Archive for the ‘PMO’ Category
IIMs seek liberty to elect directors
The Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) have a wish: The freedom to select directors on their own, and at an accelerated pace. The Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD)’s intervention in its matters, including selection of directors, is taking a toll on the schools’ reputation, they claim. “We are losing our charm internationally,” laments an IIM director. “We need basic freedom to at least appoint our own directors, sans anyone’s permission. We do not see international professors interested in heading IIMs.”
Consider this: Samir Barua, Director at IIM-Ahmedabad, was to remit office in November 2012 but was given an extension of a few months. Ditto with Shekhar Chaudhuri, Director, IIM-Calcutta, and Pankaj Chandra, Director, IIM-Bangalore, who is still on extension. In contrast, look at similar appointments internationally: Cornell University’s management announced Soumitra Dutta as the new dean in January 2012, when he was to take over in July 2012. Nitin Nohria was announced Harvard Business School’s dean in May 2010, when he was to take over in July 2010.
In fact, the board of governors at IIM-Ahmedabad (IIM-A) had sent names of three contenders – Ashish Nanda of Harvard University and IIM-A faculty members G Raghuram and Rakesh Basant – for the post of Director to MHRD on May 9, 2012. But the ministry is yet to respond. The board, in the absence of a clearance from MHRD, this month asked Dean (Faculty) Ajay Pandey to take over as the Acting Director. While IIM-Calcutta appointed a Director this week, IIM-Bangalore is yet to appoint one.
“I do not understand why an IIM needs the MHRD or the permission of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to appoint a director. Why can’t decisions regarding educational institutions be left to them? We are institutions of the 21st century. Why do we have a board of governors if we can’t be allowed to select our own directors?” asks an IIM director.
Sources at the premier management institutes say the process of selecting a director should be accelerated, as it would be a good model to have a director-designate six months to one year in advance. This would allow the outgoing and incoming directors to work together, allowing for better hand-holding before one takes over.
As an IIM director completes his term, a search committee is constituted to shortlist eligible candidates and recommend them to MHRD. The ministry approves the list, sends it to the Department of Personnel, which forwards it to the PMO for the Cabinet Committee’s approval.
Globally, however, much before a director or dean’s term comes to an end, headhunters identify some key names of eligible candidates and send these to the dean of a search committee, which comprises faculty members from the institute. Committees at the university and school levels come together to interview and shortlist candidates. The appointments are usually done months in advance.
A M Naik, chairperson of the board of governors of IIM-A, says though the selection of directors six months in advance would be a good move, the government’s role in the process would remain, as it was an important stakeholder. Ashok Thakur, Joint Secretary at MHRD, could not be contacted for comments despite repeated attempts for two weeks.
Source: Business Standard, April 11, 2013
IIT faculty federation seeks roll back of common entrance test
The IIT faculty federation, opposed to the proposed common entrance for admission in IITs (Indian Institutes of Technology) and other centrally-funded technical institutes, today met senior officials of the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office) and sought a roll back of the decision. “We are encouraged with the meeting and are hopeful of a positive outcome,” Secretary of All India IIT Faculty Federation (AIIITFF) A K Mittal told reporters after meeting PM’s advisor T K A Nair.
The federation is also expected to meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh tomorrow expressing reservation to the common test. Today’s meeting assumes significance in the wake of HRD Minister Kapil Sibal virtually ruling out going back on the Centre’s new proposal. AIIITFF had written to the Prime Minister on May 31 saying that “each IIT is an individual and independent academic entity and should reserve its right to follow its own norms with regards to admissions and other academic matter”.
Sibal, who is currently on a visit to the US, has said that the government has no intent to impinge on the autonomy of the IITs. The government had on May 28 announced that from 2013, aspiring candidates for IITs and other central institutes like NITs and IIITs will have to sit under a new format of common entrance test, which will also take the plus-two board results into consideration.
Sibal had claimed that it was approved without dissent at a council consisting of the IITs, the IIITs and the NITs. Delhi IIT alumni association today shared a letter with the press and addressed to HRD Minister Kapil Sibal which shows IIT Kanpur’s dissent over the council’s decision of adopting the new test format.
Source: The Economic Times (Online Edition), June 14, 2012
>PMO settles turf war between health and HRD ministries
>
The Health and Human Resource Development ministries have reached a compromise on regulating medical education and research. The National Commission for Human Resources in Health (NCHRH), piloted by the Health Ministry, will set the standards for university-level medical education. On the other hand, the National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER), piloted by the HRD Ministry, will set the policy guidelines for all medical research. Universities will also be free to have more exacting higher standards for which they will deal with NCHER.
