C R C R C
1
2
3
4 5
6
7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15=
(3+5+7+9+11+13)
16=
(2-15)
17=
(4+6+8+10Prof Assistant Prof Associate Prof
Total
R=Regular, C=Contract
Chapter 3: Analysis of past performance
Summary
Summary of the performance of the past year against the major targets set and the major reasons
for non‐performance
Detailed Analysis
Performance against specific goals – details on a state wise basis
Analysis of the expenditure made against the allocations, committed unspent and uncommitted unspent balances
Any particular Universities that need to be mentioned for above or below average performance
Reasons for non‐performance
Affiliation reform progress with data on the number of affiliating universities and number of affiliated colleges for every university
New strategies adopted for improving equity, access and excellence – any new and innovative practices adopted by the State
Chapter 4: Preparation of the State Plan
Methodology
The steps used for development of the Plan
Stakeholder Consultation
Which were the stakeholders that were consulted for the process of developing the Plan and what
were their major contributions
Chapter 5: Five‐year Perspective Plan
Provide the five‐year perspective plan. The five‐year plan must contain:
Current scores on norms, scores set for the current year (in the five year plan) and the target scores for the end of five‐year plan
Revisions in the targets that the SHEC deems necessary
State’s assessment of its progress against the five‐year plan targets
Course corrections and major strategies adopted to achieve the plan targets
Chapter 6: Snapshot of the Annual Plan
This section would provide the summary of the State Higher Education Plan; it would capture the
main goals and the financial outlay.
Priority Areas
The State identifies 6‐7 priority areas that it needs to work on. These areas as well as the
justifications must be mentioned.
Strategy
The Strategy section must mention out the thrust areas of the coming year, highlight the key
initiatives the States will undertake to tackle weak areas in the State and what the State hopes to
achieve from these initiatives.
Sources of funds
Source Funds expected
1. Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan
2. Grants from State Higher Education Department
3. Grants from other State departments
4. Grants from Central Departments
5. Raised from private sector, institutions, foundations and organizations
6. Resources raised by higher education institutions from internal sources like student fees, examination fees etc
Total
Major targets and financial outlays
Component Number/target Financial Outlay
New Universities
Up gradation of existing autonomous colleges to
Conversion of colleges to Cluster Universities
Infrastructure grants to Universities
New Model Colleges (General)
Upgradation of existing degree colleges to model colleges
New Colleges (Professional)
Infrastructure grants to colleges
Research, innovation and quality improvement
Equity initiatives
Faculty recruitment support
Faculty improvements
Research Universities
Vocationalisation of Higher Education
Leadership Development of Educational Administrators
Institutional restructuring & reforms
Capacity building & preparation, Data collection & planning
MIS
Polytechnic Colleges
Prerequisites: Essential commitments from the State
S. No. Item State’s Commitment
(Yes/No)
1. Does the State agree to:
Set specific targets and policy goals for higher education and agree
about size and shape.
2. Share the project cost of the Government funded and aided
institutions with MHRD in the applicable ratio (10:90, 35:65)
3. Scale up to and maintain prescribed levels of funding to higher
education as a % of State Gross Domestic Product
4. Create the State Higher Education Council according to the
suggestion made under RUSA
5. Establish “State Project Directorate” (SPD) located in State
Directorate of Higher Education / the department responsible for
Higher Education with adequate staff and maintain the staffing with
stability?
6. Fill up vacant faculty positions
7. Implement all the affiliation reforms mentioned under RUSA
8. Implement all the sectoral governance reforms mentioned under
RUSA
9. Create and submit the State Higher Education Plan according to
prescribed guidelines
10. Implement the Project according to the Project Implementation Plan
11. Ensure implementation of both academic and non‐academic
reforms by all institutions
12. Discontinue funding to any state beyond the second year of the
Project, if the state fails neglects project Implementation
13. Comply with the Disclosure Management Framework
Current level and targets for the next year
S No. Indicator
1. Governance Index ‐ 17%
1.1 % of Universities with more than
100 affiliated colleges
1.2 % of autonomous of colleges out
of total colleges covered under
RUSA
1.3 Ratio of teaching to non‐teaching
staff in State Higher Education
1.4 Delay in exam conduction and
declaration of results (in %)
1.5 % of institutions with a functional
website
2. Access Index ‐ 21.5
2.1 GER of the State
2.2 Rural Institutional density of the
State
2.3 Urban Institutional density of the
State
2.4 Median capacity intake of
Universities
2.5 Median capacity intake of
Colleges
2.6 % of students in private
universities or colleges as a % of
students in state/central
institutions
2.7 Scholarships provided by state as
a % of total expenditure on
Higher education
3. Equity Index ‐ 22.5%
3.1 SC GER
3.2 ST GER
3.3 GER for Females
3.4% of districts below GER National
average
3.5 % of students from rural
backgrounds (define rural) in the
higher education system
3.6 % of institutions "differently‐
abled friendly"
3.7 Existence of Equal Opportunities
Commission
4. Quality Index ‐ 25%
4.1 Student teacher ratio across the
State
4.2 % of institutions accredited by
NAAC/State Accreditation
Authority
4.3 Average rating of Universities
4.4 Average rating of Colleges
4.5 % of active teachers that are non‐
permanent
4.6 Per institution foreign
collaboration
4.7 Capacity at PG level as a % of
undergraduate capacity
5. Research and Innovation index ‐
14%
5.1 Capacity at doctoral level as % of
undergraduate capacity
5.2 Average number of publications
by State Universities
5.3 Citation Impact
5.4 Median patents granted for State
universities
Total Score
Chapter 7: Detailed Plan
Based on SWOT analysis provide the “strategic plan” developed for the State Plan and how the key
activities proposed in the State Plan are linked with the results of SWOT Analysis. The Plan must
cover the strategies that the State has for improvement in
Overview of the major initiatives
This section must address how the State plans to improve access, equity and excellence in the
coming year. Whether there are any thrust areas geographically etc.
