Technical education
Technical Education plays a vital role in human resource development of the country by creating skilled manpower, enhancing industrial productivity and improving the quality of life of its people. Technical Education covers programmes in engineering, technology, management, architecture, town planning, pharmacy, applied arts & crafts, hotel management and catering technology.
Technical Education – Pre-Independence
The impulse for creation of centres of technical training came from the British rulers of India and it arose out of the necessity for the training of overseers for construction and maintenance of public buildings, roads, canals and ports and for the training of artisans and craftsmen for the use of instruments and apparatus needed for the army, the navy and the survey department. The superintending engineers were mostly recruited from Britain from the Cooper’s Hill College and this applied as well to foremen and artificers; but this could not be done in the case of lower grades- craftsmen, artisans and sub-overseers who were recruited locally. As they were mostly illiterate, efficiency was low. The necessity to make them more efficient by giving them elementary lessons in reading, writing, arithmetic, geometry and mechanics, led to the establishment of industrial schools attached to Ordnance Factories and other engineering establishments.
While it is stated that such schools existed in Calcutta and Bombay as early as 1825, the first authentic account we have is that of an industrial school established at Guindy, Madras, in 1842, attached to the Gun Carriage Factory there. A school for the training of overseers was known to exist in Poona in 1854.
The first engineering college was established in the Uttar Pradesh in 1847 for the training of Civil Engineers at Roorkee, which made use of the large workshops and public buildings there that were erected for the Upper Ganges Canal. The Roorkee College (or to give it its official name, the Thomason Engineering College) was never affiliated to any university but gave diplomas considered to be equivalent to degrees. In pursuance of the Government policy, three Engineering Colleges were opened by about 1856 in the three Presidencies. In Bengal, a College called the Calcutta College of Civil Engineering was opened at the Writers’ Buildings in November 1856; the name was changed to Bengal Engineering College in 1857, and it was affiliated to the Calcutta University. It gave a licentiate course in Civil Engineering. In 1865 it was amalgamated with the Presidency College. Later, in 1880, it was detached from the Presidency College and shifted to its present quarters at Sibpur, occupying the premises and buildings belonging to the Bishop’s College.
Proposals for having an Engineering College at Bombay city having failed for some reasons, the overseers’ school at Poona eventually became the Poona College of Engineering and affiliated to the Bombay University in 1858. For a long time, this was the only College of Engineering in the Western Presidency.
In the Madras Presidency, the industrial school attached to the Gun Carriage Factory became ultimately the Guindy College of Engineering and affiliated to the Madras University (1858).
The educational work in the three Colleges of Sibpur, Poona and Guindy has been more or less similar. They all had licentiate courses in civil engineering up to 1880, when they organised degree classes in this branch alone. After 1880, the demand for mechanical and electrical engineering was felt, but the three Engineering Colleges started only apprenticeship classes in these subjects. The Victoria Jubilee Technical Institute, which was started at Bombay in 1887, had as its objective the training of licentiates in Electrical, Mechanical and Textile Engineering. In 1915, the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, opened Electrical Engineering classes under Dr. Alfred Hay and began to give certificates and associateships, the latter being regarded equivalent to a degree. opened Electrical Engineering classes under Dr. Alfred Hay and began to give certificates and associateships, the latter being regarded equivalent to a degree.
In Bengal, the leaders of the Swadeshi Movement organised in 1907 a National Council of Education which tried to organise a truly National University. Out of the many institutions it started, only the College of Engineering and Technology at Jadavpur had survived. It started granting diplomas in mechanical and engineering course in 1908 and in chemical engineering in 1921.
The credit of first starting degree classes in mechanical engineering, electrical engineering and metallurgy goes to the University of Banaras, thanks to the foresight of its great founder, Pt. Madan Mohan Malaviya (1917).
About fifteen years later, in 1931-32, the Bengal Engineering College at Sibpur started mechanical and electrical engineering courses in 1935-36 and courses in metallurgy in 1939-40. Courses in these subjects were also introduced at Guindy and Poona about the same time.
