Draft report of

Table 28

Current Quality Status in Colleges of Higher Education in India

(As on March 31, 2005)

Details	Number
Total Number of Colleges	17,625
Number of Colleges under UGC purview	14,000
Number of Colleges recognised under Section 2(f) of UGC Act	5,589 (40%)
Number of Colleges recognised under Section 12(B) of UGC Act	5,273 (38%)
Number of Colleges actually funded by the UGC	4,870 (35%)
Number of Colleges accredited by the NAAC	2,780 (20%)
Number of Colleges accredited by the NAAC and scoring above 60%	2,506 (17.9)

The situation in case of the universities is no different than the colleges. Out of 317 university level institutions that are under the purview of the UGC, only 164 are provided with development assistance under plan and have access to other financial supports from the UGC. This leaves 153 universities without developmental support. Of these, 45 are those deemed universities that have been recognised as eligible to receive UGC grant under Section 12 B while 108 are the universities that have been established by different states.

Table 29

Current Quality Status of Universities in India (As in 2007)

Details	Total Number
Total Number of University Level Institutions	367
Total Number of Universities under UGC Purview	317
Number of Universities actually funded by the UGC	164
Number of Universities accredited by the NAAC	128
Number of Universities accredited by the NAAC and scoring above 60%	128

It is important to understand that most of these colleges are left out of the UGC purview simply because they fail to meet the minimum prescribed requirements of physical and human infrastructure. At the same time, it is also a harsh reality that given the average enrolment size of 500 per colleges, these left out colleges must be catering to the needs of approximately 30 to 40 Lakh students in the country. What is even more painful is the fact that most of these colleges are located in rural and distant areas catering to the needs of the most deprived and under-privileged sections of the society. At the national level, efforts should, therefore, focus on strengthening these colleges so as to make them fulfill the eligibility requirements.

It is, therefore, proposed that adequate development assistance must be provided to all the 8272 left out colleges and 153 universities (including 45 deemed universities) to enable them meet the minimum eligibility requirements so as to be able to access further development grants in future.

It is evident that there is a wide variation in quality of standard across different types of universities and colleges.

Even the universities that have been receiving the UGC development assistance are found to be of varying quality. An analysis of 111 universities that were accredited by the NAAC up to 2001 bears testimony to the fact.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on HRD in its 172^nd Report has recommended that the NAAC should start accrediting individual departments also of a university in addition to its overall grading, at the earliest. The committee emphasizes the urgent needs to identify efficient ways and effective strategies for expediting the assessment and accreditation by NAAC within a stipulated time frame.
9.5. It is suggested that the following existing schemes on quality improvement may be continued: -
1. Universities with Potential for Excellence (UPE)

2. Colleges with potential for Excellence (CPE)

3. Special Assistance Programme (SAP)

4. Major Research Project (MRP)

5. Faculty Improvement Programme (FIP)

9.6 The following New Schemes for Quality Improvements are proposed during XI Plan:

1. 
   Establishment of IQAC in NAAC accredited Colleges, with a provision to appoint a full-time coordinator of IQAC.
   
2. 
   Support for quality improvement in teaching and learning through appropriate project development and funding. Funding to be made on specific/focused training modules as approved by an expert committee.
   
3. 
   National qualifications frame work to be developed through funded research projects.
   
4. 
   Strengthening of College Development Councils in Universities
   
5. 
   Bench marking of best practices in the Institutions and incentives for innovative benchmark developments.
   
6. 
   ICT training for teachers may be made mandatory in a phased manner.
   
7. 
   The ‘in house’ capacity (Staff and resources) of NAAC to be enhanced as a National Quality Assurance Agency.
   
8. 
   A thorough review of criteria for recognition, to receive financial assistance under sections 2(f) and 12B of the UGC Act.