Governance
Access
Equity
Quality
Research
Private sector participation
Plan for including the private sector in planned higher education expansion and raising resources
from the private sector
Detailed component‐wise allocations
Component Year 1
Target
Year 2
Target
Year 3
Target
Year 4
Target
Year 5
Target
New Universities
Up gradation of existing autonomous colleges to
Universities
Conversion of colleges to Cluster Universities
Infrastructure grants to Universities
New Model Colleges (General)
Upgradation of existing degree colleges to model colleges
New Colleges (Professional)
Infrastructure grants to colleges
Research, innovation and quality improvement
Equity initiatives
Faculty recruitment support
Faculty improvements
Research Universities
Vocationalisation of Higher Education
Leadership Development of Educational Administrators
Institutional restructuring & reforms
Capacity building & preparation, Data collection &
planning
MIS
Polytechnic Colleges
Chapter 8: University‐wise plans and financial impact
Outlays for all universities and colleges
University wise break up
Name of University Planned Outlay Current Score Target Score
University 1
University 2
University 3
University 4
College wise break up
Name of College Planned Outlay Current Score Target Score
College 1
College 2
College 3
College 4
Detailed Allocations for Universities
University 1
1. 1 Short note on the performance over the last year against norms (not exceeding 200 words)
1.2 Short note on the strategy for the coming year (not exceeding 200 words)
1.3 Major Norms – Current and target for coming year
Norm Current Target
Governance Quality Index
Academic Excellence Index
Equity Initiative Index
Research and Innovation Index
Student Facilities Index
Infrastructure and others Index
1.4 Components‐wise outlay
Component Target
Expansion of Institution
Research and innovation focus
Infrastructural upgradation of existing institutions
Establishing Management Information System
Faculty support – recruitment and capacity building
Administrative reforms
Academic reforms
Affiliation reforms
State Baseline
Head and Nodal Officer
Name Phone Mobile number Fax number Email address
State (Full time appointee)
State Baselines
S.No
Parameters
1 Enrollment and GER of the State
a Male Female Total
b Male SC Female SC Total SC
c Male ST/DT&ONT Female ST/DT&ONT Total ST/DT&ONT
d Male OBC Female OBC Total OBC
e Male (General) Female (General) Total (General)
f Male (Urban) Female (Urban) Total (Urban)
g Male (Rural) Female (Rural) Total (Rural)
2 Degrees Awarded
Awarded in 2012 Number that originally enrolled in first year of the program
Ratio of degree awarded to enrolled
3 year Undergraduate degrees
Auto-calculate
4 year Undergraduate degrees
Auto-calculate
5 year integrated Masters Auto-calculate
2 year masters Auto-calculate
3 Total number of PhD degrees
Enrolled annually (i.) Awarded annually (ii.)
Total
4 Number of research publications in Indian refereed journals in the year 20XX-1X
5 Number of research publications in International refereed journals in the year 20XX-1X
6 Number of patents obtained in the year 20XX-1X
7 Number of sponsored research projects completed in the year 20XX-1X
8 IRG from students' fee and other charges in the year 20XX-1X (Rs. In lakh)
9 IRG from externally funded R&D projects, consultancies in the year 20XX-1X (Rs. in lakh)
10 Total IRG in the year 20XX-1X (Rs. in lakhs)
11 Total Number of autonomous colleges in the State in year 20XX-IX
12 Total nos. colleges granted autonomy in year 20XX-IX
Total nos. of autonomy withdrawn in year 20XX-IX
13 Total nos. colleges created in year 20XX-IX Total nos. of colleges closed down in year 20XX-IX
14 Institutional Density (per 1000 sq. km)
Institutions (Urban) Institutions (Rural) Institutions (Total)
15 New Institutions created (Urban)
New Institutions created New Institutions created (Total)
(Rural)
16 Total financial contribution of private sector in Higher Education as a % of total higher education expenditure
17 Expenditure detail
State Expenditure on higher education as a % of GSDP
Expenditure on research, development and related activities as % of Total Higher Education Expenditure
Expenditure on capital creation as % of Total Higher Education Expenditure
Expenditure on salary of teaching staff as % of Total Higher Education Expenditure
Expenditure on salary of non-teaching staff as % of Total Higher Education Expenditure
***
II. CONSOLIDATION OF NEW INSTITUTIONS
1. Issue pending with the State Governments w.r.t new National Institutes of
Technology (NITs)
NIT/ Delhi‐ The land earmarked at Bankholi Village (Narela) for permanent
campus of the Institute is yet to be transferred by the State Govt. Of Delhi.
NIT/Goa‐ the land earmarked at Cuncolim for permanent campus of the
Institute is yet ot be transferred by the State Govt. Of Goa.
NIT/Sikkim – The Land earmarked at Khamdong for the permanent campus of
the Institute is yet to be transferred by the State Govt. of Sikkim.