Quite a number of engineering colleges have been started since August 15, 1947. It is due to the realisation that India has to become a great industrial country and would require a far larger number of engineers than could be supplied by the older institutions.
Technical Education –Post Independence
The study of history of Technical Education in India shows structural differences, even after India became independent. There have been commissions on University Education such as, Radhakrishnan Commission (1948) & Yashpal Committee (2008); commissions on Technical Education such as Sarkar Committee (1945), Thacker Committee (1959), Chandrakant Committee (1971), Nayudamma Committee (1978), Rama Rao Committee (1995), Mashelkar Committee (1998), U.R. Rao Committee (2002), P Rama Rao Committee (2002) & Kakodkar Committee (2010); commission on Polytechnic Education such as Damodaran Committee (1970); commissions on National Institute of Technical Teachers’ Training & Research (NITTTR) such as, Kelkar Committee (1976), Jha Committee (1978), Bhattacharya Committee (1991) and Indiresan Committee (2000) and so on. SOme of these are explained below:
1. Sarkar Committee (1945-1949)
Sarkar Committee (1945 – 1949) According to the recommendation of the Central Advisory Board of Education & on the initiative of Sri Ardeshir Dalal, a visionary director, Tata Iron and Steel Company, the Government of India appointed a Committee, under the chairmanship of the late Sri Nalini Ranjan Sarkar in 1945 to survey the entire question of Technical Education in India and to make definite and concrete recommendations in this respect as the Post-War Reconstruction plan. The Sarkar Committee submitted an interim Report in 1946 (the report was published in 1949), in which the Committee recommended that four Higher Technical Institutions should be set up as soon as possible, one each in the east, west, north and south. The Committee was of opinion that the existing facilities for higher Technical Education are inadequate, both in quantity and quality. To meet the demand of technically skilled personnel required for the post world war II, certain steps can be taken:
a) Four Higher Technical Institutions in the pattern of Massachusetts Institute of Technology may be established in the North, South, East and West part of India and the institution in the East would be made in or near Kolkata.
b) The Western Institution should be in or near Bombay and be taken in hand concurrently with the Eastern Institution or failing that as soon after as possible.
c) To satisfy the immediate needs for engineers generally and for those with specialised training in Hydraulics in particular, the engineering nucleus or the Northern Institution should be set up without delay.
d) To ensure the proper planning of buildings, equipment and courses of study, the Principal and Heads of the Main Departments of these institutions should be appointed and the services of an architect with experience in the planning of technical institution be secured at a sufficiently early stage. As a consequence, five IITs were established at Kharagpur, Bombay, Kanpur, Madras and Delhi between 1951 and 1963. The IITs were created with foreign technical collaboration & UNDP assistance. They were also modeled on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA and the University of Manchester, U.K. pattern and to train scientists and engineers with the aim of developing a skilled workforce to support the economic and social development of India after independence in 1947.
2. S. S. Bhatnagar Committee (1947)
A Scientific Manpower Committee was appointed under the chairmanship of Dr. Santi Swarup Bhatnagar, Secretary, Ministry of Education and Educational Adviser to Government, in 1947 to assess requirements of scientists, technologists, engineers & doctors and to meet the needs of economic & industrial development after independence. The committee assessed the requirement of the technical manpower in the different government sectors for about 10 years and it was estimated that the ratio between the demand and the supply of the technical manpower would be at 4:1. This was the first-ever systematic assessment of the scientific manpower needs of the country in all aspects and it served as an important policy document for the government to plan the post-independent S&T infrastructure.
3. Radhakrishnan Commission (1948 – 1949)
The Government of India appointed the University Education Commission in 1948 under the chairmanship of Dr. S. Radhakrishnan to study the problems of Indian University education and to recommend remedial measures to suit the future requirements of the country. It aimed to improve the quality of University education. It submitted its report on 25 August, 1949.
