Internationalisation of Higher Education: Strategic Implications

India’s strategy with regard to internationalisation of higher education should be based on its potential to be an effective aid to the mitigation of the basic problems facing this sector. So far, the liberalisation policies have induced foreign providers to focus only on certain technical and professional fields of study that can earn them good market returns. In contrast to these modes, it is better to design a strategy that taps foreign universities and institutes of acceptable quality to work together with Indian universities/ institutes to improve both access and quality. Augmenting and strengthening the capacity to produce more faculty in selected fields through such partnerships will help public universities play a more effective role in higher education.

The author is grateful to K R S Murthy, K Gopakumar Thampi and Kala Sridhar for useful comments.

Samuel Paul (Samuelpaul@mac.com) is with the Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore.

“Internationalisation” is not an alto

gether unknown phenomenon in

higher education in India and other developing countries. Students have for many decades gone abroad for higher studies and professionals have gone out to teach or do research. Foreign faculty have come to our shores for teaching and managing institutions. Foreign books and journals have been an indispensable source of knowledge for our university students and teachers. Thus, teaching and learning, research and institution-building have all been influenced by some form of internationalisation or the other. What is new, however, is the much larger scale of such activities and inputs today, and the adoption of new modes of delivery of higher education. Foreign universities or colleges opening branch campuses abroad or offering joint programmes of study in partnership with local institutions are e xamples of new modes of delivery. The use of new technologies that permit s tudents to enrol in foreign educational programmes while sitting at home and learning “on line” is also a novel approach. Government policies that permit foreign investment in higher education, and negotiations to treat education as a tradable service under international agreements such as General Agreement on Trades in Services (GATS) are taking the inter nationalisation of higher education to a new level.

The reasons behind the explosion of the phenomenon of internationalisation are not difficult to fathom. The opening up of our economy through the new policies of liberalisation, easier capital flows and a ccess to new technologies facilitated by globalisation have helped expand the scale and modes of internationalisation. Liberal policies have created opportunities for education service providers, both within the country and abroad, to invest in a big way in setting up new institutions or joint ventures to offer educational programmes that are in great demand. That the main players in this arena are from the private sector is not surprising. It is they who have the resources and the incentives to undertake these ventures. The nonprofit providers have also entered the scene, given their interest in expanding and diversifying their activities.

This trend, however, would not have gained currency in the absence of two other factors. First of all, there is an unmet demand for higher education in India and other countries that many foreign providers and investors have rightly recognised. The gross enrolment ratio (GER) of higher education in India is a mere 10%. The growing population, the rising incomes of the middle class and increased awareness of the value of education by lower income groups have widened the supply-demand gap in higher education. It explains why a large number of students go abroad every year at their own cost or enrol in private institutions at home, paying exorbitant fees (Agarwal 2006). The second factor is the failure of the State to increase its investment in higher education. There has hardly been any increase in the number of public universities in India in the past two decades. Primary and secondary education has received higher priority than higher education in government circles. It is the private sector that has stepped in to fill the resultant gap in demand. Foreign programmes and partnerships have been brought to India largely by these private sector players. The vast majority of colleges in India are private entities, though a good proportion of them receive government aid. A similar trend can be found in other developing countries too.

1 Trends in Internationalisation

As a result of the interplay of these factors, further internationalisation of higher education is already in progress in India. The following evidence, though not comprehensive, will give us a sense of the directions and trends on the ground (Panchamukhi 2008; Kapur 2008).

A total of 1,00,000 Indian students are presently studying abroad, at an annual cost of over $4 billion. This number is next

EPW

PERSPECTIVE

only to that of China which has also sent their students abroad in a big way. A good proportion of the Indian students, of course, do not return to the home country.1

In 2005, there were 131 foreign educational programmes being offered in India in partnership with Indian institutions. A few thousand students are enrolled in these programmes which also offer them opportunities to study in foreign countries for a part of their courses.2 These programmes are largely in technical and v ocational subjects.

