From Convocation Stages to Classroom Realities: Why India's Higher Education Reforms Still Lag

At twin events this week — a birth centenary tribute to Professor K.V. Sivayya in Visakhapatnam and the first convocation of Amal College of Advanced Studies in Nilambur, Kerala — speakers converged on a single diagnosis: India's higher education system produces graduates in volume but falls short on relevance, employability, and equity. Kerala's Higher Education Minister Roji M. John, speaking on September 3, said the State government would introduce new academic programmes and upgrade facilities to retain students who otherwise migrate for better institutions. In Visakhapatnam, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax B. Srinivas linked commerce and management education directly to the national aspiration of Viksit Bharat @2047, calling for curricula that "evolve with the changing economy."

The two gatherings, geographically distant, point to the same structural gap: India's higher education system is expanding in enrolment but not yet in quality or alignment with workforce needs.

The Scale of the Challenge

India's higher education enrolment remains modest by global middle-income standards. The 2022–23 Economic Survey placed the Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) for the 18–23 age cohort at 27.1%, meaning roughly one in four young Indians in that age group is enrolled — well below the 50% target the National Education Policy 2020 has set for 2035. This quantitative shortfall is compounded by qualitative ones: outdated syllabi, faculty shortages, and a persistent skills–industry gap that Mr. John acknowledged in his Nilambur address.

• ▸The GER target under National Education Policy 2020 is 50% by 2035
• ▸India's GER of 27.1% (Economic Survey 2022–23) is below China's ~60% and Brazil's ~50%
• ▸The UGC regulates over 1,100 universities and 40,000+ affiliated colleges under the UGC Act 1956
• ▸The student-teacher ratio in many state universities exceeds 40:1, against the UGC-recommended 20:1

Constitutional Obligations and Policy Frameworks

The right to education in India has a strong constitutional base, though it is asymmetric. Article 21-A guarantees free and compulsory education only for children aged 6–14 — it does not extend a similar enforceable right to higher education. Article 41, a Directive Principle of State Policy, asks the State to "make effective provision for securing the right to work, to education and to public assistance" — language that is aspirational, not justiciable. The gap between these two provisions is itself a governance story: the Constitution treats school education as a right but higher education as an aspiration.

The policy response has evolved through three major milestones. The UGC Act 1956 created the regulatory architecture for universities. The National Education Policy 2020 introduced a multidisciplinary, skills-integrated vision with a 50% GER target. Between these poles lies a long implementation record — of committees, regulations, and partial reforms — that has yet to close the access–quality divide.

Delivery Failures: Where the System Breaks Down

The Minister's remarks in Kerala crystallise three recurring last-mile failures. First, the curriculum–industry gap: he noted that government steps to introduce "new courses and programmes based on changing needs" are still reactive, not systemic. Second, the employability crisis: his call for students to become "job creators rather than job-seekers" implicitly acknowledges that the existing degree pipeline does not reliably produce employable graduates. Third, regulatory rigidity: UGC norms on new courses, faculty recruitment, and autonomous status remain slow-moving, discouraging the very innovation that state ministers now demand.

Federalism and the Burden on States

Higher education is on the Concurrent List (Entry 25, List III) but operates heavily through state-level institutions — state universities, affiliated colleges, and self-financing private colleges. This produces what fiscal analysts call an "asymmetric burden": states fund most operational costs while the Centre controls regulatory levers. Kerala's combined public–private ecosystem, which the Minister credited for the state's progress, is not replicable everywhere. States with weaker fiscal capacity and fewer private institutions cannot offer the same range of programmes, which is precisely the migration pressure Mr. John acknowledged — students leaving for better-equipped states or abroad.

What the Conference Calls For

In Visakhapatnam, 80 research papers were received at the national conference on "Re-imagining Commerce Management Education in India" — a scale that signals the academic community's appetite for reform. Former GITAM Vice-Chancellor M. Gangadhara Rao's call for "transformation in higher education" and changes in commerce curricula reflects a wider consensus: without a workforce fluent in data, finance, and emerging technologies, the Viksit Bharat vision will run on aspiration alone. The commemoration of Professor Sivayya — who helped establish the MBA programme at Andhra University — was not merely nostalgic; it framed quality and access as twin, non-negotiable goals.

Significance and Forward Path

The reform agenda is already partially drafted. The challenge is delivery. Successive CAG audits have flagged teacher shortages, unspent allocations, and regulatory inaction. Bridging the gap between the National Education Policy 2020's vision and the average graduate's competence will require faster regulatory clearance for interdisciplinary programmes, stronger industry–institution partnerships, and a credible accreditation regime under bodies like NAAC and NBA. Without these, India will continue to produce millions of graduates each year — and millions of employers who say they cannot find the talent they need.