Now for other issues

It was always obvious that the issue of fees that the institutes of management and technology should charge, was not something for a court to decide.

So it is no surprise that the Supreme Court has given short shrift to the public interest litigation brought before it, while extracting a promise from the government that it will not interfere in the functioning of the IIMs, which technically speaking are run by autonomous societies set up by the government. The government will now enforce its diktat on fees, on the strength of the argument that it will make up the shortfall.

While there is nothing to stop the government from doing so "" since public opinion on the subject has been completely ignored "" there is no getting away from the conclusion that this is a sub-optimal denouement.

While there is nothing that can be done on the issue now other than to let Dr Joshi go his misguided way, there may still be opportunity now to address some of the other questions that have cropped up in the course of the extended debate over student fees.

For instance, are the management institutes being run efficiently, and is it true (as has been alleged) that some of them have far too many supporting staff on their rolls?

Can they take in more students, and increase the teaching faculty's load without affecting the quality of education offered or adding to land and buildings?

Should the institutes consider increasing the range of mid-career, advanced management courses that are the real money-spinners for B-schools everywhere?

Should the faculty be subjected to more rigorous scrutiny on the quality of their lecture programmes, and expected to conduct more research, develop Indian business case studies, and the like?

Should firmer relationships be established with the leading B-schools overseas, and faculty be exchanged for the infusion of new ideas and fresh thinking? Can the institutes wrest greater autonomy for their day-to-day functioning, on fairly simple issues like faculty travel?

The debate on fees has also helped focus attention on the UR Rao Committee report, which has not been made public but which has reportedly pointed to the manifold problems of the second and third rung B-schools in the country, which constitute the majority of the 950 that have received official recognition.

It is clear that students hungry for a professional diploma and for a leg up in the job market, are willing to pay exorbitant sums for sub-standard management education at institutes that lack the basic facilities and a proper full-time faculty.

Certainly, the functioning of the All India Council on Technical Education, which has presided over (if not created) this mess, needs to be reviewed and corrective action taken.

The government, on its part, should consider launching a need-based all-India scholarship programme that should be open to all students who get merit-based admission to the best quality professional colleges and institutes (and here one could include the medical colleges, architectural courses and so on).

The programme could be a grant-cum-loan scheme so that it is not a complete giveaway, and would address the charge that students from disadvantaged backgrounds are stopped at the entrance door of the country's best professional institutes.

If all of this can get done, then the controversy over fees would have produced some positive side-effects.