This is a document of great importance as it has guided the development of University education in India since independence. Perhaps very few reports on education laid down the aims and objectives of education so comprehensively as done by this commission. Following the recommendations, the University Grants Commission (UGC) was formed and assumed a most important role in the coordination and development of Universities in India from 1956. The present higher education structure of 10+2+3 was recommended. The UGC Act (1956) still governs the University education system in India.
4. Mudaliar Commission (1952)
Under the chairmanship of Dr. A. Lakshmanaswamy Mudaliar, the Secondary Education Commission was constituted in 1952 to study the problems of secondary education in the country and to make recommendations for changes to be introduced therein. The Commission made valuable recommendations regarding the objectives of education, reorganisation of teaching institutions, medium of instruction and the system of examinations. This is important because these guide the inputs to the higher education system. It suggested that the secondary education should be a preparatory stage for higher education. For Technical Education, the commission suggested that technical schools should be started in large number either separately or as part of multi-purpose schools. Such schools should be located in close proximity to appropriate industries and they should function in close cooperation with the industry concerned.
5. Thacker Committee (1959 – 1961)
In 1959, a committee was formed under the chairmanship of Professor M.S. Thacker, which made a comprehensive study of postgraduate engineering education and research. The committee submitted their report in 1961. Growth & development of postgraduate education and research in the country in the sixties and seventies was significantly influenced by the recommendation of the Thacker Committee. Third five year plan was to begin in 1961. The Thacker Committee specifically requested that a provision of Rs. 10 crores should be made in the plan for the development of postgraduate education.
6. Kothari Commission (1964-1966)
The Kothari commission otherwise known as National Education Commission was appointed under the Chairmanship of Dr. D. S. Kothari by the Govt. of India on 14th July, 1964 to advise the govt. on “the national pattern of education, general principles and policies for the development of education”. It submitted its report in 1966. The report suggested the introduction of 10+2+3 pattern of education in all parts of the country. It is observed that, though the structure was already recommended by Radhakrishnan Commission, this has only been accepted now and still being followed in the country. It also emphasised on vocational, technical and science education. The unique feature of this report was that, it was the first report to have a comprehensive review of the entire educational system. The commission was of the opinion that, education is the most powerful instrument of national development. Many of the recommendations have been accepted & helped the government to make the National Education Policy (1964), which was only reviewed and redrawn after twenty years.
7. Damodaran Committee (1970 )
In early 1970, govt. of India appointed a high power committee under the chairmanship of G.R. Damodaran to examine the problems regarding the unemployment of technicians and to suggest some solutions. The aim of the committee was to examine the entire system of polytechnic education, the needs of the industry and the other opportunities of employment & to prepare a blueprint for future development. This report is considered the bedrock of polytechnic system & helped to revamp the polytechnic education in India.
8. L.S. Chandrakant Committee (1971)
About 10 years after the Thacker Committee, an appraisal of the postgraduate education and research programmes were undertaken under the then Educational Advisor to GOI, Dr. L.S. Chandrakant in 1971. Its major recommendations were:
i) PG curricula should be revised. Reducing the over-emphasis on theory, emphasis on laboratory and project work should be increased.
ii) PG diploma programmes should be organized for industry.
iii) Institutions must be given freedom to initiate new programmes.
9 .Kelkar Committee (1976)
To remove the deficiencies of the polytechnic institutions and train better teachers for polytechnics, on the recommendation of the AICTE, the central Government started four Technical Teachers’ Training Institutes (TTTIs) at Chennai, Calcutta, Bhopal and Chandigarh between 1966 and 1967. The Union Education Minister appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Dr. P.K.Kelkar, Ex-Director, IIT, Bombay to evaluate to what extent the aims and objectives of the setting up of the TTTIs have been fulfilled by each of the institutes, to suggest future role of the TTTIs in the scheme of Technical Education in general and for purposes of teacher training in particular. The committee mainly studied the training of teachers in Technical Education.
