Education Ministry in process of drafting bill for unified higher education body: MoS to Lok Sabha
In a written reply, Majumdar said the initiative aligns with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, which advocates for a 'light but tight' regulatory structure. The framework aims to ensure transparency, efficiency, and accountability while promoting institutional autonomy, innovation, and good governance.
As envisioned in the NEP 2020, the HECI will serve as an umbrella body with distinct verticals for regulation, accreditation, funding, and academic standards. The proposed commission is intended to replace existing regulators like the University Grants Commission (UGC), All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE).
Currently, the UGC oversees non-technical education, AICTE handles technical institutions, and NCTE regulates teacher education. The idea of consolidating these functions under a single regulator was first floated in a 2018 draft bill aimed at repealing the UGC Act, which was then opened for public consultation.
Efforts to implement the HECI gained renewed momentum under Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, who assumed office in July 2021.
The NEP 2020 emphasises that the existing regulatory framework needs a complete overhaul to revitalize India's higher education system and help it meet contemporary challenges and global standards.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
7 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
CBSE schools offering AI rises to over 4,500 in Class 9: Education ministry data
New Delhi: The number of Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE)-affiliated schools offering artificial intelligence (AI) as a subject to students in Classes 9 and 11 has seen a sharp rise, with Class 9 registrations surging by 1,833% — from 235 schools in 2019–20 to 4,543 in 2024–25 — and Class 11 by 1,080%, from 80 in 2020–21 to 944 in 2024–25, according to data shared by the union ministry of education in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday. The national board introduced AI as an optional elective skill subject in Class 9 from the academic session 2019–2020 and in Class 11 from 2020–21. (Representative image) Responding to questions raised by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lawmaker Sujeet Kumar, union minister of state (MoS) in the ministry of education Jayant Chaudhary said that the board had signed memorandums of understanding (MoUs) with Intel (Integrated Electronics) and IBM (International Business Machines) to promote an emerging technology-based curriculum in schools. 'The curriculum and the content for the AI course was prepared by the board with support of experts from Intel, IBM and other higher educational institutions,' Chaudhary said. The national board introduced AI as an optional elective skill subject in Class 9 from the academic session 2019–2020 and in Class 11 from 2020–21. The data shows that the number of students opting for the subject has seen a continuous rise. While Class 9 students opting for AI jumped by 2,900%, from 15,645 in 2019–20 to 4,69,454 in 2024–25, Class 11 student enrolment increased by 1,556%, from 2,048 in 2020–21 to 33,933 in 2024–25. School principals and technology experts said that the inclusion of AI in the school curriculum has become essential, and demand is growing due to its relevance in the present times and a changing mindset towards AI. 'With AI set to change how students will learn and teachers will teach in the future, we have trained our teachers in smart tutoring platforms to ensure our students are future-ready for digital classrooms. We believe that each student is different and hence our teachers are being trained to create customised study plans for weaker students and thus bring them at par with the others — by taking AI's help in tracking their performance,' Swati Yadav, principal of Bliss International Public School in Meerut, said. Principal of Modern Public School in Delhi's Shalimar Bagh, Alka Kapur, said, 'Their (students') interests are less about gadgets and more about exploring how technology works, affects life, and can be used responsibly to effect positive change. This reflects a change in mindset guided by curiosity with purpose.' Raising concerns about students becoming dependent on AI, principal of Shiv Nadar School in Gurugram, Sameer Arora, said, 'By using analogies, stories, and discussion, not just software, we help students understand not just how AI works, but what it means. Aligned with National Education Policy (NEP)'s vision for future-ready learning, our goal must be to teach students about AI, not lead them into dependence on it. However, before integrating AI in the school curriculum, schools must ask: Is it enriching student thinking? Does it free teachers for deeper engagement? Is it building capability or replacing it?' Co-founder of curriculum design organisation Nature Nurture Akshal Agrawal said, 'Over the past year or two, there has been a visible rise in students opting for AI electives. This is not just because of the buzz, it is because the subject feels real and relevant. Many students are genuinely curious to learn how the tech they use every day actually works. At the same time, there is growing awareness among parents and educators about the need to equip children with skills that go beyond academics.' The growing demand for AI elective subjects also reflects a change in mindset among educators and parents, said Anurag Gupta, CEO and co-founder of AI coding and robotics lab setup company STEMROBO Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 'They see the value in preparing children not just to use technology but to innovate with it. This momentum will only grow as schools continue to invest in 21st-century learning environments,' Gupta added. Minister Chaudhary said that from 2020 to 2024, CBSE has organised seven events, including two national skill expos, three ideathons, and two Future Tech Olympiads. 'A total of 35,000 students, including children who were part of the AI curriculum, have participated in CBSE events,' he said.