Fee levels are uniformly high in these programmes. However, capital investment by the foreign providers is minimal in these ventures. There is no guarantee that these programmes are accredited in the country of origin of the provider.

Hundred per cent foreign investment in higher education is now permitted by law in India. Though foreign universities have evinced interest in setting up their campuses in India, so far there is no case of this kind. Nor is there any evidence that top notch foreign universities have been attracted to India under this liberal policy.

The unprecedented expansion of the private sector and the entry of foreign education providers in India’s higher education arena have caught the regulatory authorities off guard. There is, as yet, no coherent regulatory framework to monitor or accredit these new players. Whether their quality, standards, and related management practices are of an acceptable level, is a matter for conjecture.

2 What Are Others Doing?

Before we propose a strategy for the internationalisation of higher education in I ndia, we need to understand and assess what other countries are doing in this r egard. This is not to say that we should follow their examples. But since we live in a competitive world, it will be useful to find out how other countries are responding to the same challenge (Kapur 2008; Huang 2007).

(1) Study abroad by students is still the most visible mode of internationalisation. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries dominate this arena. The United States (US) leads in this regard with 6,00,000 visiting students. China alone has

Economic & Political Weekly

3,50,000 students studying abroad. India and China account for the largest proportion of foreign students in the US. This mode is adopted by those who can afford to meet the high cost of foreign education. Needless to add, liberalisation policies have clearly aided the popularity and large-scale expansion of this mode.

vol xliv no 9

abroad. In 1990, China had hardly 7,600 students abroad. Presently, it has nearly 3,50,000 students abroad. It caters to 77,000 foreign students who are enrolled in Chinese institutions. In 2004. China had nearly 750 joint programmes in partnership with foreign institutions, of which 165 awarded degrees of foreign or Hong Kong universities. It has not a pproved the establishment of branch campuses of foreign universities. Instead, the Chinese government is investing in the development of 38 world-class universities to upgrade the access to and quality of higher education.

3 What Are the Key Issues?

Compared to the developments in China and other countries, India’s forays into i nternationalisation have been modest. As noted above, these include the liberalisation of foreign exchange for those who wish to study abroad, easing of restrictions on foreign investment, and a limited number of collaborative programmes with foreign providers. The key Indian players that have taken advantage of the new policies are from the private sector. Public universities have not been active on this front so far, nor do they have the resources to take such initiatives. There is, however, no effective and coherent strategic or regulatory framework to monitor and a ssess these activities. The net result is that internationalisation has been dominated by foreign and Indian institutions which are not in all cases known for their high standards and educational quality.

A consensus on India’s policies on internationalisation in higher education is yet to emerge. This is understandable, given the democratic setting of the country, and the diversity of views held by different parts of the government, experts and o ther stakeholders. The ministry of human r esource development and ministry of commerce have divergent views on the role of foreign providers and investment. Regulatory bodies such as the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the National Knowledge Commission do not see eye to eye on the role and nature of regulation. State governments and the central g overnment have had their share of conflicting views. Managements of private sector institutions and public universities differ on several

PERSPECTIVE

counts. Some of these difficulties can be traced to differences in values and ideologies of the parties i nvolved. The upshot is that the country’s direction in terms of i nternationalisation is neither clear nor c oherent. Piecemeal decisions have been taken so far, without guidance from an overall strategy. The j udiciary had to intervene in the policymaking process as some of the disputed issues have been taken to court (Agarwal 2006).

Rather than regurgitate the current confused policy scenario and the underlying conflicts, we propose to begin with an assessment of the key problems and challenges facing the higher education sector in India, and ask whether internationalisation offers any opportunities or answers to at least some of these problems. There is no implication here that internationalisation holds the key to solving all the problems thus identified. But even if some problems can be mitigated through this route, it will be a step forward. We could then explore the modes of internationalisation that will be appropriate in the Indian context, given the sector’s pro blems and priorities. Based on this reflection and assessment, we might be able to put together the outline of a tentative strategy for the internationalisation in higher education.