NIT/ Uttarakhand – State Govt’s nominees from State Govt. of Uttarakhand
are still awaited for the constitution of Board of Governors (BOG) of NIT‐
Uttarakhand.
NIT/Mizoram – Part land measuring 84 acres at lengpui is yet to be
transferred by the State Govt. of Mizoram.
2. Issue pending with the State Governments w.r.t old National Institutes of
Technology (NITs)
NIT /Kerala‐ Nomination of two State Government’s nominees on the Board
of Governors of NIT‐ Calicut (Kerala) from amongst persons, who, in the
opinion of that Government, are technologist or industrialists of repute.
NIT/ Haryana ‐ Nomination of two State Government’s nominees on the
Board of Governors of NIT‐ Kurukshetra (Haryana) from amongst persons,
who in the opinon of that Government, are technologist or industrialists of
repute.
NIT/Maharashtra‐ One State government nominee is awaited on the Board
of Governors of VNIT‐ Nagpur (Maharashtra).
NIT/Bihar‐ One State Government nominee is awaited on the Board o
Gvoernors of NIT‐ Patna (Bihar).
NIT/Assam‐ Nomination of two State Government’s nominees on the Board
of Governors of NIT‐Silchar (Assam) from amongst persons, who in the
opinion of that Government , are technologist or industrialists of repute.
NIT/Jammu & Kashmir‐ Additional land measuring 64 acres at Zainkot is yet
to be transferred by State Government of Jammu and Kashmir in the name of
NIT‐ Sirnagar (J&K).
3. There is a time lag for release of funds under TEQIP‐II from the State to the Institutions as follows :
Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Karnataka, Punjab & Rajasthan : 8 – 12 Months
Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh &
Uttarakhand : 6‐8 months.
Jharkhand, Maharashtra, UT‐Chandigarh, UT‐Puducherry, Uttar Pradesh & West Bengal : 3‐5 months.
State‐wise details on annexe‐I
4. NBA would like to suggest the following to the State Governments for successful implementation of mandatory accreditation:‐
State Governments may work with affiliating universities to make the appropriate legislation for making the following mandatory:‐
i) Linkage of affiliation, by the State Governments, with the Accreditation. ii) Increase of intake in the existing accredited programmes only. iii) To allow affiliation for new programme only when rest of the other
programmes are accredited. iv) To allow affiliation of the existing programmes with increased capacity,
if the programmes are accredited. v) Since international accreditation is outcome based,
necessary steps, such as orientation of the faculty members and other stakeholders to outcome based education and accreditation may be taken.
5. Status in respect of 20 new IIITs being set up in PPP mode
The MoU and MoA are still awaited from the State Governments of Kerala,
Tamil Nadu,Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana.
Detailed Project Report is awaited from the States of Karnataka, Bihar,
Chhattisgarh,Goa, Jharkhand, Orissa, Maharashtra, Punjab and West Bengal.
MoA not signed as Bank Guarantees have not been submitted for
IIIT/Tripura.
The Govt of Madhya Pradesh informed that 2 industry partners namely Core
Higher Education Ltd and Trident Ltd finalized due to unavoidable
circumstances have withdrawn their offers of investment. The State Govt had
intimated that a public sector undertaking was being finalised but response in
this regard is still awaited.
6. Central University of Gujarat
Keeping in view the constraints of availability of land in and around the twin city of
Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar, the Government of India agreed to reduce the land
requirement of 500 acres and requested the Government of Gujarat in June 2011 to allot a
total area of land (approximately 247 acres) available at Lekawada, Gandhinagar for
establishment of the permanent campus of the Central University of Gujarat with the
specific condition that it will maintain atleast 50 acres as green area. The matter was taken
up with Government of Gujarat several times including reminders from the Secretary,
Department of Higher Education. The matter was subsequently raised with the Chief
Minister of Gujarat by the Human Resource Development Minister on 13.5.2013 in response
to which Chief Minister assured for immediate action and to render necessary assistance.
In pursuance of the above, Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Govt. of India
vide letter dated 24.06.2013 has again requested the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Gujarat to
transfer the land to enable the University to start the development of permanent campus.
No response received from the State Govt so far.
7. Central University of Himachal Pradesh
The State Government allotted 62 hectares of land at Dharamshala and 318 hectares
of land at Dehra for the new Central University. Since the two pieces of land fell under the
forest cover, the State Government had approached the Ministry of Environment and
Forests for exemption and use of allocated land for the educational purposes. As no
favourable response was received from the Environment Ministry, the State Government
offered another piece of land about 120 hectares in addition to the 62 hectares already
offered at Dharamshala itself. A Site Selection Committee which included a representative
of Ministry of Environment and Forests, inspected the land in June, 2013. The State
Government is now to formalize the process of allotment expeditiously so that the
university which is currently running in a temporary campus with very limited courses, shall
be able to develop itself into a full‐fledged Central University.
****
III. SUB MISSION ON POLYTECHNICS 1. SETTING UP OF NEW POLYTECHNICS
Government of India provides financial assistance to the State / UT Governments, limited to Rs.12.30 crores per polytechnic to meet the costs of establishing a Polytechnic in the unserved Districts / underserved districts, subject to the respective State / UT Governments providing land free of cost, meeting 100% recurring expenditure and also non-recurring expenditure beyond Rs.12.30 crores, if any. 287 Districts have been provided partial financial assistance under the scheme.
