Chapter 14.: “Invasion” of Foreign Education

Some other important titles are:

1.  Peterson’s College & University Almanac,

2.  Applying to Colleges and Universities in the United States – A Handbook for International Students (Peterson’s),

3.  Index of Majors and Graduate Degrees,

4.  Accredited Institutions of Postsecondary Education, Programs and Candidates for Accreditation (American Council of Education, Washington, DC).

Russian Education

The erstwhile Soviet Union had been for a long time a destination of choice for many Indian studying science and technology and medicine. Till the country split, students went under exchange agreements between the two nations. Indian students were attracted by low and highly subsidised tuition fees. The education was also of high standard. However, after the disintegration of the country in 1991 there is all-round confusion. Starved of government funds, education institutions in the constituent countries of the Soviet Union started aggressive marketing of their courses to get as many students as possible, often diluting the entry requirements so as to swell the numbers.

Many Indian students who could not get admissions in any professionals elsewhere started opting for these countries. Taking advantage of the break-up of a centralised education system, consulting firms sprouted in major cities of India. Display advertisements with such heading as “Hurry! The Time is Very Short – Study in Tajiskitan/Krighizxistan”, “Life Time Opportunity to Students – Representatives of Top Russian Universities are in Town to Offer on-the-spot Admission”, “Admission on first come, first serve basis” flooded the newspapers.

The unscrupulous agents/counsellors started sending unsuspecting Indian students to some Russian medical colleges whose diplomas are not recognised in India. Often they collected tuition fees for the full course, while actually paying the college for on year only. Some advertisement promised MBBS degrees although the nomenclature of Russian medical degree is MD (Physician). In 1994, the Government of India and the Russian Federation’s Committee for Higher Education signed an agreement to regulate admissions to 9 medical and 15 engineering universities.

The Educational Consultants India Ltd. (EdCIL) was authorised to select students for these universities. The All India Council for Technical Education and the Medical Council of India were associated with the agreement. The fate of this agreement in not known. However, the confusion about the recognition of the medical universities persists. The Medical Council of India (MCI) earlier recognised 29 medical universities listed in Part II of the Third Schedule of the Indian about the deterioration in the quality of education offered by several universities and planned to introduce a screening test for registering students qualifying from the Russian universities.

At one stage, MCI recommended the derecognition of these medical degrees. However, of late, the Government of India has decided against such a step. Students aspiring for going to Russia for higher studies should, therefore, elicit the current status from the concerned regulatory authorities.

Canadian Education

Canada claims that its education is of high standards. Tuition and living costs for international students are lower than in the USA, UK and Australia. Information about Canadian education is available form Canadian Education Centre India D-1/56 Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 and from the website www.studyincanada.com

Franchising, Twinning and Distance Learning Modes

Franchising (often called tie-ups) by foreign universities and delivering distance education from abroad are new phenomena. Foreign universities enter into agreements with Indian institutions for conducting courses on their behalf and the former award degrees to successful candidates. The franchised institutions and local facilitators of distance education courses promise high quality reading material, lectures by teachers of the foreign counterparts, air-conditioned class-rooms, good library and computer facilities and access to Internet.

In some franchise arrangements, there area provisions for students completing part of the course in India, then transferring the full credits to the foreign university and completing the course there. This is known as “twinning program”. The fees charged are exceptionally high by Indian standards. Several institutions affiliated to universities have now started entering into franchise agreements, thus running a parallel system.

Perils of Foreign “Invasion”

It is in this context that the report “Internationalisation of Higher Education – Exporting Education to Developing and Transitional Economies”, deserves attention. The report authored by Paul Bennell and Tarry and published by the Institute of Development Studies at the Sussex University (UK) refers to the cut-throat competition among the universities in Britain, the USA and Australia for franchising overseas institutions to offer their courses. The authors have likened this new phenomenon to Cocoa-cola and McDonald’s Corporations awarding franchises ”to companies and entrepreneurs in overseas countries to produce their products…”.

They had predicted potentially dire effects for institutions in developing countries which are likely to lose out to foreign universities promoting what they called “prestigious and portable qualifications:. They had warned, “just as trade liberalisation has resulted in large swathes of the industrial sector being wiped out in many countries, as higher education becomes increasingly privatised, then the threat posed by foreign providers becomes equally real”.