Let us begin with a review of where I ndia’s higher education sector stands t oday. There are many detailed treatises on this subject. Our purpose, however, is to present the essential evidence that can help us reach a consensus on the basic problems and challenges facing the sector.

Access to Higher Education: India has the largest number of higher education i nstitutions. Its universities and colleges add up to 18,000, well above those of the US and China. The gross enrolment ratio (GER) in higher education, however, is a mere 10%. This number tells us that the sector caters only to a small proportion of those eligible to go for higher education. In developed countries, the GER exceeds 50%. Other BRIC countries, Brazil, Russia and China, have much h igher GERs than India. Even Indonesia that has lagged b ehind India has a GER of 16%. There is thus a big gap in terms of the access to higher education in India. The 11th Plan envisages raising GER to 15% – a modest target. But this implies expanding student intake by over seven million in five years! A major quantitative expansion of student numbers is necessary if the country’s f uture requirements of skilled personnel are to be met. It points to the urgent need to invest vast resources for the expansion of the sector.

Quality and Standards: Though the higher education sector is relatively small in relation to future needs, its record in terms of quality and standards of performance leaves much to be desired. In global rankings of universities, very few Indian institutions find a place. The Shanghai world rankings of the top 500 universities/ institutes include only three Indian Institutes of Technologies (IITs) and one Indian Institute of Management (IIM), and that, too, at the lower end. The Times global rankings of the top 100 also find a mention of just a couple of Indian institutions. In terms of published papers (an indicator of research output), India has slipped from the 8th place in 1985 to the 14th in 2006. Thus, though we have a few outstanding colleges and other higher education institutions, the vast majority do not meet i nternational standards of quality and e xcellence. According to some observers, the entry of self-financing private colleges in a big way has exacerbated this problem. This, in turn, has negative implications for the acceptance of our degrees and of the graduates of the system in other countries and markets.

Resources, Financial and Human: Paucity of resources is another disquieting feature of India’s higher education sector. Public expenditure in this sector as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) is 0.37% compared to 0.50% in China and

1.40 % in the US (Agarwal 2006). Government has traditionally been the primary investor in higher education in India, though private colleges do play a major role in the delivery of education. However, in recent decades, there has been a shift of government priority in favour of primary and secondary education.4 Expansion of public universities and upgradation of their infrastructure have been negligible since the 1980s. It is not merely that funds are scarce, but that there is also a shortage of qualified faculty and researchers to meet the growing demand. The slack has been taken up by the private sector, but largely in the sub-sector of technical and professional education, where the unmet demand is perceived to be significant. Here again, faculty shortage is a serious issue.

Regulation of Higher Education: The foregoing problems are linked to a large degree to the weaknesses in the regulatory framework of higher education. This applies especially to the question of quality and standards. The overload on the regulatory authorities, enforcement failure, overlaps and conflicts between agencies, and collusion due to political or other i nfluences have all played a role in this outcome. There is much confusion also about the role of these agencies in the regulation of private and foreign providers.

In summary, India’s higher education sector is currently facing serious challenges in respect of the need to expand student intake (access), upgrading quality and achieving excellence, mobilising the needed resources, and strengthening the regulatory function. All these are complex issues, and there are no simple remedies that can solve them. Many commissions and working groups have made recommendations to deal with them. Nevertheless, progress has been slow with respect to all the four problem areas.

How then should we respond to this s ituation? One could take a “do nothing” attitude and believe that time will take care of these problems. After all, the country’s growth rate has accelerated, and as more resources become available, suitable steps could be taken to improve the situation. Some others might argue that the e ntry of the private sector will help bring in more resources and meet the rising demand for higher education. While there is some truth in this argument, there is little evidence to show that the Indian private sector institutions have done much to upgrade quality and standards or to cater to the educational needs of our less well-off families. Governments, both central and state, do not seem to have the resources to tackle the major problems identified above.

