28 Aug 2020: Indian Express Editorial Analysis

Indian Express Editorial Analysis
28 August 2020

1) Burdening the states-

GS 2- Functions and responsibilities of the Union and the States, issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure

CONTEXT:

  1. The economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic has deepened the faultlines in Centre-state fiscal relations.
  2. A key sore point that has emerged in recent months is that of compensating states for the shortfall in their protected GST revenues — collections from the compensation cess will not be enough to offset the shortfalls this year.

 

 

RENEGING PROMISE:

  1. The option that the Centre has now presented to states is allowing them to borrow the amount of the shortfall through an arrangement with the RBI, facilitated by the Centre.
  2. This suggests that rather than taking the burden of compensating states on itself, as was originally promised, the Centre has shifted the weight of meeting the shortfall in collections to the states.
  3. While the states have requested for a seven-day period to think this over, they may have no option but to accept these terms.
  4. However, shifting the burden on to the states is tantamount to the Centre reneging(break) on its promise of protecting their revenues.
  5. It strikes at the very foundation of the original agreement between the Centre and states on GST.

 

SHORTFALL IN COLLECTION:

  1. As per the Finance Ministry, the shortfall in state GST collections this year is likely to be around Rs 3 lakh crore. Of this, Rs 65,000 crore will be collected through the cess route, implying a shortfall of Rs 2.35 lakh crore.
  2. The compensation due, but not paid to states, for the April-July period stands at Rs 1.5 lakh crore, as against cess collections of only Rs 14,482 crore in the first quarter of the current financial year.
  3. To bridge this growing gap between cess collections and GST shortfalls, state finance ministers had laid out several alternatives.
  4. Some proposed that the GST Council be allowed to raise funds, securitised against future cess collections.
  5. Others had suggested increasing the cess levied on products. Another option, one preferred by several states, was for the Centre to borrow the funds and transfer to the states.
  6. While these options have been debated upon for several months, the Centre has rejected all of them.
  7. For states, revenue from GST accounts for roughly a third of their revenue receipts in 2019-20 (BE).
  8. Thus, any reluctance on their part to borrow more to finance these shortfalls (it would add to their debt burden), coupled with further shortfalls in flow of resources to them (tax devolution is likely to be lower), would force them to cut back on spending, imparting a contractionary fiscal impulse to the economy, at a time when there is a growing clamour(request) for loosening the purse strings(control on money).

 

CONCLUSION:

At the current juncture when states are at the forefront of fighting the pandemic, the Centre should have assured them of adequate funds.

Centre’s refusal to compensate for GST shortfalls could impart contractionary fiscal impulse to economy.

 

 

2) Testing times-

GS 2- Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Education

CONTEXT:

The Joint Entrance Examination to the IITs and the National Eligibility cum Entrance Tests for medical institutes are slated for September.

 

 

 

POSTPONEMENT:

  1. Both the tests have been postponed twice — the JEE was originally scheduled in April, then deferred to July; the NEET slated for May was also pushed to July.
  2. With the COVID pandemic showing no sign of letting up, they were rescheduled again. Now, there is a chorus of opposition to holding these examinations next month.
  3. On Wednesday, chief ministers of seven states threatened to move the Supreme Court to seek the deferment of NEET-JEE — this, after the Court had made it clear last week that it is against putting off these examinations any further.
  4. So far, the government has been unequivocal(not confused) about the September schedule — it should not buckle down.

 

CHALLENGE:

  1. The virus does introduce several challenges to the task of holding examinations.
  2. But given that the COVID curve continues its upward climb, at different rates in different states, there is no evidence that delaying the exams — by weeks or months — will reduce the risk.
  3. To ensure trust and a level playing field across income groups, an online examination is challenging to administer.
  4. Given the numbers who take these tests, losing an entire year in these colleges isn’t an option. This would have a cascading effect on the next year.
  5. In short, the test is an unavoidable and that needs to be done following the science.
  6. Today, a lot more is known about the virus than what was known in April — what precautions are needed, from masks to distancing for a test that will take three hours of a student at a desk.
  7. The epidemiological understanding is virtually mainstream now and has informed the lifting of restrictions on a range of activities.

 

 

PASSPORT TO DREAMS:

  1. This is also the thinking behind the Election Commission’s stated intention to hold the Bihar assembly elections; the Delhi government calling for resuming the Metro services; airlines planning to expand services.
  2. Everywhere, the discourse is how to open up while minimising the risk.
  3. That logic should drive these examinations as well.
  4. As this newspaper has reported, an average of Rs 150 is being spent per candidate to ensure COVID hygiene at the 660 centres across the country.
  5. But care should also be taken to ensure that holding the test now does not diminish the representative character of these institutes — socially, regionally and with respect to gender.
  6. The governments must ensure that the candidates can travel safely, and, in time, to the examination centres.
  7. For lakhs of young women and men, these tests are a passport to their hopes and aspirations.

 

CONCLUSION:

It’s the government’s responsibility to ensure that they get all they need to take the test — safely.