The agreement brokered by the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) will end the turf war between the Health and HRD ministries. This could mean that both bills could be finalised for introduction in the Budget session of parliament. There appears to be a move to bring in Rajashekharan Pillai, Vice-Chancellor of the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), as the chairperson of NCHER.
The need to apportion medical education between the two proposed regulators became necessary after HRD ministry appointed taskforce on NCHER suggested that higher education in all disciplines should be brought under the proposed over-arching regulator. The exception was agricultural education, since agriculture is a state subject. The move was opposed by Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad and Law Minister Veerappa Moily, as both medical and legal education were to be brought under the NCHER.
The Health Ministry argued medical education was linked to the provision of health services. The Health Ministry’s regulator, NCHRH, was asked to oversee the availability of well trained and competent medical personnel on the ground. This it was argued would only be possible if there had control over medical education. The NCHER task force argued since all education was governed by the varsity system and there were multi-disciplinary areas of research, all education should come under one regulator.
The difference of opinion resulted in an intense turf war. So much so, that the Prime Minister’s Office had to intervene to resolve the situation. In a series of meetings presided over by TKA Nair, Principal Secretary to the PMO, the two sides sought to work out a compromise.
Source: The Economic Times, February 16, 2011
NCHER will not be a super regulator – Medical education & Law to be kept out
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appears to be disinclined to accept the idea of setting up the proposed National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER) as the higher educations super regulator. Despite best efforts by HRD minister Kapil Sibal, medical education and law will be kept out of the purview of NCHER. In the aftermath of the Ketan Desai-Medical Council of India (MCI) scandal, the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) had sought to bring medical education within the ambit of the NCHER.
The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) is learnt to be of the view that medical education should be kept under the purview of the health ministry-sponsored National Council for Human Resources in Health (NCHRH). The MHRD had cited the Yashpal Committee recommendation and that of the National Knowledge Commission to set up a regulator that would have jurisdiction over the entire spectrum of higher education. However, the PMO is clear that the such reports and recommendations cannot override government policy as enunciated in the President’s address to Parliament last June.
The MHRD’s efforts to garner total control over the higher education segment has also been opposed by health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, law minister Veerappa Moily, state governments and educationists. The MHRD’s efforts are not new. In the UPA-I government, Mr. Sibal’s predecessor Arjun Singh too sought to put in place a higher education super regulator. Mr. Singh’s efforts ran into dangerous territories as health ministry was then shepherded by A. Ramadoss of PMK and agriculture by NCPs Sharad Pawar.
The MHRD, however, is not giving up its effort to get a larger mandate. To build support for the proposed regulator, the MHRD has planned a retreat meeting on May 29. The meeting will discuss NCHER with experts for further fine tuning. It will then take the draft bill to the Central Advisory Board of Education, which is meeting on June 18 and 19. The idea is to create a critical mass of support for the proposed super regulator.
Source: The Economic Times, May 22, 2010
NCHER will not be a super regulator – Medical education & Law to be kept out
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appears to be disinclined to accept the idea of setting up the proposed National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER) as the higher educations super regulator. Despite best efforts by HRD minister Kapil Sibal, medical education and law will be kept out of the purview of NCHER. In the aftermath of the Ketan Desai-Medical Council of India (MCI) scandal, the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) had sought to bring medical education within the ambit of the NCHER.
Source: The Economic Times, May 22, 2010
Constitutional amendment not needed for creating Higher Education body – PMO
The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) has rejected the Human Resource Development (HRD) Ministry’s proposal to amend the Constitution for setting up the National Commission of Higher Education and Research (NCHER). The PMO has refused amending the Constitution for setting up an independent NCHER, which will take over the academic, accreditation and financial functions of the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), University Grants Commission (UGC) and National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE).
Constitutional amendment not needed for creating Higher Education body – PMO
The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) has rejected the Human Resource Development (HRD) Ministry’s proposal to amend the Constitution for setting up the National Commission of Higher Education and Research (NCHER). The PMO has refused amending the Constitution for setting up an independent NCHER, which will take over the academic, accreditation and financial functions of the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), University Grants Commission (UGC) and National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE).
Higher Education News and Views 