It is against this background that we should examine whether internationalisation can play a positive role in remedying

EPW

PERSPECTIVE

these gaps. This is not an option for those who are against international involvements and exchanges. The risks that come with trade and unequal exchanges are real and cannot be wished away. On the other hand, policymakers can assess such risks, and make a judgment as to whether this option will generate some net benefits for the country while taking steps to minimise the risks. The rest of this paper is rooted in this view and takes a critical look at how internationalisation can be used in the n ational interest to strengthen the higher education sub-sector. There is no presumption here that internationalisation is the “magic bullet” we are seeking. We should pick and choose, negotiate and adopt only those modes of internationalisation that subserve our interests.

What we need to ask, therefore, is whether the instrument of internationalisation has the potential to tackle some or all the challenges discussed above. If the answer is “yes”, we could then explore the areas in which it can be an aid, and reject aspects that are of little benefit to us. It is through this process that we should formulate a strategy to make use of the

o pportunities that internationalisation can create in the Indian context.

Internationalisation entails exchanges between domestic and foreign parties i nterested in these activities. The more d eveloped countries (OECD, for example) have an interest in exporting educational services in which they hold an advantage. Developing countries, on the other hand, are recipients of the services from the former. This is not to say that they cannot export services in which other countries are interested. Some developing countries such as China and India, for example, are attracting overseas students to their institutions. It means that eventually they may develop the capacity and incentive to engage in both the export and import of educational services.

4 Towards a Strategy

As far as India is concerned, since our priority will be in tackling the basic problems discussed above, we should be looking for the “import” of services and resources that can aid us in this important endeavour. Successful resolution of these problems could eventually pave the way for us to

Economic & Political Weekly

“export” our services to other countries. But this clearly is not our priority at this stage of our development.

What modes of internationalisation are pertinent to the Indian context of higher education? Which modes will help us to improve access and quality so that higher education becomes more equitable through the expansion of its reach? We present b elow seven modes and offer a brief assessment of the relevance of each.

Each of these modes can be evaluated in terms of its likely contribution to solving the problems of our higher education sector. Will it improve access and quality? Will it augment the reach of higher education and achieve the goal of equity? Will it help the country to augment resources or improve its regulatory effectiveness? Is it likely to succeed at this stage of the country’s development? Perhaps, none of these options will satisfy all of our criteria. But some indication of which modes are more appropriate and timely may come out of this assessment.

Movement of Students for Studies Abroad: The focus here is on scaling up this mode which has already been popular for a long time. It is a way to meet the d emand gap, especially in technical and professional fields. Increased mobility through liberalisation has also facilitated

vol xliv no 9

the movement of teachers and other professionals to work abroad. But the downside is that this mode can be accessed only by the elite sections of society. While it is bound to remain popular, it cannot be counted on to solve the problem of access that faces the majority of our students.5 For them, the answer lies in creating

o pportunities for higher studies within the country.

Distance Education and Online Learning: This mode is more cost-effective than the physical movement of students to foreign countries. To the extent that internet access is improving in the country, a larger number of students could take advantage of this option. Regulation of this mode will be difficult, and hence, quality and standards cannot be assured. This limitation applies also to the first mode discussed above. Furthermore, the high fees charged may make this mode beyond the reach of the less well-off students. There is, however, opportunities here to turn this mode around to benefit the less well and rural-based students. If online learning can be made available to rural and small town institutions, access and quality of higher education can be improved for the students involved. The question of fees still remains and may need support from government.

Establishment of Branch Campuses by Foreign Universities: This mode can, to some extent, alleviate the problem of access. However, it can still be expensive for students as foreign providers are likely to charge relatively high fees. Since only a few universities are likely to take this route, enrolments will be limited. It is feasible to regulate and monitor this mode. For example, approval may be given only to accredited institutions. They can be asked to comply with national policies, and standards of transparency and disclosure with regard to admission, fees, etc. Judged by the criteria of access and equity, this mode will, for the most part, remain elitist, though it could set new standards of quality.