10. C.S. Jha committee (1978)
Within 2 years of the Kelkar committee, another committee was formed under the chairmanship of C.S. Jha in 1978. The main task of the committee was to review the staff requirement and staff structure for Technical Teachers’ Training Institutes (TTTIs) and make recommendations on cost reduction. On the basis of their observations, the committee recommended that:
i) TTTI’s efforts should be distributed as training (50%), curriculum development (30%) and supporting activities (20%)
ii) Staff-student ratio should be 1:8 for all training programmes.
iii) Overall staff structure to be 1:1:1 for professors, Assistant Professors and lecturers.
iv) Minimum no of participants to be 10 for long and short courses.
v) Training facilities to be offered to overseas teachers also.
vi) Close collaboration between TTTIs is necessary for optimal use of facilities.
11. Nayudamma Committee (1978 – 1980)
A Review Committee on Post-Graduate Education and Research in Engineering and Technology was set up under the Chairmanship of Dr. Y. Nayudamma in 1978. In June, 1980, the Committee gave an extensive report. The committee found that the state of the country’s effort in engineering education and research was highly unsatisfactory. The Committee recommended restructuring and organisation of post-graduate courses, identification of emerging areas, revision in the norms of assistance to institutes, faculty improvement etc. Both Chandrakant Committee (1971) & Nayudamma Committee found that one year Post Graduate Diploma programmes in engineering were not successful. And the system was abolished subsequently.
The major recommendations of this review were:
i) M.E. /M.Tech programmes should be of 2 years duration having 3 semesters – two of course work in the first year and one of dissertation and viva in the second year.
ii) Holding an All India Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE) twice a year to ensure selection of only meritorious and motivated students. This led to holding the national exam GATE.
iii) Course of study should ensure participation of industry, be need-based and of national relevance.
iv) Curriculum should have 30 – 50% core area subjects, 50-70% optional area subjects, and dissertation should be on live programmes or emerging areas.
v) Project / dissertation work should be joint project with industry.
vi) Encouragement of sponsorship of candidates by industry or government organizations vii)Tax rebate to industry on contributions to postgraduate education and research in engineering and technology.
viii)Monitoring of academic research at all levels as to their socioeconomic relevance.
ix) The national investments in S&T education and research should be increased.
x) Part time PG programmes should be introduced in the industry relevant areas.
xi) Old fashioned PG programmes should be revised.
xii)AICTE should be made a statutory body through an act of parliament.
xiii)Ph.D. essential for postgraduate teaching. Following the recommendations, the M.E. /M.Tech programme was reduced to 3 semesters. GATE is being conducted every year. The recommendation to give statutory power to AICTE has also been implemented. The Ph.D. criteria for postgraduate teaching are still to be followed in many institutions.
12. National Policy on Education (1986)
The National Policy on Education (NPE), 1986 and its Programme of Action (POA) as updated in 1992 are based on review of the entire educational process and has been formulated on the basis of a national consensus. New Education Policy of 1986 gave more emphasis on human development. It aimed at promoting national progress, cultivating a sense of common citizenship and culture and strengthening national integration and pays greater attention to science and technology, moral values and relates education to the life of the people. Its main Recommendations were:
i) Technical Manpower Information System should be developed and strengthened to improve the situation regarding manpower information.
ii) Programmes of computer literacy will be organised on wide scale from the school stage. iii) The development and expansion of vocational education will need a large number of teachers and professionals in vocational education, educational technology, curriculum development, etc. Programmes will be started to meet this demand.
iv) Training in entrepreneurship will be provided through modular or optional courses, in degree or diploma programmes to encourage students to consider “self-employment” as a career option.
v) In order to meet the continuing needs of updating curriculum, renewal should systematically phase out obsolescence and introduce new technologies of disciplines.
vi) The community polytechnic system will be appropriately strengthened to increase its quality and coverage.