However, some of the Districts of a few States have not yet submitted the progress
reports and statement of expenditure of first installment sanctioned under the scheme. It is proposed that the concerned State Governments should take effective steps to utilize the entire amount and submit the statement of expenditure expeditiously so that the action may be initiated by the Ministry to release the second installment in time. State-wise details of such Districts will be made available at the venue of the meeting.
2. STRENGTHENING OF EXISTING POLYTECHNICS
Government of India has formulated a scheme to provide financial assistance to upgrade infrastructure facilities of 500 existing diploma level public funded polytechnics subject to a maximum of Rs.2 crores per Polytechnics. 500 Polytechnics have been provided partial financial assistance under the Scheme.
However, as per available information 43 Polytechnics have not re-submitted proposals /
recast proposals under the Scheme as per details given below – S.NO. NAME OF THE STATE NO. OF POLYTECHNICS 1. PUNJAB 1 2. RAJASTHAN 2 3. UTTAR PRADESH 5 4. ANDHRA PRADESH 1 5. KARNATAKA 2 6. TAMIL NADU 2 7. PUDUCHERRY 2 8. MADHYA PRADESH 2 9. CHHATTISGARH 12 10. A & N ISLANDS 1 11. BIHAR 12 12. MEGHALAYA 1 TOTAL: 43 The concerned State Governments may take necessary action to submit the revised/recast proposals to the Ministry immediately. Otherwise, it will be presumed that the State Government is not willing to avail financial assistance under the scheme for these polytechnics.
3. CONSTRUCTION OF WOMEN’S HOSTELS IN POLYTECHNICS
In order to enhance women enrolment in polytechnic education, the Scheme of Construction of Women’s Hostels envisages a one time financial assistance subject to a maximum of Rs.1.00 crore for each polytechnic, to be provided to 500 existing AICTE approved Government / Government aided Polytechnics, for the construction of women’s hostel in polytechnics. 499 Polytechnics have been provided partial financial assistance under the Scheme.
However, Polytechnics of some of the States have not yet submitted the progress
reports, statement of expenditure and audited utilization certificates of first installment sanctioned under the scheme. It is proposed that the concerned State Governments should take effective steps to utilize the entire amount and submit the statement of expenditure expeditiously so that the action may be initiated by the Ministry to release the second installment in time. State-wise details of such Polytechnics will be made available at the venue of the meeting.
4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THROUGH POLYTECHNICS (CDTP)
The Ministry provides 100% grants to the State Governments for implementation of the Scheme of Community Development through Polytechnics (CDTP), which aims at providing non formal, short term, employment oriented skill development programmes, through AICTE approved Polytechnics, to various sections of the community, particularly the rural, unorganized & disadvantaged sections of the society, to enable them to obtain gainful self / wage employment. Duration of training usually ranges from three to six months. These courses will be offered by the Polytechnics in its premises, as well as through extension centres, to be set up in nearby locations, from where, these courses can be offered to the local community. No fees are charged from the trainees under this Scheme and there is no restriction of age and qualification. 518 Polytechnics have been selected for financial assistance to implement the Scheme. ISSUES: - The grant for implementing the CDTP Scheme has been released to respective State
Governments for further release to Polytechnics. State Governments are requested to put in place a process for quickly disbursing the sanctioned funds to the implementing Polytechnics of the State, in a time bound manner so that targets under the scheme can be achieved.
- If feasible, possibility of transferring the CDTP Scheme grants received from the Centre
on lump sum/advance basis by State to concerned Polytechnic’s Bank Accounts may also be explored, so as to ensure timely availability of funds.
- As per available reports State Governments of West Bengal, Assam & Bihar are yet to
release the grant provided under CDTP Scheme to concerned Polytechnics. These States may initiate steps to expedite release of sanctioned funds.
- The Prime Minister’s Office is monitoring the monthly progress of the training programs
under the CDTP Scheme. State Governments may kindly instruct the Polytechnics in their State to submit the data in time to respective NITTTRs of their region to enable compilation of a report in the matter.
IV. NOTE ON ASSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATION OF INDIAN HIGHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
1. Assessment and Accreditation- Definitions
Globally, quality assurance in higher education is defined as a process by which an institution is evaluated, at least in part, by an external body in its educational offerings The terms- “Assessment” and “Accreditation” imply, broadly, the evaluation of “Quality Status” of an institution.
In the context of Higher Education, “accreditation” means the process of quality control in higher education, whereby, as a result of evaluation or assessment or by any other scientific method followed by accreditation agencies, a higher educational institution or any programme conducted therein is recognised by it as conforming to parameters of academic quality and benchmarking of such academic quality determined by the appropriate statutory regulatory authority.
“Assessment” means the process involved in ascertaining or verifying the preparedness of a higher educational institution in terms of its physical infrastructure and human resources prior to the commencement of its academic programmes.
2. Benefits of Accreditation:
Enables an institution to know its strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities through an informed review process undertaken by a third party. .
Makes available reliable data, relating to compliance with quality parameters, to all the stakeholders (students/ government/ funding agencies/ employers etc.) as inputs in their decision making process
Fosters innovation and adoption of best practices.
Encourages intra and inter-institutional interactions.
Mandatory accreditation in the higher education would enable the higher education system in the country to become a part of the global quality assurance system.
3. Types of Accreditation World wide, two types of accreditations are in place: one is the Institutional
accreditation wherein quality of the Institution with reference to its competency to provide quality education is evaluated. The National Assessment and Accreditation Council, under the aegis of the University Grants Commission, undertakes this kind of quality assurance.