Joint Programmes with Foreign Providers: Joint programmes imply partnerships, twinning arrangements, and the

PERSPECTIVE

like. The participation of local institutions has the potential to develop local capabilities and compensate for the gaps in local skills and resources such as faculty. They may also award joint degrees that may prove attractive to the students. But much depends on the quality of the foreign partners. It is here that the regulatory framework can be used to ensure that only f oreign providers of certain minimum standards enter the scene. So far, this is a neglected aspect of joint programmes in India. When properly designed and regulated, this mode (compared to the other modes discussed above) has the potential to positively impact on both access and quality in areas of higher education that are in need of upgrading.

Award of Contracts to Build World-class Institutions: In the final analysis, access and quality can be improved only when we have an adequate number of institutions that can cater to large numbers of students while upholding quality. Since upgrading quality and intake in all institutions is not easy, a beginning has to be made by creating model institutions from which others can learn. Since universities are at the centre of higher education, these world-class models should be established in the university system. Future faculty and research personnel for other institutions should come from these world-class universities. To the extent that a country does not have the faculty resources to mount this effort, there is a case for getting well-known foreign institutions to play an institution-building role to achieve global standards. They will naturally e xpect to be paid for their services. The original IITs and IIMs were set up on this basis, in collaboration with reputed f oreign institutions.

Private sector providers in India may well be able to finance this effort on their own. But if this mode is to make an impact, it should be applied to India’s public universities. The selection of public universities for this purpose is a matter to be carefully considered. More importantly, funds for this important initiative will have to come from the government. It should be seen as an investment in order to create the faculty for the future who in turn will set standards in many other u niversities, and may well create the foundation to make Indian universities a destination for foreign students too.

Making Our Universities Attractive to Foreign Students: In terms of sequence, this mode cannot emerge in a real sense until our universities and other institutions become world-class and have the c apacity to provide high quality education to the visitors. Some of our universities do attract foreign students, and they should continue to provide this service. In terms of our national priorities, however, this will rate rather low at this juncture.

february 28, 2009 vol xliv no 9

EPW

Economic & Political Weekly

PERSPECTIVE

pointless to decry their commercial m otives. No one is going to serve our i nterests for free. The trick is to offer them the needed incentives to contribute to the upgrading and renewal of our education system as indicated below.

(2) A similar word of caution is in order with respect to the last two modes. At this stage of our development, our scarce public resources need not be devoted to the education of foreign students or to meet international demand. The priority has to be to solve our internal problems of access and quality. However, if private resources are available to launch ventures abroad, they could be treated on par with the f oreign i nvestments of other Indian e ntrepreneurs.

(3) A more attractive option is to encourage foreign institutions to partner with Indian universities/institutions in selected fields of education of mutual interest and that may serve our national interest. Such collaborations or twinning arrangements should be limited to foreign providers of established reputation and quality. For example, pre-qualifications can be set for prospective foreign partners (those who are in the first 300 in the Shanghai rankings).6 That these providers may have a commercial interest should not prevent us from utilising their services. The contentious issue of foreign providers charging high student fees can be taken care of by government paying the former for their services and determining student fee l evels as a separate matter. The early IITs and IIMs have gone through this experience. The regulatory framework should be used to ensure that the selected partners are of the quality acceptable to us.

(4) Internationalisation can be an aid also in the creation of a few world-class universities that can lay the foundation for the upgrading of many other universities in the country. But this will require s ubstantial public investments as collaborating partners will have to be paid for their services. So far, the more reputed universities have not shown much interest in partnering Indian institutions except in limited areas such as research or training projects. Pune University is one example of a state university that has taken some initiatives in this direction (Jadhav 2008).

(5) It is easier to apply this mode when new universities are being set up. They

Economic & Political Weekly

EPW