vii)For Promoting Efficiency and Effectiveness at all Levels: • Institutions will be encouraged to generate resources using their capacities to provide services to the community and industry. For this, they will be equipped with up-to-date learning resources, library and computer facilities. • Adequate hostel accommodation will be provided, specially for girls. • More effective procedures in the recruitment of staff Staff Development Programmes will be integrated at the State, and co-ordinated at Regional and National levels. • The curricula of technical and management programmes will be prepared according to the needs of industry. viii)Professional societies will be encouraged and enabled to perform their due role in the advancement of technical and management education. (This is one area which is still neglected). ix) The All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) will be responsible for planning, formulation and the maintenance of norms and standards, accreditation, funding of priority areas, monitoring and evaluation, maintaining parity of certification and awards and ensuring the co-ordinated and integrated development of technical and management education. According to the recommendation of the National Policy on Education 1986, the AICTE became a statutory body through an Act of Parliament, in December, 1987.
13. Nayudamma Committee (1986)
The Government of India constituted a Review Committee under the chairmanship of Dr Y. Nayudamma, Chairman, Centre for Development Alternatives, Madras to review the functioning of the five IITs at Kharagpur, Bombay, Madras, Kanpur and Delhi. Before this, to review the work and progress, the India Government has appointed separate Reviewing Committees for each of the five IITs between 1971 and 1973. This is the first time that a single common committee was appointed to review all the IITs together. The IITs were also asked to improve their interaction with industry through a variety of mechanisms. On the scaling up of quality technical education, the Committee felt that institutions like the Regional Engineering Colleges (later renamed as NITs)2 must receive infusion of funds and should be upgraded but did not suggest new IITs. Interestingly, they also suggested a cap on an optimum campus size of 2500 students for each IIT. Since then the IITs have steadily grown in size and in 2002–03, all 7 IITs together graduated 2274 UG, 3675 PG and 444 PhD students with faculty strength of 2375.
14. Amitabha Bhattacharya Review Committee (1991)
The Bhattacharya committee was appointed to review the progress made by the Technical Teachers’ Training Institutes (TTTIs) in fulfillment of their objectives, to identify the institute’s problems and weaknesses and to suggest directions for future development of the Institutes.
15. P Rama Rao Committee (1995 – 1999)
In 1995, the AICTE felt the desirability of undertaking a fresh review of PG education as nearly 15 years had passed since the last review. A PG Review Committee headed by P. Rama Rao was constituted in September 1995, submitted its Report in 1999. The committee recommended urgent measures to revitalize PG education and research in engineering & technology. Some of the recommendations were implemented including introduction of National Doctoral Fellowship, enhancement of scholarship & fellowship. The major change of reverting the PG programme in engineering back to 4 semesters was done.
16. Mashelkar Committee (1996 – 1998)
During 1956-1960, Regional Engineering colleges were established to cater to the projected growth of technical manpower in various states. A High Power Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. Raghunath Anant Mashelkar, the former Director General of the Council of Scientific & Industrial Research has been constituted on June 17, 1996 to review the progress made by the Regional Engineering Colleges and their achievements and suggest the future role of R.E.Cs in building a high quality Technological Education base in the country. The committee submitted its report entitled “Strategic Road Map for Academic Excellence of Future RECs” in 1998. The committee came out with recommendations on governance structure, academic matters, faculty issues and staff development and funding issues. The Mashelkar Committee report was fully accepted and recommendations were implemented by the government. As a result, 17 Regional Engineering Colleges have been converted to National Institutes of Technology (NIT), changing the entire pattern of funding and governance and the control was shifted from state to centre. This has been a major shift. Regional aspirations were given a national shape. But even with lot of fund input NITs are yet to make their mark on the national scene in Science & Technology research & development.