The Print
5 hours ago
- The Print
KIIT to blame for suicides of Nepalese students, says UGC; orders academic audit
Looking into the suicides, a UGC fact-finding committee led by Professor Nageshwar Rao has submitted the report, concluding that the university's conduct amounted to criminal liability. 'Instead of punishment, they (university) favoured the boy by pushing [for] forced illegal compromise with the girl. Later on, this led to suicide. The suicide case could have been averted. Members of the committee and senior administrative personnel of the university are liable for criminal punishment as per law,' the report has said. The consecutive suicides of two Nepalese students rocked the KIIT campus this year—third-year engineering student Prakriti Lamsal on 16 February and first-year BTech student Prisha Shah on 1 May. New Delhi: A fact-finding report by the University Grants Commission (UGC) has squarely blamed the May suicide of a Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology (KIIT) student, Prisha Shah, on the 'unlawful' actions of the university. The UGC has also called for criminal proceedings against the university administration as well as Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) members involved in handling a sexual harassment case brought to the fore by KIIT student Prakriti Lamsal, who died by suicide earlier in February this year. Following the first suicide, that of Lamsal, Nepalese students protested against the university. However, the university responded to the protests with force, coercing students off the KIIT campus after issuing a 'sine die' closure notice, with no future date fixed for the withdrawal of the notice. Security guards allegedly 'manhandled' the protesting Nepalese students, escalating the crisis into a Nepal-India diplomatic issue. The UGC report, now submitted to the Ministry of Education, investigated the circumstances leading to the suicides of the Nepalese students. It has highlighted grave lapses in crisis management, student welfare, and institutional governance at KIIT, held the university leadership accountable for the suicides, and recommended sweeping reforms. Speaking to ThePrint, a KIIT spokesperson said, 'KIIT-DU (KIIT Deemed to be University) is currently reviewing the contents of the report and analysing it thoroughly in its entirety. As a responsible institution, the university will take necessary steps to implement the recommendations in a time-bound and appropriate manner, in keeping with the highest standards of academic and administrative governance.' Also Read: 'No one can touch me'—Harassment charge against Krishna Kalpit shakes Hindi literary world KIIT's systemic failures The UGC fact-finding panel has stated that the KIIT administration 'needs to learn a lot,' considering its handling of Prakriti Lamsal's sexual harassment complaints preceding her suicide. 'This unlawful action of the university led to the suicide later on,' said the report. Weeks before her suicide, Lamsal had twice reported serious allegations of sexual harassment against her peer, Advik Srivastava. The report has further noted that the failure to address her allegations contributed to the second suicide of Prisha Shah, another Nepalese student at the university. The report has found the university-constituted ICC to have failed in its duty of taking lawful action and conducting transparent investigations into the reported sexual harassment case. Instead, the university had chosen an 'illegal compromise' to settle the two complaints raised by Lamsal in the case, the report has stated, adding that the administration 'prioritised the reputation of the university over regulations, law of the land, and international relations of the country'. The report has also criticised KIIT administration's use of 'brute force' against students protesting Lamsal's death while opting not to engage in dialogue. Calling the issuance of the sine die closure notice that forced Nepalese students out of their hostel 'casual decision-making,' the report noted its adverse impact on India-Nepal bilateral relations. The report also highlighted the gaps in the induction of Nepalese students, noting a lack of institutional protocols for orientation, cultural integration, or crisis support. It has highlighted poor hostel conditions, 'substandard' facilities, and Nepalese and Indian students housed in one room, without any consideration for their cultural sensitivities. The UGC has also flagged a disproportionate student intake relative to available infrastructure. 'The existing hostels, classrooms, and welfare services are inadequate to accommodate the real intake,' its report stated. KIIT's actions & what UGC says The UGC report has not only included the 'action taken report' submitted by KIIT but also the subsequent recommendations by the fact-finding commission. KIIT has maintained that it improved its grievance resolution mechanism, constituted a special grievance redressal committee for international students, and implemented a multi-tiered mental health support system, including partnerships with the Ministry of Education's 'Manodarpan' initiative and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare's 'Tele-MANAS' programme. The university has also claimed to have introduced 'strict forensic handling protocols' and mandated 'immediate forensic intervention and evidence preservation'. Furthermore, it has created specialised kitchen zones for international students to get culturally inclusive food. However, the university has failed to satisfy the committee, which noted in its report, 'The reforms appear largely theoretical, lacking timely and practical implementation.' The UGC has ordered an academic audit, calling the 30,000-student population 'excessive' compared to the existing infrastructure. It has called for a formal orientation for international students, the installation of lifts in the multi-story hostels, larger rooms for students, and culturally sensitive housing arrangements. The fact-finding team has also recommended replacing the ceiling fans on the campus with wall-mounted fans, emphasising the need for transparency in handling crises such as suicides. This report has been updated with the KIIT spokesperson's response. (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read: Sexual harassment, suicide & gangrape—Odisha's 1st BJP CM battles fallout from rising crime, 'inaction'
