Latest news with #NationalBoardofAccreditation
News18
7 days ago
- Science
- News18
NIRF Rankings 2025 Likely By First Week Of August, Major Changes In Evaluation Criteria
Last Updated: NIRF 2025 rankings are expected in the first week of August with key updates, including new SDG metrics and penalties for retracted research papers. Ask ChatGPT NIRF Rankings 2025: The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) 2025 rankings are expected to be released in the first week of August. According to sources from the National Board of Accreditation (NBA), the final announcement will be made once the Ministry of Education finalises the date. NIRF, launched by the Ministry of Education, is a nationwide ranking system that evaluates higher education institutions across various disciplines and categories. It is released annually and plays a key role in helping students, educators, and policymakers assess institutional performance on a structured set of parameters. What's New In NIRF 2025? The 2025 edition of the NIRF rankings will see some major updates, including the addition of a new evaluation category focused on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This new metric is expected to assess how institutions contribute towards sustainability, environmental responsibility, and social development, aligning with global higher education benchmarks. While this year's penalty will be minor, Sahasrabudhe clarified that the severity of the scoring will gradually increase in future editions if the issue of retracted publications is not addressed. This change will specifically impact the 'Research and Professional Practices" parameter, which measures the volume and quality of institutional research through indicators such as the number of publications, citation impact, and peer-reviewed journal output. How NIRF Rankings Are Prepared? The NIRF rankings are prepared using a transparent and structured methodology developed by the Ministry of Education and executed by the National Board of Accreditation. Institutions are assessed under several broad parameters, including: From 2025, the new SDG category and the negative marking for retracted research papers will be integrated into this framework, further strengthening the integrity and global relevance of the rankings. The NIRF rankings continue to serve as a key reference for students and institutions alike, offering a data-driven insight into the strengths and areas of improvement across India's higher education ecosystem. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Indian Express
7 days ago
- Science
- Indian Express
NIRF Rankings 2025: What's new, and changes this year
The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) 2025 rankings are expected to be announced by the first week of August. According to confirmation received from the National Board of Accreditation (NBA), the rankings are likely to be released after the Ministry of Education announces a date. NIRF rankings lack mechanisms to assess teaching quality, overlook student evaluations, alumni feedback: Study The NIRF — released annually — assess and rank higher education institutions across the country based on a structured methodology. This year, several key changes are being introduced to the framework, including new parameters and methodological revisions. One of the major additions to the NIRF framework in 2025 is the introduction of a new category focused on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In addition to the new SDG category, a significant change has been introduced under the research component of the rankings. For the first time, the framework will include negative marking for the retraction of research papers. As confirmed by Anil Sahasrabudhe, chairperson of the NBA, a formula has been developed to apply negative weightage depending on either the number or percentage of retracted publications. While the penalty applied this year will be minor, the chairman stated that 'the gravity of negative scoring would increase' in subsequent years, till the issue is addressed. Top 10 agriculture and allied sector colleges in India: NIRF 2024 Rankings Apart from the new additions, the 2025 rankings will also feature updates to the existing evaluation process. The negative scoring mechanism introduced for retracted publications will apply specifically under the 'Research and Professional Practices' parameter, which evaluates institutions based on publication volume, quality (through citation counts), and other research-related metrics. The NIRF rankings are based on five broad parameters—Teaching, Learning and Resources; Research and Professional Practices; Graduation Outcomes; Outreach and Inclusivity; and Perception. The methodology is guided by recommendations of a core expert committee constituted by the Ministry of Education. The ranking process begins with the finalisation of the framework for the year. Institutions then go through a pre-registration and registration phase. Following that, they are required to upload comprehensive datasets through the Data Capturing System (DCS), which include information on faculty, students, financials, research, citations, patents, and infrastructure. Institutions must also host these datasets publicly on their websites to maintain transparency. The submitted data is then opened for validation. Stakeholders and the public are invited to provide comments, following which institutions may be asked to make corrections, if necessary. Peer perception is captured through an independent survey conducted as part of the process. After all verification, feedback, and analysis are completed, the final rankings are released. Last year also brought in several updates to the framework. Two new institutional categories, Open Universities and State Public Universities, were introduced for the first time. A new focus on 'Innovation' was added as a ranking dimension, aimed at encouraging institutions to adopt and promote innovative practices in education and research. Other key changes in 2024 included the removal of self-citations from research metrics across all categories, to ensure a more accurate reflection of citation impact. The Faculty-Student Ratio (FSR) was revised from 1:15 to 1:10 for medical institutions, while it was changed to 1:20 for the newly added category of State Public Universities. That edition also saw the initial introduction of sustainability-linked parameters, partly influenced by the G20 Mission LiFE (Lifestyle for Environment) initiative. In addition, the framework started factoring in institutional efforts in implementing multiple entry and exit systems, offering courses on Indian Knowledge Systems, and providing instruction in multiple Indian regional languages. Earlier this year, the Madras High Court issued a temporary restraint against publishing the 2025 NIRF rankings. This followed a Public Interest Litigation which argued that the rankings lacked a reliable foundation and were potentially misleading for students. The petitioner claimed that the methodology used could negatively affect the quality of higher education in the country. While the interim order did not fully halt the ranking process, it added to the ongoing debate around the transparency and reliability of the NIRF system.