The other kind of accreditation is program accreditation which is assured on the basis of the outcome programme. In Technical Education, the quality as well as relevance of the programme is specially assessed and evaluated during the process of accreditation. This is to ensure the employability of the graduates and ascertaining the skill as demanded
by the profession. The National Board of Accreditation(NBA), under the aegis of the All India Council for Technical Education, undertakes this kind of quality assurance.
Over 150 countries have some kind of accreditation mechanism to ensure quality in higher education. Most the QA bodies are supported directly or indirectly by the respective governments.
4. Steps in accreditation process: It generally involves three steps with specific activities: (i) a self-evaluation process conducted by the faculty, the administrators and the staff of the institution or academic program, resulting in a report that takes as its reference set of standards and criteria of the accrediting body; (ii) a site visit, conducted by a team of peers, selected by the accrediting organization, which reviews the evidence, visits the premises and interviews the academic and administrative staff resulting in an assessment report, including a recommendation to the accrediting body; and (iii) examination of the evidence and recommendation on the basis of the given set of criteria concerning quality and resulting in a final judgment and the communication of the formal decision to the institution and other constituencies, if appropriate.
5. Steps undertaken to make assessment and accreditation mandatory for Higher Educational Institutions in India
(a) The Department of Higher Education, Government of Indian has already introduced the National Accreditation Regulatory Authority for Higher Educational Institutions Bill, 2010, (NARAHEI Bill) in Lok Sabha . This Bill proposes the Central Government to establish a regulatory authority to register, monitor and audit the functioning of accreditation agencies which would be invested with the responsibility of accrediting higher educational institutions including universities, colleges, institutes, institutions of national importance and programmes conducted therein. Institutions imparting higher education beyond twelve years of schooling would be mandatorily accredited. Every higher educational institution and every programme conducted therein shall require accreditation in the manner provided in the proposed legislation. Higher educational institutions engaged mainly in agricultural education and research have been kept out of the purview of the proposed legislation.
b) The UGC has notified UGC( Mandatory Assessment and Accreditation of Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2012. The UGC Regulations stipulate mandatory accreditation of each Higher Educational Institution (HEI) after passing out of two batches or six years whichever is earlier. HEls so eligible, at the date of coming into force of the regulations, shall apply within a period of six months to the Accreditation Agency. The Regulations also have provisions for penalties by the UGC on HEIs in the nature of de-recognition from list of 12B institutions, withholding of grants, action under the Private University Regulations, public notice that the institution is not accredited etc.
c) The AICTE has approved the Regulations for Mandatory Assessment and Accreditation of Technical Institutions. These will be notified shortly.
6. Role of States in the regime of mandatory accreditation
In view of the provisions discussed in the previous chapters, the states have the
following role in the proposed regime of mandatory accreditation:
a) In the short term to initially disseminate amongst the State Higher Educational Institutions the need to undergo assessment and accreditation and familiarize them with the processes required. Assistance in this regard can be provided by NAAC/ NBA etc.
b) To impress upon and monitor the State Higher Educational Institutions to undergo assessment and mandatory accreditation. Consequences of non-compliance are already detailed in the NARAHEI Bill and UGC Regulations. A six month time period wef. 19th January, 2013 has been given to the institutions to apply for accreditation.
c) In the medium term to adopt mandatory accreditation as one of the norms for deciding state funding / intervention in a particular State Higher Educational Institution.
d) In the long term to explore formation of credible Assessment and Accreditation Agencies. In this regard, required assistance can be extended by NAAC/ NBA. Funding can be extended through Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan(RUSA).
e) To ensure the regular functioning of the State Higher Education Council. This Council can be a key to ensure setting up and functioning of Assessment and Accreditation Agencies.
7. Recognition of State Accreditation Agencies
Till the formation of National Accreditation Regulatory Authority, the UGC/ AICTE, through NAAC/NBA, will be the body according recognition to the State Accreditation Agencies. The procedure outlined in NARA HEI Bill will be applied for according recognition by UGC/ AICTE.
8. Structure of state QA bodies-
Basic provisions of a State Accreditation Agency should be in conformity with the NARAHEI bill. Thus each State Accreditation Agency should have the following features:
Registered as non profit entity in respective State.
Academically and financially an autonomous body.
Follow the methodology, criteria and procedure developed by NAAC and NBA.(This is important for the reasons mentioned in para 5.5 below)
Have Executive Committee(EC) with Director and support Staff.
Members of the EC to include 5 academicians within the state and 5 outside the state.
EC should have nominees of NAAC and UGC as ex-officio members
Appellate body should be defined. The NAAC and NBA can be considered as Appellate Bodies for decisions made by State accreditation Agency.
Adequate office space and training infrastructure.
9. Support from NAAC and NBA- this can be of the following nature:
Develop guidelines and procedures for setting up new QA bodies at state and national level.
Provide guidance and academic resources to new agencies about assessment and accreditation process.
Facilitate national and international exposure to new QA bodies
The NAAC and NBA have already been requested by the Central Government to dedicate exclusive wings for providing support to State Assessment and Accreditation Agencies.
********
V. Brief on National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT)
The National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NME-ICT) has been envisaged as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme to leverage the potential of ICT, in teaching and learning process for the benefit of all the learners in Higher Education Institutions in any time any where mode. The NMEICT Mission was approved on 2nd January, 2009, with an outlay of Rs.4612 Crores and was launched on 3rd February, 2009.
