Balancing The Regulation Of Private Education
Private educational institutions are desirable. Fraud is not.
The Acorn had argued that one public policy issue in the ongoing IIPM saga is the regulation of the use of official sounding words in the of naming private organisations.
While there is no case for preventing organisations from assuming official sounding names, like the ‘Indian Institutes’ of various things, it may be useful to consider requiring those who do so to publish disclaimers to the effect that they have no official connection with the Indian government. [The Acorn]
It appears that the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) thought likewise. It has announced plans to regulate the use of the words “National” and “Indian” or acronyms like “IIT” and “IIM” in the names of unrecognised, private institutions. There are reasonable grounds to justify this regulation, to prevent misrepresentation and protect the interests of the consumers of private education.
But the AICTE is going further. It intends to insist that private institutions that award their own degrees be forced to publish a disclaimer that they are not recognised by the government of India. Here, the policy rationale is unbalanced — while it does help prevent misrepresentation, it is likely to have an negative impact on the private education industry. Bona fide private institutes who award their own degrees but do not aim to pass off as officially recognised ones, may now be perceived in the same class as the dubious degree shops.
If the government wants to distinguish those institutions and qualifications it recognises from those it does not, it may be better off allowing recognised schools to insert an official “claimer” announcing their recognition. It is for the market to judge which qualifications it considers worthy. The role of government should be to protect consumers from fraud. India has the potential to build a globally competitive education industry — it will be a shame if the side-effect of a well-meaning government policy ruins those chances.
[...] ffect of a well-meaning government policy ruins those chances. (This post also appears on The Indian Economy Blog)
[...]
Pingback by The Acorn » Balancing the regulation of private education — October 19, 2005 @ 10:16 am
[...] EDT South Asia India Global Roundups The Indian Economy Blog has a post on private education and government control in India. [...]
Pingback by Global Voices Online » Blog Archive » India: Private Education — October 19, 2005 @ 12:10 pm
I agree that there is no reason why the state should not reserve “official sounding” names like “Indian Institute of…” for themselves. In general, there is no reason why a company should not be prosecuted for fraud if they create intentionally and demonstably false advertisements. It is alright to say “We are the best” but it is not alright to say “We are ranked no. 7 in X’s survey” when in fact they were not listed at all.
I don’t see it as very bad if there is a regulation that requires disclosure of relevant information, such as the fact that degrees offered by an institution are not recognized by this or that authority. Just putting this information in an advertisement shouldn’t harm a legitimate institution as long as people generally understand how the education system works in India. But if the lack of accredidation is a real issue, then there should be some means in which reputable institutions could be judged and accredited without interference from the government. Private institutions will just create their own accredidation system.
Comment by Michael H. — October 19, 2005 @ 3:37 pm
Michael,
Although higher-education comes under the purview of the Central government, I think it is possible for some states to accredit educational institutions in some form. So getting private schools to “disclaim” their association from government may be a complicated affair. Eg Alpha College, a private-educational institute that is not recognised by the Governments of India, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh… Recognised by the Government of Tamil Nadu (Economics) and Rajasthan (Arts) etc. From a practical point of view, I think it is easier for government-run/funded schools to declare their affiliation/accreditation. Eg. Beta University, Recognised by the Government of India.
Considering the scope for bureaucratic intrusion into the education industry, I’d be reluctant to advise further regulatory obligations on them as a rule. Exceptions of course could be those giving themselves official-sounding names, or offering degrees in professions like medicine, some branches of engineering and law.
I think the idea of a private accreditation system is something whose time has come. Indeed, it has been attempted in some form, as is evident from the current IIPM saga, where C-Fore dropped IIPM from its rankings. This is a good way ahead.
Comment by Nitin — October 19, 2005 @ 5:33 pm
The idea of regulating the naming of institutes sounds a bit dubious - like all other kinds of attempts by govenment to regulate market activities. Of course, don’t want to make a wild wild west out there. What is needed is information. All institutes, government or otherwise, should be required to have a web page or an insert in their flyer, stating their affiliations and source of funding. And then, as you have mentioned above, let the market decide. That will even take care of the issue of whether an institutes degree is recognized by AICTE or not.
Comment by AA — October 19, 2005 @ 10:42 pm
I thought there were already norms which regulated usage of ‘Indian’, ‘National’ etc. in names of educational (or indeed commercial) institutions. IIRC, a few years back, IIIT-Pune’s name was changed from Indian Institute of Information Technology to International Institute of Information Technology.
Comment by S Jagadish — October 19, 2005 @ 11:31 pm