17. Professor P.V. Indiresan Review Committee (2000)
The activities of Technical Teachers’ Training Institutes (TTTIs), during the period 1990-91 to 1999-2000, were primarily directed towards assisting the polytechnics in implementing the various development programmes under the World Bank Assisted project. In 2000, the Government of India felt the need to take a fresh look into the programmes and activities of TTTIs. In November, 2000, a review committee under the chairmanship of Professor P V Indiresan was formed to review the programmes and activities of TTTIs, to study the major problems and to give directions for future development of TTTIs. The Indiresan committee in its report has pointed out some weaknesses of the institutes, such as lack of training policy at the state level and central level, lack of financial and administrative autonomy, Inadequate funding, paucity of faculty, decline in productivity etc. Further, the committee felt that to improve the performance and productivity of TTTIs, it may be desirable to upgrade them as National Institutes from their present regional status to generate the healthy competition among TTTIs. To change its thrust, the TTTIs may be renamed as ‘National Institutes of Technical Education and Research’ (NITER). TTTIs were upgraded and renamed as National Institute of Technical Teachers’ Training & Research (NITTTR) vide Government of India order dated 20th October, 2003 with an objective to play larger role for the improvement of Technical Education in the country. The Director is the Executive Head (CEO) of the institute. Here again, the formation & funding was fast. But NITTTR’s impact on national scenario is still to be felt.
18. U.R. Rao Committee (2002 – 2003)
A review committee was set up by the Ministry of Human Resource Development in November 2002 under the chairmanship of Prof. U.R.Rao, former chairman ISRO, to review the functioning of the AICTE and to redefine its role in view of the emerging changes and to suggest steps for further improvement.
19. P Rama Rao Committee (2002 – 2004)
On 27th June, 2002 Govt. of India appointed a review committee under the chairmanship of Dr. Rama Rao to review working of the Indian Institutes of Technology together. It was a second joint review committee after the Nayudamma Committee in 1986.
20. Knowledge Commission Report on Technical Education (2005 – 2008)
On 13 June, 2005, the Prime Minister of India, Dr. Manmohan Singh, constituted the National Knowledge Commission, as a think-tank charged with considering possible policy that might sharpen India’s comparative advantage in the knowledge-intensive service sectors. In particular, the Commission was to advise the Prime Minister’s Office on policy related to education, research institutes and reforms needed to make India competitive in the knowledge economy.
NKC proposes the following set of initiatives:
i) Reforming the Regulatory Framework by establishing an Independent Regulatory Authority for Higher Education (IRAHE) to cover all streams.
ii) Good quality graduate students must be motivated for doing Ph.D. Attractive incentives through opportunity for international exposure like attending international conferences or exchange programs must be provided.
iii) Professionals from industry and research laboratories should be invited to participate in the teaching process. Institutions should be encouraged to create adjunct positions for them.
iv) Tap potential faculty should be identified at their undergraduate level and motivated to take teaching as a career.
v) The current curriculum should be modified to provide flexibility, interdisciplinarity and choice of electives.
vi) Faculty should have the freedom to design their own evaluation systems and experiment with them.
vii) In order to reduce the perceived gap between science and engineering, it is desirable to start four year undergraduate programs in science along the lines of engineering programmes.
viii) In order to meet the increasing demand, more institutes of excellence need to be established. Public private partnership could be explored for the same purpose. However, all polytechnics should be operated in PPP mode.
ix) An apex independent regulatory authority should be established that can achieve the objectives of regulation without political interference. An autonomous Standing Committee for Engineering Education should be established under proposed Independent Regulatory Authority of Higher Education.
x) The Government should help the elite institutions maintain their excellence. Policy framework and procedural simplicity should be such as to enable more and more institutions to become elite.
xi) Increasing the number of faculty by relaxing the criterion of holding a Ph.D. degree for undergraduate teaching Many of the recommendations of the NKC are already in the implementation stage by different ministries of the Government. This includes areas such as Libraries, e-governance and translation. Some of the major areas under work are higher education, vocational education, entrepreneurship, school education etc. The XI Plan has integrated many NKC recommendations on its agenda.