Yes, there are challenges but, on balance, deferring JEE, NEET doesn’t reduce risk; Govt should work to ensure safety.

 

3) Home and the World-

GS 2- Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Education

CONTEXT:

  1. The best indicators of a university’s performance are the learning outcomes and how its education has impacted the students and society.
  2. The hype surrounding the announcement of world university rankings by international ranking organisations is unfortunate.
  3. Regardless of whether the rankings are beneficial or not, more universities than ever before want to get into these rankings.
  4. The obsession to be within the top 100 universities in the world is exasperating(frustrating).
  5. Since there is a potential danger of creating elitism among universities through this ranking, lower-ranked universities may lose out on many counts.
  6. Some top-ranked universities want to collaborate only with other top-ranked universities, impairing(restricting) the less fortunate ones to further sink.

 

 

PERCEPTION:

  1. International ranking organisations also force universities to alter their core missions.
  2. This has happened with JNU. Although JNU ranks between 100 and 200 in certain disciplines, it does not find a place in world university rankings. The reason is JNU does not offer many undergraduate programmes.
  3. We were indirectly told to start more undergraduate programmes in order to scale the ranking order while our university is predominantly a research-oriented institution.
  4. First, let me state the obvious. Indian institutions lose out on perception, which carries almost 50 per cent weightage in many world university ranking schemes.
  5. Psychologists know that perception is a result of different stimuli such as knowledge, memories, and expectancies of people.
  6. While one can quantitatively measure the correlation between stimuli and perception, perception cannot be a quantifiable standalone parameter.
  7. Therefore, perception as a major component in the ranking process can easily lead to inaccurate or unreasonable conclusions.

 

CITATIONS:

  1. Rightly or wrongly, international ranking organisations use citations as a primary indicator of productivity and scientific impact a discipline makes.
  2. However, studies show that the number of citations per paper is highest in multidisciplinary sciences, general internal medicine, and biochemistry.
  3. It is the lowest in subjects such as visual and performing arts, literature and architecture.
  4. It is nobody’s case that the latter subjects are of any less importance.
  5. By making citations of published papers from a university as a strong parameter for rankings, we seem to have developed an inexplicable blind spot when it comes to the differences among subject disciplines.
  6. It is no wonder that universities such as JNU, whose student intake in science research programmes is less as compared to the other disciplines, will loose out in world university rankings although it has been rated as the second-best university in India.

 

RIGIDITY AND LACK OF TRANSPARENCY:

  1. International ranking organisations are too rigid in their methodology and are not willing to add either additional parameters or change the weightage of current parameters.
  2. They are disinclined to employ meaningful and universally fair benchmarks of quality and performance.
  3. This is an absolute requisite to take into account the diversity that prevails among the universities.
  4. Some Indian higher education institutions even decided not to participate in the world university rankings alleging a lack of transparency in the parameters that are used in the ranking process.
  5. Since universities are complex organisations with multiple objectives, comparing universities using a single numerical value is as ineffectual as comparing a civil engineer with a biologist or a linguist and a dancer.
  6. Hence, the danger that such skewed world rankings will downgrade the university education to a mere commodity is a realistic trepidation.
  7. This inelastic stance of ranking organisations has forced more than 70 countries to have their own national ranking systems for higher educational institutions.

 

NATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL RANKING FRAMEWORK:

  1. I had argued in an editorial in IETE Technical Review (March 2015) for India to have its own national ranking system.
  2. The MHRD established the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) in 2016.
  3. The parameters used by NIRF for ranking Indian institutions are also most suited for many other countries — among the parameters are teaching, learning & resources, research and professional practice, graduation outcomes, outreach and inclusivity and peer perception.
  4. Unlike international ranking organisations, NIRF gives only 10 per cent weightage for perception.
  5. In 2016, the NIRF rankings were given in four categories — University, Engineering, Management and Pharmacy. College, Medical, Law, Architecture and Dental were added in 2020.
  6. This shows how NIRF is refining its ranking methodology by taking inputs from the stakeholders, which the international ranking organisations seldom do.
  7. No right-minded person can plausibly argue against such a ranking system, which recognises and promotes the diversity and intrinsic strengths of Indian educational institutes.

 

CONCLUSION:

  1. International ranking organisations are often sightless about what it takes to build a world-class educational system as compared to a world-class university.
  2. If a country has a world-class educational system with a focus on innovation, best teaching-learning processes, research-oriented towards social good, affirmative action plans for inclusive and accessible education, it will have a more visible social and economic impact.
  3. Indian higher educational institutes need to ask themselves: What positive role can they play in improving the quality of higher education?
  4. What can we do to adopt innovative approaches to become future ready? And they need to act on those questions to make a change and plan beyond what is obvious.

 

  1. NIRF will stimulate healthy competition among Indian educational institutes, which should eventually lead to a world-class Indian educational system.
  2. This system will act as a catalyst for the transformation of local universities to world-class institutions.