The Hindu
19-07-2025
- Science
- The Hindu
NIRF to award mild penalty to institutions for retractions this year, harsh penalty next year
In a first, starting this year, the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) will award negative scores to higher educational institutions for papers that have been retracted from journals in the last three calendar years and their corresponding citations. 'This year, we will award some negative weightage for retracted papers and their citations. Next year, the penalty will be harsher,' says Anil Sahashrabudhe, Chairperson of the National Board of Accreditation (NBA), the agency managing the NIRF. This is the first time the NIRF will be awarding negative weightage while calculating the ranking. 'Both the number of retractions as well as citations from these retracted papers will be taken into account,' Dr. Sahashrabudhe says. 'We are also learning and will fine-tune the negative scoring system as we go.' 'By awarding a negative score for retractions, we want to send out a strong message that research should be conducted ethically,' he says. Explaining the reason why the NIRF is awarding a negative score for retractions, he says: 'The number of retractions was small a few years ago but the numbers have increased in the couple of years. So we are taking this seriously.' While most of the retractions are due to unethical research practices such as data fabrication, manipulation of images, using the same image in multiple papers dealing with completely different materials, using large language models (LLMs) without proper disclosure etc., some are due to genuine mistakes. It is for this reason that journals do not wish to give the impression that retractions are necessarily bad. Will it be correct to penalise institutions for retractions that have been due to genuine mistakes and not due to unethical practices? 'Retractions due to genuine mistakes are far less, and that had been happening some years ago. But most of the retractions now are due to unethical practices,' he asserts. That the number of retracted papers from China and the U.S. is far higher than India cannot be cited as a reason, he says. 'India should not be in the race with China and the U.S. for negative things.' He does not rule out harsher penalties to institutions that continue to have a large number of retractions in the years to come. To begin with, the penalty will be mild this year, which will become harsh next year and harsher in the future if institutions continue to have a large number of retractions every year, he says. 'Maybe we may even blacklist institutions for a few years if the retractions stay high,' Dr. Sahashrabudhe says. Dismissing any objections that institutions should not be penalised for wrongdoings of individual researchers, he retorts: 'If institutions can take the credit for the number of papers published by their researchers, they should also take the discredit [penalty] for the retracted papers. They should take measures to ensure that the number of papers retracted reduces.' He then asks: 'What are the authorities doing? Where is the governance? Institutions already have internal quality teams. What are they doing?' It is time that institutions take research ethics seriously and encourage their faculty to engage in ethical research practices, he says. 'The focus should shift from mere quantity to quality of research and research ethics,' Dr. Sahashrabudhe says. 'Research and Professional Practices' is one of the important parameters used by the NIRF for ranking institutions. Under this head, scores are awarded for parameters such as the weighted number of publications in a given year, quality of publications which are measured based on the total citation counts over previous three years and the number of citations in the top 25 percentile averaged over the previous three years. According to him, international bodies involved in ranking institutions have started to take into account the retracted papers. This, he says, is a reflection of the increasing number of retractions in recent years. Unlike a few years ago, journals have now become more responsive to red flags raised by independent research integrity researchers who point out serious flaws in published papers. The time taken to retract papers has also reduced considerably. Also, journals on their own have begun investigations into papers produced using LLMs without correct disclosures, authors added or changed during the reviewing process without adequate explanations, and manuscripts produced by paper mills — fraudulent organisations that make money by writing fake manuscripts and offering authorship slots for sale to academic customers.
Hans India
28-06-2025
- General
- Hans India
NBA team inspects Padmavathi Women's Polytechnic College
Tirupati: An inspection was conducted on Friday by representatives of the National Board of Accreditation (NBA) at the TTD-run Sri Padmavathi Women's Polytechnic College. As a part of the NBA renewal process, an expert team from New Delhi visited the college and reviewed the laboratory, faculty, staff details, records and other infrastructure facilities. The team also gathered feedback from students regarding teaching quality, lab facilities, library and other academic aspects. Previously, the college had received NBA accreditation for a period of three years. As the validity period is getting completed, this inspection was carried out by the NBA officials. Dr M Padmavathamma, the Principal of the college, expressed her gratitude to the TTD management, TTD Education Department officials, and the college team for their cooperation during the inspection.
The Hindu
14-06-2025
- Science
- The Hindu
GITAM Deemed to be University receives NBA accreditation
GITAM Deemed to be University received accreditation granted by National Board of Accreditation (NBA) under the Tier-I format aligned with the Washington Accord. The NBA accreditation is a significant endorsement of quality, particularly in engineering and technology programmes. It validates program outcomes, institutional processes, and ensures alignment with international educational standards—thereby enhancing the global mobility and employability of graduates, according to a release here on Saturday. The NBA has accredited GITAM programmes such as in Computer Science, Electronics and Communication, and Biotechnology, and also and Master of Computer Applications.
