GLOBALISATION IN HIGHER EDUCATION – A PERSPECTIVE
The curriculum for higher education practically means the course of study. It prescribes syllabi and text books, dictates teaching methods, and determines examination pattern, and, hence, it is one of the vital components of higher education. It is also the weakest link of higher education. A number of Commissions and Committees have examined the curriculum, and they have described it as rigid, inelastic, out-of-date and outmoded. The University Education Commission (1948) and the Education Commission (1966) maintained that, the manner in which courses specify subjects for each semester both for under graduate and post graduate levels,- the major and the allied ancillary subjects in the case of the former, and the subjects of specialization in the case of the latter, make them rigid, and leave little freedom for students to select subjects which suit their interest, needs and aspirations and to study subjects at their own pace; and lack of provision for students on the one hand for correlating subjects belonging to arts, humanities sciences, vocational and professional streams in various combinations, and on the other for integrating academic, practical, environmental, vocational and aesthetic aspects of each subject makes the courses inelastic. The Education Commission (1966) and the National Policy (1986) maintained that, inclusion of a lot of traditional content in each subject at the exclusion of its recent developments and research findings makes it out-of date; and teaching of the content having little relevance to the socio-economic needs of the contemporary society and to various vocations makes it outmoded. Further, they held that, prescription of sub-standard content makes subjects less comparable to international standards. A comparative study of the curriculum in respect of these deficiencies shows that, the university curriculum in countries like the USA, UK, and Japan has a high degree of flexibility, elasticity, relevance and modernity.
In this context, it will be a travesty of truth to state that Indian universities have been indifferent to the curriculum lacunae as specified above. In fact, during the last one and half decades several universities in their own initiative or at the instance of the UGC have made sincere attempts to design new curricula; but, by and large, such attempts are nothing more than “the scissor and paste” method of curriculum construction. The world has moved on leaving the university curriculum in backwaters. The situation has serious implications for higher education and for national development particularly during the period, the nation is slowly and progressively stretching its policy of globalization from the field of economic development to that of educational development. Globalization in higher education is a kind of two way process, – the products of Indian universities flowing into other countries, and the products of universities of advanced countries flowing into Indian universities.
Among the comity of nations India has captured a unique place in computer science, defence sciences, and space technology. Universities should further their efforts to maintain the highest level of achievement in these new areas, and also give fillip to the output of highly qualified scientists and technologists for service in India and abroad, and packages of sophisticated knowledge like software in computer science for foreign markets.
Universities of advanced countries are very quick in absorbing the new frontiers of knowledge and in developing new curricula in almost all disciplines. In the context of globalization in higher education, Indian universities should immediately respond to these trends and adopt appropriate measures.
Universities should restructure their entire curriculum. The new curricula provide for the teaching of a large variety of subjects pertaining to the latest advancements in sciences, engineering, technology, medicine, management, commerce and trade; maintain a standard at par with that of international standard; and finally, make provision for students to study a subject of any discipline in correlation with a subject of any other discipline, to begin the study of a subject in any semester year and to learn it at one’s own space, and to make inter-institutional migration. Universities should promote inter-continental exchange of academicians and researchers as well as collaboration of Indian authors with authors of other countries for the production of books and instructional materials of international standards.
The above tasks would make exacting demands on universities; and in order to meet them, there is an urgent need to reform the procedure of curriculum construction. In the existing system, the Board of Studies initiates and also works out the details of a new curriculum which is examined by the respective faculty, and approved by the Academic Council and Syndicate. The Board of Studies is constituted by a few selected members of the staff of university departments and affiliated colleges, and to this extent, the majority of affiliated colleges and its staff and students who are the real consumers of the curriculum have the least participation in the process of curriculum development. This is responsible for the failure of universities to design a modern/standard curriculum and also to implement a new curriculum. It is nothing but a trite that, the real consumers should be real makers of the curriculum, and universities should confidently confront this reality.
Every university should establish a statuary body of the Curriculum Development Committee. The Committee should include experts in various disciplines, experienced professors and teachers, community leaders and also a cross section of student population. This committee should have three functions, Research, Development and Teaching; and a separate sub-committee should handle each function. The three sub-committees should work in collaboration. The first sub-committee should make a detailed analysis of the curriculum prevailing in various universities in India and abroad, the curriculum requirements relevant to the prevailing and evolving socio-economic needs of India, and finally the new frontiers of knowledge in various disciplines. Based on the findings of the analysis, the second sub-committee should interact with groups of students, staff, administrators and community leaders; and based on result of discussions, it should form a new curriculum. The content of the new curriculum would certainly include several new areas of knowledge, which are unfamiliar to the teaching staff. The third sub-committee should dispel this ignorance, for which it should conduct, or arrange for both preservice and inservice training.
Globalization as considered above would find the solutions to two major problems of contemporary society, namely, dearth for trained manpower and educated unemployment. India is in the threshold of economic development, and it requires trained manpower and leaders in various walks of life including academic, industries, business management and administration. Vis-a-vis the country is confronted with the problem of educated unemployment. Indeed it is a paradox. Globalization of higher education would certainly satisfy the need for trained manpower, and also help to find the solution to educated unemployment.