In Britain, the growth of “hybrid overseas validated courses”, as they are known, has been driven primarily by the case-strapped polytechnic-turned-universities which account for nearly two-thirds of such courses. In contrast, many of the older universities including Oxford, Cambridge and Edinburgh have none of these courses abroad which the report attributes, to “a desire on their part to maintain the international standards and exclusiveness of their qualifications.”

Critical articles accusing the universities for the “demeaning” of traditional British academic standards overseas now regularly appear in the British press. The well known American educationist, Prof. Phillip G Altbach, who is well-acquainted with the Indian academic scene, has warned against the perils of internationalising higher education in the article “Globalising higher education – buyers beware”. He has identified several problems created by the multi-nationalisation of higher education.

Among them are: “quality control – how can off shore providers be regulated and how quality be ensured? information – who can tell which are worthwhile programmes offered by reputable institutions and which are low quality sold just to make a quick profit? fit – do the programmes meet a local need and do they contribute to the higher education system and do they relate to local institutions? Costs and benefits – are the programs worth what is charged for them?” (Christian Science Monitor, May 13, 1999)

While he is against imposing too many controls which may stifle new ideas, he is of the opinion that”… the current wave of multi-nationalising higher education brings with it the dangers of total lack of regulation and control. It is a bad idea, in education at least, to permit caveat emptor to dominate”.

As press reports suggest, the Ministry of Human Resource Development is still debating for the last several years whether it should “facilitate” or “regulate” the entry of foreign educational institutions or “systematize” their operations. This is despite the fact that the issue had been discussed by a “task force”, the committee of Secretaries, the Cabinet Secretariat”, a “working group” and a “core group”. The dominant view is against outright banning the entry in this era of globalisation. The need is to ensure that there is no crass commercialisation and that the students do not become victims of sub standard institutions.

Recognition and Equivalence of Foreign Degrees

Two major problems posed by the proliferation of foreign degrees offered by franchisee institutions are the recognition of degrees and the determination of their equivalence in India, both for the purposes of employment and admissions. As stated in Chapter 7 (Regulatory Authorities), the Association of Indian Universities (AIU) is responsible for determining the equivalence of foreign degrees with the Indian ones. In September 1993, in a press release, it warned Indian students not to fall prey to advertisement for admission to foreign universities as “difficulties may arise in acceptance of these qualifications… there is no automatic process/blanket recognition of foreign qualifications available in Indian universities”.

It also pointed out that some of the foreign universities are not listed as accredited institutions of post-secondary education in their own country and therefore, the recognition in India may not arise at all. In a few other cases comparable awards may not be offered in Indian universities making it difficult to establish the equivalence.

On September 11, 1997, the Madras High Court directed that the Indian Collaborators and franchisees of foreign universities and institutions must mention in advertisement, prospectuses and application forms the fact that the degrees awarded are not recognised by the UGC, AIU and AICTE or the Central and State Governments.

However, the orders are observed more in breach even by well-known educational institutions. The AICTE which is the regulatory authority for most of the disciplines offered by the franchised institutions had also through public notices, drawn the attention of students to this judgement and had warned that “the students or the candidates aspiring admission to such foreign universities/agencies should do so at their own risk”.

Recently, the AIU had notified that it would consider the grant of equivalence (not recognition) to degrees awarded by foreign universities operation in India, in collaboration with various academic institutions, subject to the following conditions:

1.  The Indian counterpart has adequate infrastructure and facilities as substantiated by the report of Review Committee of the AIU,

2.  The programme is implemented jointly by the foreign and Indian universities or academic institutions affiliated to them, with both contributing to academic programme in approximately equal measure,

3.  The foreign university gives an undertaking, in the form of a certificate that the degree/diploma awarded to the students in India would be considered as equivalent to the corresponding degree/diploma awarded by the University at home and that it would be recognised in that country as being equivalent to the corresponding degree/diploma of the awarding university.

The Review Committee appointed by the AIU would inspect the facilities on the Indian Campus. Its report would be considered by the Equivalence Committee/Standing Committee of the AIU. The recognition granted would be valid for three years (University News May 31, 1999, August 23, 1999). However, the success of this measure would largely depend upon how effectively AIU ascertains, among others, the credibility of foreign providers and the relevance of their programmes in India.

The AICTE has also been sounding a note of caution that candidates must be wary of substandard professional courses. They must make sure that the institutions and the courses must be accredited in its own country. All told, the students should understand that the glib talks of consultants or the flashy advertisements in newspapers are not substitutes for ascertaining correct information from credible sources.