The Mission has following major components:
a. Content generation, 100% contribution being provided by the Centre. b. Connectivity to Institutions, 75% contribution being provided by the Centre and
25% from States/Institutions. c. Development of low-cost access devices (LCAD), 50% contribution from
Centre for the (Aakash devices). d. Virtual Labs & e-Books, to be accessed by students (free) from anytime,
anywhere. e. 50 DTH Channels, Free to air curriculum based education channels on all TV
Sets.
Content: A number of projects for development of e-content have been sanctioned under NMEICT scheme to various institutions in the country. For engineering Courses seven IITs and IISc Bangalore, under a programme called National Programme for Technology Enhanced Learning (NPTEL) project, have under Phase-I developed 125 web & 136 video based courses (each course of about 40 hour duration) in 6 engineering disciplines and the content is uploaded on Websites. Similarly under Phase II another 967 courses in 23 Disciplines that include Web and Video courses are getting completed and uploaded. In non engineering & under graduation subjects, CEC a unit of UGC, is developing e-content in 19 Subjects in Phase-I and 68 Subjects in Phase-II. As on 28.2.13, 4550 e-content program have been developed and 1000 e-contents on various subjects have been uploaded on CEC web portal. Similarly the UGC is engaged in development of e-content in 77 PG Subjects. Connectivity: The NME-ICT is to provide connectivity up to last mile through (i) 1 Gbps optical Fiber to universities/deemed universities and institutions of national importance, (ii) 15-20 VPNoBB connections of 512 Kbps speed each (upto 10 Mbps bandwidth) to colleges and polytechnics in the country and LAN of up to 400 nodes on average, has also been envisaged to be provided to the universities under this Mission. Similarly under National Knowledge Network (NKN) of NIC, optical fibre connectivity to the Universities and other institutions are also being provided.
As on 28.2.13, connectivity to about 400 Universities and 19,875 colleges have been provided under the NMEICT Mission. The connectivity has been established in Centrally and state funded Institutions, besides this Private Institutions have also been provided Connectivity.
Low-cost access devices (Aakash)
Under NMEICT, a project is being implemented by IIT Bombay for achieving following deliverables for student and teacher empowerment:
(i) Acquisition and testing of low cost access cum computing devices (Aakash); and
(ii) Hardware & software optimization of low cost access cum computing devices.
In the first phase one Lakh Aakash-II tablets have been delivered at a cost of Rs.2263/- a unit,. Aakash-II was launched by the Hon’ble President of India on the occasion of National Education Day i.e. 11th November, 2012. Aakash-II compared to its predecessor is an advanced version has a processor which is about 3 times faster; memory is twice as large and is capacitive touch screen as compared to resistive touch screen and is being procured by IIT Bombay. The LCAD’s (Aakash) have been distributed to technical institutions (like IITs, NITs, etc).
Virtual Labs & e-Books:
Virtual Labs numbering 89 have been launched on 23th February 2012. At present the engineering students are capable of using virtual labs in 9 disciplines and can conduct 769 Engineering experiments from anywhere & any time mode.
Mission is also making available: textbooks, reference books, research journals, learning material etc to learners, free of cost in e-form. Students can at present access more than 80,409 e-books and 3828 e-Journals procured under NMEICT from best of the publishers. Full text e-Thesis, of Indian Scholars, numbering 2224 and more is also available on the website
MHRD 50 DTH Channels: It is envisaged that NMEICT shall deliver e-content not only up to college & university levels, but also to homes. For this purpose the DOS, ISRO has been approached and it has allocated two Ku-band satellite transponders to MHRD. The DTH Committee has decided to begin delivery of curriculum based content through launch of 50 TV educational channels on 24X7 bases (live or recorded), in almost all the subjects being taught in universities and colleges in the country. The Content on DTH shall be delivered free of cost to learners across the country and the user has to acquire a set Top
Box & Dish Antenna etc., worth Rs1500/- with no recurring expenses. The lectures shall be delivered by outstanding teachers through 150 Teaching Ends being established at leading institutes in the country. The DTH programme has the potential to be viewed on 165 million TV sets and benefiting a population of more than 67% in the country. The educational content besides being viewed on TV sets is also expected to be viewed on PCs, Tablets (including Aakash), smart phones and on other personal devices in the country. The Teacher shall deliver live lessons with Multimedia material and in order to have live interaction with the teacher, students across the country can ask live question through video conferencing, mobile, land line, SMS, e-mail etc and get instantaneous reply of their queries from the teacher, further others watching the programme can also benefit from this interaction. The delivery of educational content by the MHRD is highly cost effective, has the potential to revolutionise education delivery across the length and breadth of the country and will help improving Gross Enrolment of Ratio (GER) in Indian education which at present is about 14% against world average of 23%.
The preparations on the project are on and the channels, free to Air, are likely to be launched in 4-5 months of time. For this purpose 150 Teaching Ends (TE) spread across the country from where the live content shall originate are being established, a number of TEs from leading State Universities can also be considered.
Talk to a Teacher:
Under Talk to a Teacher project sanctioned to IIT, Bombay A-VIEW developed by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham has been used as the collaboration tool for the National Teacher Empowerment Program. Prof. Deepak Phatak, IIT Bombay, leads the National Teacher Empowerment Program using A-VIEW to train thousands of college teachers across the nation. Under this program, in June-July 2012, IIT-B conducted a training workshop for 10,000 teachers, which were inaugurated by then Honorable Union Minister for HRD Shri Kapil Sibal. In November 2012, A-VIEW was used to train 14,000 teachers on a workshop on Aakash 2 Tablets. A total of about 40,000 engineering college teachers have been trained until the end of 2012 through one workshop or other. A total of a minimum of 1,50,000 teachers will be trained in the next three years.
