The universities have to serve a two-fold purpose. First, they will have to train men who will take up the affairs of the State. They will also be training persons who will be training the future generation of students. They have also to be at the same time centres of creative effort in our country. Now, all these attempted things are in all universities. In our country the ancient practice had been that the torch of learning was kept lit by the teacher. I think, even when we have this modern paraphernalia, we will ultimately have to go to the teacher to have the inspiration and the necessary guidance in all matters concerning education.
I do not think that the problem of education is a problem of simply setting up standards. It is not a problem of regimentation. It is not merely by specifying that the boys should attain such and such a standard that you will be able to achieve your end, and solve the problem. The most important agents here are the people who serve you in the colleges, in the universities, in the laboratories, and in the different research institutes.
Ultimately, they are the persons—who have been working there all the time—who have got the experience and who will be able to tell you exactly what is needed, if you want to improve the standards of education in our land. I feel that it will be a terrible task for any Commission if you simply say that they will have to recommend to the universities the measures necessary for the reform and the improvement of university education.
I do not think, Sir, that you will be able to find in this land persons who will be ready to take upon themselves this terrible responsibility of guiding the course of education through the various mazes of subjects which the different universities now teach. Therefore, Sir, I think that the aim of this Bill should be a modest one. It is only necessary to co-ordinate the standards of teaching and examinations.
I think, at the present moment, there is an inter-university board, where we have discussions about these subjects, but these discussions have been mostly ineffective. The setting up of this Commission is thus very welcome. Very often, the universities themselves have felt the need for reforms, for introducing modern methods to attain a higher standard of efficiency, but they have not been able to do much in this direction for want of funds.
Also read: If you want an efficient all-India service, allow them to open their mouth freely—Sardar Patel
I am not going to repeat, Sir, the various figures that have been quoted by the various speakers who have pointed out the extreme paucity of the grants that we have been allocating up to the present moment to the universities, and to the cause of education generally. I think, therefore, that we should ask the Select Committee, which will go into the provisions of this Bill, to see that the task of this Commission is circumscribed and limited to mainly solving the question of coordination and determination of standards of teaching in the different universities, and also to the question of studying carefully and sympathetically the demands of the various universities about grants, giving due consideration to the developments in those particular universities.
I, therefore, feel, Sir, that sub-clause (c) of clause 12 of this Bill should be omitted, or at any rate, should be reworded as follows: “recommend to any university the measures necessary for the maintenance of standards of teaching and examination.” That is all that is necessary.
I feel, Sir, that any step that you are going to take about improvement of education will bear fruit only when you are able to inspire a spirit of cooperation among all the teachers in the different universities of India. It has, of course, been suggested that this particular Commission would be able to solve the problem of education in this country. I may, however, point out that in this task we will ultimately have to depend upon the responsible people that are in charge of education inside the universities.
I also know, Sir, that every teacher in our country is alive to his responsibility, and the corporate bodies that we have set up in our land are also serious about their tasks. I do not feel, Sir, that the standard of our universities has gone down to a very ludicrous level. I do not feel so, because I remember the long list of persons that have been turned out by these universities who had served the national cause, and who have been and who still continue to be the leaders of thought in our country.
We also remember, Sir, that in many of these universities, there are young people and workers who have achieved fame and distinction, who have contributed substantially to the cause of learning, and who have made the name of India respected in different lands. Therefore, Sir, you need not have any misgivings about the way in which work is being done in our universities.
All that is wanted is that you should be generous, and you should set up an efficient machinery which should be able to get in touch with the people who work at different centres, and should find out what they need. And you should be able to supply those needs in the form of grants, which may either be given out of the consolidated fund of the government or out of the fund which is set apart for this purpose, and which would be administered by the Commission.
Secondly, Sir, about the composition of the Commission, I feel you may have some representatives from the government services in order just to tell the Commission about the particular needs—of the public services—or of your army, or of your defence etc. But still, Sir, the number should not be such as to overweigh other considerations in this particular field. I think the best advisers can be only those persons who have been working for the cause of education, or even our vice chancellors.
I am not sure, Sir, whether a very large number of members of this Commission is really needed for that particular purpose—to lay down the rules in a non-interfering spirit, etc. I am afraid, Sir, that some of the clauses that have been incorporated in this Bill may be read in a way which may suggest that the central government will be interfering with the normal working of these universities. I think this question should be gone into by the Select Committee and the provisions amended to remove this impression.
About the terms and conditions of appointment I suggest that all appointments should be at least for a period of six years. You cannot really hope for any results in a lesser number of years, and any member of the Commission cannot have that particular sense of responsibility, if you say that he may have to go out after a year or two. From the way things move in our country we may presume that at least a year will elapse before the members of the Commission are able to understand the problems and the needs of the different universities in India.
And if you ask them to go out after two or three years, I do not think that they will feel themselves responsible enough, and the whole burden of working out the aims of this Bill will shift upon the perpetual members, who will be government servants, or perhaps on only the chairman.
Therefore, I suggest this as an alternative: Let the number of the members be limited to about five as originally suggested by the University Commission, but let them be responsible people and let them be entrusted with the task of looking to the needs of the different universities and let this work be left with them for a certain number of years.
We have been talking about planning and it has become customary to talk about a term of five years; why not think of the University Commission enquiring into the needs of the universities in the same way and allot a period of five or six years for its work? Choose your commissioners and entrust them with this particular task.
Let them be sympathetic persons who understand these problems, who wiH go to and consult the different universities, find out their needs and see what particular subjects can be fostered or nourished in any particular place. India is a vast country and it need not be that all the universities should grow up according to the same pattern.
What is really wanted is that the standard should be kept more or less at a certain degree of efficiency so that the persons that we want, the workers that the State may require have got the requisite amount of general education. At the same time, you should allow the different universities to specialise in particular subjects for which the teachers in that particular corner of the country may be famous. Formerly, it was customary for the student to go to the teacher.
Now also there should be some way found by means of which students from one part of the country may travel easily to another part where they can find teachers who are famous for the particular subject in which they are interested. Such a custom prevails in Germany, and I think it would not be difficult for this country also to bring about a similar arrangement by which students from one part of our country may go over to another part and finish their education at a third university if necessary.
I suggest this from a certain point of view. I am not only thinking of the efficient teachers who will be working at a certain corner of our country; but this custom, if allowed to grow, will bring about a healthy interchange of students among different parts of the country. We all want India.
The future generation of Indians who will be able to travel about and see the country for themselves will be able to understand the aspirations of the different sections in our country. I think the University Grants Commission (UGC) should also consider the feasibility of introducing this practice in our universities and I request the Select Committee to take into their consideration this suggestion that I have made.
This is part of ThePrint’s Great Speeches series. It features speeches and debates that shaped modern India.