The recent news of NAAC (National Assessment and Accreditation Council) delisting about 900 assessors and the arrest of some top academics of some universities by CBI sleuths last month over bribery charges revealed that they were linked to a bribery racket involving NAAC team members and a private university in Andhra Pradesh that was attempting to get a better NAAC ranking.

The arrested include a few NAAC assessors from different universities and a few officials from the private university that wanted to obtain an A++ accreditation. The action proved the worst fears of academics who feel that arrests like these were waiting to happen. They feel that there are a few systemic issues that need to be fixed immediately.

The NAAC was established in 1994 as an autonomous institution of the University Grants Commission (UGC) to promote quality in Indian higher education institutions (HEIs). It conducts assessments and accreditation of these institutions and advises State and Central governments through analysis of accreditation reports. NAAC assesses institutions based on quality standards, evaluating their performance from processes to research and infrastructure, among others. However, the assessment system has been facing criticism on several counts for the last few years.

NAAC ratings

The branding and marketing around NAAC rankings seem to have a massive impact. With a large number of private universities sprouting over the last few years, NAAC ratings assumed significance as universities began to go to town with their top rankings.

Since the stakes are high, some universities are reportedly trying to take to underhand methods to earn a better rank so that they can use it in their brand campaigns.

Tracing the origins of the Council, VS Prasad, former Director of NAAC, and an educator for over 50 years, said that its creation was driven by factors including economic reforms influencing quality management practices, the 1986 Education Policy’s call for an independent quality assurance agency, international quality assurance practices and the changing landscape for higher education in India.

Refusing to talk on the current happenings around the NAAC, Prasad recounted its contributions to higher education over the last few years and how it helped the institutes improve quality.

He, however, felt that “we are currently in an assessment trap”. He felt that it was like engaging in quality assessment of universities without clearly knowing what its purpose is or narrowly interpreting its purpose. Prasad, who helmed the Council for five years from 2003, admitted that there should be some element of measurement, but that should not be the sole aim of the assessment. He also called for the strengthening of internal systems of educational systems. “The assessments and rankings should only be indicative. They can’t be conclusive,” he said.

There is also a criticism that public universities, particularly the State universities, are not equipped to meet the stringent quality parameters set by the Council and get a good ranking. Faced with an acute shortage of funds and staff, the public universities are no match to their peers in the private sector with deep pockets.

If the issues around pre-NAAC assessment are shrouded with several issues, the post-accreditation phase also poses several challenges. Critics say there are no systems in place in several HEIs to maintain the quality parameters once they achieve an NAAC rating. Though the Council insists that HEIs should have quality assurance cells, they are mostly ineffective in most institutions.

The NAAC has swung into action and has thoroughly assessed the situation and initiated an initiative to cleanse the system. “While the target of 50 per cent GER (gross enrolment ratio) in higher education by 2035 has been set to leverage the potential of the growing young population of India, the need for enhancing the quality of higher education is of paramount importance to the nation,” Ganesan Kannabiran, Director of NAAC, said in a recent newsletter of the Council.

Published on March 3, 2025