***
VI. ISSUES RELATING TO EDUCATIONAL EMPOWERMENT OF SC, ST and
PwDs
The National Policy on Education (NPE) 1986 modified in 1992 gives special emphasis
on the removal of disparities and equalizing educational opportunity by attending to the
specific needs of those who have been denied equality so far. The Eleventh Plan had given
highest priority on education as a central instrument for achieving rapid and inclusive
growth. The Twelfth Plan has stressed upon the need of faster and more inclusive
development.
2. As a recognition of our vision, a number of initiatives are being taken by this Ministry
both at school and higher education levels. Special emphasis is laid on education of children
belonging to disadvantaged groups and simultaneously to provide greater opportunities for
access to quality education at all level by taking several legislative measures and also
investing in infrastructure & faculty, promoting academic reforms, improving governance
and institutional restructuring.
In higher education sector, 37 Model Degree Colleges have been sanctioned in
backward districts within 20 Universities in 8 States.
3. Several programmes/schemes have been launched which also equally lay emphasis
on education development of students belonging to SCs / STs & PwDs, which mainly
includes Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009 and various
students support initiatives such as Scholarships, Remedial coaching classes, opening of
Equal Opportunity Cells in the Universities, Rajiv Gandhi Fellowships, Post Graduate
Scholarship for Professional Courses, Post doctoral Fellowship, Remedial coaching for
NET/SLET, Preparatory classes for IITs, Interest subsidy on Education Loan etc.
4. Further, in order to institute a sense of discipline and inculcation of moral values in
youth, it has been decided to implement NCC as an elective subject with credit points in 30
autonomous colleges from academic year 2013‐14 and will be extended to all other 400
autonomous colleges and interested universities from the academic year 2014‐15. This
initiative will help in instilling values of emotional integration, secularism, tolerance, sense
of adventure and sensitivity to issues among youths.
5. In higher education, various schemes like Upgradation of existing Polytechnics to
integrate the Persons with Disabilities, Higher Education for Persons with Special Needs
(HEPSN), Teacher Preparation in Special Education (TEPSE), Financial Assistance to Visually‐
handicapped Teachers are being implemented. As per provisions of PwD Act, 3%
reservation (horizontally) in admissions in all CFHEIs have also been provided to PwD
students. During 2009‐10, 1586 PwD students have been enrolled in Central Universities.
The UGC also provides a number of relaxations to PwDs in the NET examination.
6. Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in Admission) Act, 2006 provides 15%
and 7.5% reservation to SC and ST students respectively. This has led to increase in Gross
Enrolment Ratio (GER) of SC students in higher education to 11.11 in 2009‐10 from 8.37 in
2005‐06. Similarly, the GER of ST students has been increased to 10.28 in 2009‐10 from 6.60
in 2005‐06. The share of SCs and STs in total enrolment in Centrally Funded Higher
Educational Institutions (CFHEIs) in 2009‐10 are :
(Share %)
CFHEI SC ST
Central Universities 10.7 18.0
IGNOU 7.4 8.6
IITs 13.1 4.6
IIITs, IISERs, IISc 17.2 5.8
NITs 13.9 6.9
IIMs 11.0 4.7
7. To ensure benefits of various Schemes of Government of India are reached directly
to the SC & ST students, from 2011‐12, the Planning Commission has started earmarking of
Plan funds for SCSP/TSP in Annual Plans allocations separately. Accordingly, the MHRD has
opened Minor Head ‘789’ for SCSP and for TSP Minor Head ‘796’. For 2013‐14, the MHRD
has earmarked an amount of `12363/‐ crores under SCSP and `6533/‐ crores under TSP.
8. However, despite a number of initiatives in the previous Plan periods, there is a
staggering difference among different groups. Hence, in order to have a targeted approach
with focus on SC and ST dominated regions and convergence of various equity schemes in a
composite manner to address the educational needs of the disadvantaged sections
including the PwDs, a National Monitoring Committee has been constituted.
ISSUES RELATING TO EDUCATIONAL EMPOWERMENT OF MINORITIES
The recommendations of the Sachar Committee and the Prime Minister’s New 15‐Point Programme have, inter alia, emphasised the need for addressing the relative backwardness of the minorities, especially of the Muslims( 59.1% in comparison to the national literacy rate of 64.8%) by various affirmative schemes for promotion of minorities’ education.
2. In view of the enormity of the challenge, the successful implementation of the Schemes made during the XI Plan for promotion of the minorities’ education, is, therefore, being continued during the XII Plan with renewed vigor and with modifications/improvement of the Schemes, wherever necessary. This is considered essential to usher in equity and access of the minorities in education for their social and economic inclusiveness.
3. The Study Report of the NUEPA indicates poor participation of the minorities, especially of Muslims in higher education. In its 1st Report, submitted recently to the Govt., the Standing Committee of the National Monitoring Committee for Minorities Education (NMCME) has looked into the current scenario and has given a number of recommendations for address the issues. The recommendations are presently under examination for finalizing actionable plans.
