Access with equity

Education is an investment in human capital, to borrow Swami Vivekananda's phrase, "the manifestation of what is already in man." It is a sort of cultivation of human mind. Nelson Mandela viewed education as an agent of change. In an electoral democracy, education holds special significance, as democracy cannot function properly without an educated electorate. John Stuart Mill cautioned us about this long ago in his pioneering work, ‘Representative Government.’

Privatisation of higher education in India has become a highly debated topic, with the country's adoption of neoliberal policies paving the way for private investment in education. Proponents of privatisation argue that it can help reduce the financial burden on the state, promote decentralisation, and foster creativity and innovation. India's higher education system is indeed massive, with over 43,796 colleges and 1,184 universities, making it the largest after China and the USA. However, despite its size, the system faces significant challenges, including inadequate funding, poor infrastructure, and concerns about quality.

The push for privatisation is driven by several factors. Reducing public expenditure is a major consideration, as privatisation can help shift the financial burden from the state to private investors. Improving quality is another key factor, as private institutions are often seen as more efficient and effective in delivering high-quality education. Increasing access to higher education, particularly in underserved areas, is also a significant driver of privatisation. Furthermore, privatisation is seen as a way to promote innovation and entrepreneurship in education.

However, critics argue that privatisation can lead to commercialisation of education, where education becomes a commodity rather than a public good. This can result in increased inequality, as private institutions may cater to the affluent, exacerbating existing social and economic inequalities. Additionally, privatisation can lead to a loss of government control over education policy and standards. Ultimately, the privatisation of higher education in India is a complex issue that requires careful consideration of its potential benefits and drawbacks.

The concept of public subsidies for promoting education in India dates back to the East India Company era, before the country gained independence. Prior to independence, India experimented with three types of private institutions, where individual philanthropists and notables played a significant role. Some of India's premier universities, such as Banaras Hindu University and Aligarh Muslim University, were established with the active moral and financial support of the community. This initiative can be regarded as a precursor to the present Public Private Participation model in the educational sector.

The privatisation of higher education in India has undergone significant evolution, transforming from what was once described as "half-baked socialism" to "half-baked capitalism." Privatisation has taken various forms in India. Initially, the government introduced self-financing courses within public institutions. This system was unique, with inherent contradictions, as the ownership remained with the state while the courses became self-financed.

The Indian judiciary has played a crucial role in shaping the privatisation of higher education. In the landmark case of Mohini Jain vs. the State of Karnataka (1992), the apex court reacted to the trend of collecting exorbitant fees, popularly known as "capitation fees." The court argued that the right to education is a fundamental right and cannot be denied to students who cannot afford to pay these fees. Significantly, private investors have primarily focused on professional education, such as engineering, medicine, and management.

The privatisation of higher education in India has taken multiple forms. The second form involves converting government-aided institutions into private self-financing institutions. The third form is characterised by the rise of commercial private higher educational institutions, focusing on self-financing private institutions.

India also has a distinct set of private colleges and universities run by missionary organisations, such as the Jesuit Order and Ramakrishna Mission, without a profit motive. For instance, St. Xavier's University in Kolkata, founded by the Jesuits, received government support in the form of land at a subsidised rate and significant contributions from alumni.

In contrast, the privatisation of higher education by individuals seeking to profit from it can be seen as the commercialisation of education. This raises fundamental questions about the purpose of education: will it foster critical thinking and analytical skills in learners, or will it merely equip them with marketable skills to serve the interests of capital owners?

One of the critical concerns surrounding the privatisation of higher education is its potential impact on the promotion of democratic values. Experts argue that democratic ethos is deeply intertwined with the organisation of the education system, pedagogy, and the evolution of knowledge systems. In India, a significant section of the historically underprivileged population remains excluded from the educational system.

Despite growing awareness among parents from disadvantaged backgrounds about the importance of quality education, financial constraints prevent them from accessing private education. This raises fundamental questions about the role of the state in ensuring equitable access to education. Can the state absolve itself of its responsibility to provide quality education to all citizens?

Should the state refrain from providing grants-in-aid to institutions that offer quality education without prioritising profits? This is a critical dilemma, as the state's support can help bridge the gap between private and public education, ensuring that quality education is accessible to all, regardless of their socio-economic background.

The state can play a crucial role in supporting education in two ways. Firstly, the state can provide financial assistance to learners, after a comprehensive assessment, to pursue their education in private institutions. Secondly, the state can offer grants-in-aid to these institutions to support their operations. The criteria for providing these grants must be carefully evolved, with wisdom and impartiality.

However, a fundamental question remains: will profit-driven private investors utilise these funds effectively? This issue can be addressed by appointing a committee comprising competent individuals. The state can establish a committee to rank private institutions based on their performance and devise a grant-in-aid scheme accordingly.

There is no valid reason for the blanket withdrawal of subsidies to private universities that have legislative approval. It is essential to recognise that commodifying education can exacerbate rural-urban disparities and widen the gap between backward and forward classes. This would have detrimental effects on equality and equity, the twin pillars of democracy.

The state must vigilantly monitor private institutions that perpetuate the commercialisation of education by introducing job-oriented courses with exorbitant fees. Although these courses guarantee quick employment, they grant private providers unchecked freedom to determine the price tag of the course.

Another challenge facing the privatisation of education in India is the issue of autonomy. The state attempts to regulate private institutions through various means, without providing financial support. While national bodies like the UGC, AICTE, and BCI should oversee academic curricula to ensure uniformity, stringent regulatory measures may stifle the initiative of private investors.

India, being the youngest country in the world, is poised to reap its demographic dividend from 2005-06 to 2055-56. With approximately 68 per cent of the population falling within the 15-64 age bracket and 26 per cent within the 10-24 age group, India boasts a relatively young population with a median age of 28.4 years. Harnessing this demographic dividend requires spreading quality education among the youth. A study in Assam reveals that students have a positive perception of privatisation in education.

Furthermore, our commitment to achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly the principle of leaving no one behind, underscores the need for private initiative in education. Public institutions alone cannot cater to the vast population of our country. Therefore, private initiatives that prioritise quality education over profit maximisation must be encouraged.

Fr. John Felix Raj is the Vice Chancellor of St. Xavier’s University, Kolkata and Prabhat Kumar Datta is the Adjunct Professor of Political Science and Public Administration at Xavier Law School, St. Xavier’s University, Kolkata. Views expressed are personal