The binary accrediting method proposed by Dr. K Radhakrishnan’s high-level committee causes alarm in the academic community. Mamidala Jagadesh Kumar, the chairperson of the UGC, contends that the binary character of accreditation creates a definite distinction and gets rid of the complications linked to various accreditation levels or categories. Since it guarantees that they choose authorized institutions that adhere to established quality criteria, he thinks that this strategy can assist parents and students in making well-informed selections about where to study.
The binary system, nevertheless, might cause institutions to get complacent, which would lower the standard of education. According to Kumar, students may choose where to study in an informed manner if information about institutions is presented in an open-and-shut manner. Students will lose interest in unaccredited institutions as a result, which will act as a lever to raise the quality and accreditation rate.
The Overarching Committee’s recommendation emphasizes the creation of a “Unified Elicitation Tool” with built-in collateral cross-checking to verify the veracity of data to collect a superset of data from Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) for various reasons. This will reduce subjectivity and increase credibility and transparency.
Every organization is accountable for ensuring that the data they offer is correct and reliable, therefore steps to prevent data are a concern. In order to preserve transparency and the relationship of trust between institutions and students and parents, institutions must disclose information in accordance with the norms and rules established by the UGC.
The National Education Technology Forum (NETF) created the Education Ecosystem Registry, a specialized registry for creating a student/teacher profile to monitor progress and life skills. Users will be able to review data and ensure its accuracy in government systems thanks to the EER’s simplicity of access and use for consented stakeholders/partners to enroll.
Instead of considering rankings to be a zero-sum game where one institution’s success comes at the price of another, institutes must concentrate on improving the quality and competitiveness of all institutions. A ranking system should be implemented to pinpoint areas for growth, establish benchmarks, and encourage healthy competition.
For More News stay tuned with www.felanews.org