4. Department of Higher Education does not have any Scheme exclusively for the minorities. However, for promotion of minorities’ education, while implementing the following schemes, the Minority Concentration Districts are given preference. During the year 2012‐13, the Department of Higher Education has approved the following Schemes for the Minority Concentrated Districts (MCDs):
Sl.No Scheme No of Units Amount sanctioned (Rs. in Crore)
1. Model Degree Colleges 12 9.34
2. Girls Hostels 57 10.24
3. New Polytechnics 54 317.78
5. The physical targets for the above schemes, during the year 2013‐14, are mentioned hereunder:
Sl.No Scheme No of Units Action Plan
1. Model Degree Colleges 13 Action plan will be finalized after receipts of proposals from State Govts./Institutions and approval .
2. Girls Hostels 101 ‐do‐
3. New Polytechnics 02 2 Districts in Arunachal Pradesh and Delhi can be covered, if the State Govts. provide their consent to meet recurring expenditure and to provide free land .
*****
VII. ALL INDIA SURVEY ON HIGHER EDUCATION (AISHE)
All India Survey on Higher Education for the year 2011-12 has commenced on 21st March, 2013 and uploading of information by institutions on the portal (http://aishe.gov.in) is expected to be completed by 30th September 2013. A statement showing, state-wise, status of uploading of the data by institutions of higher education is attached. All States/UTs may be requested to ensure uploading of the data on the portal by institutions such as universities, affiliated/constituent colleges, PG Centres and standalone institutions before 30th September 2013.
AISHE 2012-13 is going to be launched in the first week of August, 2013. Data uploading on the AISHE portal may please be ensured by the universities and their affiliated/constituent colleges, PG Centres and standalone institutions at the earliest.
***
State ‐ wise Progress of the Survey 2011‐12
TotalForm
Uploaded
%
CompletionTotal
Form
Uploaded
%
CompletionTotal
Form
Uploaded
%
Completion
Andaman & Nicobar Islands 6 1 17 4
Andhra Pradesh 47 9 19 4817 921 19 1008 83 8 03.05.2013
Arunachal Pradesh 3 1 33 19 11
Assam 9 486 1 0 62 2 3
Bihar 20 1 5 635 10 2 68 2 3
Chandigarh 3 27 5
Chhatisgarh 19 1 5 636 34 5 96
Dadra & Nagar Haveli 4 2
Daman & Diu 3 4
Delhi 26 1 4 185 37 20 112
Goa 2 47 10
Gujarat 37 5 14 1918 332 17 525 9 2
Haryana 23 3 13 1065 82 8 322 1 0
Himachal Pradesh 18 4 22 300 59 20 75 5 7
Jammu and Kashmir 11 216 46 1 2
Jharkhand 12 1 8 187 56
Karnataka 43 7 16 3304 461 14 1940 625 32 06.04.2013
Kerala 17 2 12 962 3 0 590
Madhya Pradesh 28 4 14 2019 84 4 384
Maharashtra 44 8 18 4646 328 7 2642 228 9
Manipur 3 2 67 78 2 3 17
Meghalaya 10 61 9 15 20 1 5
Mizoram 3 3 100 29 21 72 9 7 78
Nagaland 4 52 6 12 9
Odisha 19 1 5 1099 9 1 255
Puducherry 4 86 9 10 57 1 2
Punjab 17 2 12 960 2 0 290
Rajasthan 44 2450 3 0 552 1 0
Sikkim 6 16 1 6 5
Tamil Nadu 59 3 5 2024 8 0 1458 5 0
Tripura 3 1 33 40 6 15 10
Uttar Pradesh 59 1 2 4086 18 0 585
Uttrakhand 19 347 2 1
West Bengal 26 3 12 859 15 2
All India 638 63 10 33669 2464 7 11229 971 9
State
University College Stand Alone
17‐Jul‐2013
Workshop
Conducted on
Andaman & Nicobar Islands
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Chandigarh
Chhatisgarh
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
Daman & Diu
Delhi
Goa
Gujarat
Haryana
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu and Kashmir
Jharkhand
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Manipur
Meghalaya
Mizoram
Nagaland
Odisha
Puducherry
Punjab
Rajasthan
Sikkim
Tamil Nadu
Tripura
Uttar Pradesh
Uttrakhand
West Bengal
All India
State
State ‐ wise Progress of the Survey 2011‐12
TotalForm
Uploaded
%
CompletionTotal
Form
Uploaded
%
CompletionTotal
Form
Uploaded
%
CompletionTotal
Form
Uploaded
%
CompletionTotal
Form
Uploaded
%
Completion
1 1 2
184 129 654 83 13 31 10
3 6 2
20 22 2 9 17 3
19 1 5 35 11 1 1 100 2
1 3 1
25 47 12 9 3
1 1
2 2
40 18 15 21 18
6 1 2 1
104 2 2 357 6 2 45 13 1 8 6
197 1 1 59 42 19 5
34 17 5 29 24
17 23 1 4 6
25 5 18 6 2
299 7 2 1092 533 49 519 85 16 24 6
74 272 230 7 7
99 170 91 18 6
1160 16 1 1282 207 16 116 69 5 7 15
3 8 6
2 10 7 1 14 1
2 2 100 3 1 33 4 4 100
4 4 1
122 85 40 6 2
10 1 10 46 1
104 29 153 2 2
175 1 1 199 157 17 4
2 2 1
451 3 1 823 168 1 1 8 8 1 13
3 4 3
258 75 130 110 12
3447 34 1 4829 755 16 2478 174 7 363 7 2 112 1 1
Technical Teacher Training PGDM Institute under Ministries
Stand Alone
17‐Jul‐2013
Nursing
top related