Mint
7 hours ago
- Mint
India's National Education Policy has been a victim of ignorance
Gift this article We are at the fifth anniversary of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. Having been a member of the NEP drafting committee, I am frequently asked, 'You invested so much time on this, what do you think has actually happened on the ground?" The tone ranges from accusatory to genuinely curious. My response: 'It's too early to tell." We are at the fifth anniversary of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. Having been a member of the NEP drafting committee, I am frequently asked, 'You invested so much time on this, what do you think has actually happened on the ground?" The tone ranges from accusatory to genuinely curious. My response: 'It's too early to tell." This is partly because two of these five years were roiled by the pandemic, forcing schools to shut down and governments to scramble. And then at least one year after that was spent on recovering lost learning. Combine that with the 20-year time horizon of the NEP and it does seem too early to say anything on how successful the policy has been. But that would be a cop-out, because the NEP did set out milestones along this 20-year horizon. The clearer and more definitive ones were written down. So, while it is too early to tell its effect on Indian education, it's not so when it comes to assessing the efforts to bring it to life on the ground. While the NEP is more transformative for higher education than school education, I will limit my assessment to school education, which I observe closely. An equally large number are attacking it for things that are not even implicitly there. The most amusing offenders are states on both ends of the spectrum—a few that have boldly declared that they have implemented the NEP fully while having done precious little, and then those that rail against the NEP while implementing many of its recommendations. Some of this stems from a misreading or deliberate distortion of the policy, but some of it might be because people just don't read, astonishing as this may be. Some of them insist that they are implementing the NEP, even as they do things that are often antithetical to the letter and spirit of the policy. Others smugly contend that they have courageously attacked the evil that is the NEP. Let us take two examples. The three-language formula has been a feature of Indian education since 1968. If anything, NEP 2020 made it more flexible and responsive to local and regional preferences. Yet, it became a political flashpoint, with critics either unaware of the policy's actual provisions or projecting their own anxieties onto it. Similarly, claims that the policy promotes privatization are baffling to anyone who has actually read the document, which emphasizes strengthening public education. To return to my very brief assessment of the milestones approached, I will describe three under-recognized shifts that are unfolding driven by the NEP—changes that will over time redefine Indian school education. The first is a system-wide focus on early childhood education (ECE). Research has long shown that ages 3 to 8 are critical for every dimension of development of the child—physical, cognitive, social, ethical and emotional. Yet, India's education system has historically neglected this phase. Spurred by the NEP, there is widespread work on curricular transformation, infrastructure upgrades and teacher development for ECE. Everywhere in the country, you can hear the buzz of early childhood education, including in the vast public anganwadi system. We are in the early stages, but this is laying the foundation for a truly equitable and effective system. Children from vulnerable and disadvantaged communities and homes will benefit the most—if we don't let the momentum slip. Also read: India's consensus on school education makes space for optimism The second change is the policy push for mother tongue-based education in gaining early literacy. Evidence is clear that children learn best in a familiar language. Yet, India has not implemented this approach adequately, exacerbating the crisis we have in basic education. The NEP's approach effectively tackles the multilingual reality of our classrooms as well as aspirations for learning English. As states are beginning to adopt this approach, alongside implementing other key policy measures in foundational literacy as well as numeracy and teacher support, we are likely to see an improvement in basic educational outcomes. The third and potentially even more far-reaching set of changes are in teacher education. For decades, the system for it has been marred by poor quality and corruption. In a very real sense, this state of teacher education has been at the heart of our troubles in school education. The NEP has confronted all the issues in teacher education head-on. By introducing four-year integrated programmes in top universities—making them the benchmark qualification and moving the entire teacher education system to that approach—to complement decisive regulatory reforms, we have reached the cusp of a new era. Also read: Invest heavily in education: It's the cornerstone of a Viksit Bharat We often blame India's Constitution for our own failings or use it to legitimize our whims. The NEP has also been treated a bit like that. But much like the Constitution, the National Education Policy has transformative potential. It is up to us to make what we will of it. For a start, we should at least read it. Topics You May Be Interested In