21. The Yashpal Committee (2008 – 2009)
The government of India, through a notification issued by the MHRD in February 2008, constituted “The Committee to Advice on Renovation and Rejuvenation of Higher Education in India”, headed by scientist Yashpal to review the functioning of the UGC and the AICTE and critically assess their role and preparedness in providing institutional leadership to the emerging demands of access, equity, relevance and quality of higher education/technical education and the university system. The committee was aware of the work that has been done by various other committees and commissions on this issue, the most recent being the report of the National Knowledge Commission (NKC) on Higher Education. The committee shares the concerns articulated by the NKC regarding several issues on higher education. After much consultation with all the stakeholders, including students and teachers, the committee submitted its final report, ‘Renovation and Rejuvenation of Higher Education’ to the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) on June 24. Major Recommendations were:
i) Universities to be self-regulatory bodies to be assisted by hassle-free and transparent regulatory processes;
ii) Universities to be made responsible regarding the academic content of professional courses.
iii) Creation of an all-encompassing Commission for Higher Education, a central statutory body to replace the existing regulatory bodies including the UGC, AICTE, NCTE etc. iv) Curricular reform to be the topmost priority of the newly created HEC.
v) Undergraduate programmes to be restructured to enable students to have opportunities to access all curricular areas with fair degree of mobility;
vi) All universities to have the full range of knowledge areas. No single discipline or specialized university to be created;
vii)Institutions of excellence like the IITs and IIMs to be converted into full-fledged universities, while keeping intact their unique features, which shall act as pace-setting and model governance systems for all universities;
viii)Expansion of the higher education system to be evaluated and assessed continuously to ensure not only equity and access but also quality and opportunity of growth along the academic vertical.
22. Dr Anil Kakodkar Committee (2010 – 2011)
The Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) on 3 February 2010, constituted a Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr Anil Kakodkar, Chairman, BOG, IIT Bombay, to suggest a roadmap for strengthening the financial, administrative and academic autonomy of the IITs. The Terms of Reference for the Committee also included suggesting how to attract top students of the country into postgraduate studies in India, growth of the established IITs, establishment of new IITs and improving interaction among IITs, IIMs, IIIT, etc. the committee submitted its report in April, 2011 titled “Taking IITs to Excellence and Greater Relevance”. Major Recommendations were:
i) Scale up Ph.D. students from less than 1000 Ph.D. graduates per year today to 10,000 Ph.D. graduates by 2020-25 from about 20 IITs
ii) The tuition fees should be between Rs 2–2.5 lakh per year per student.
iii) The committee has also proposed that Ministry sh-ould fully provide for fees and living expenses for all research students (post graduates) as well as under graduate students from weaker sections as per currently prevalent norms at IITs.
iv) IITs to be made independent of non-plan (operational) support from the Government for their operational expenditure while at the same time seeking greater plan (capital) support to enhance research in a comprehensive manner. The objective of realizing autonomy would be facilitated by de-linking IIT finances with non-plan support of the Government.
v) IITs are to be totally independent of MHRD for their governance and management functions. They are to be run by their Boards with all rules and regulations made by their Boards.
vi) The curriculum system needs to adopt greater flexibility to provide greater choice to students so that they are better prepared for a chosen career option.
vii) At least 100,000 quality engineering graduates per year through Central government-funded institutions alone should be produced.
viii) Identification/creation of 50 Central government-funded institutions (other than the 20 IITs) is to be done, which could be nurtured with the help of young IIT faculty. These would include NITs, ISERs, NISER, IIIT and certain other institutions. At the time when the Indian Institutes of Technology are facing faculty crunch & inadequacy of autonomy, the committee has attempted to come out with a vision statement that would be a road map for the IITs. Whether the successful implementation of the recommendations would help to put our country at the forefront of research by creating a large pool of researchers is yet to be seen.
