Access and quality in higher education entwined, shape policy and reform: NAAC

Mumbai: Access and quality in higher education are no longer parallel concerns; they are now deeply intertwined, shaping the direction of policy and reform. It is this lens that Nageshwar Rao brings to his new role of executive committee chairman at the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), at a time when the accreditation process itself remains paused and under review, prompting questions on both reach and quality.

Speaking to TOI, Rao, former vice-chancellor of Indira Gandhi National Open University, signalled urgency. “The time has come when we cannot stop any activity related to quality,” he said, referring to the nearly two-year pause in grading. A new framework, built around basic (binary) accreditation and Maturity-Based Graded Levels, is in the works, but the transition, he admitted, has been complex, driven by the need to align with global standards while staying rooted in India’s context.

Even as the framework evolves, a more immediate concern looms: reach.

India has more than 1,000 universities, but only about 44% have been accredited. The gap widens sharply at the college level. Of nearly 45,000 colleges, just around 17% hold valid accreditation today. “If only a fraction of institutions participate, the very purpose of accreditation stands defeated,” Rao said.

The hesitation, he indicated, is not without reason. For many institutions, especially older colleges, accreditation is still seen as a “regulatory check” rather than a collaborative “quality improvement”. “They feel, once we are legally permitted to operate, what more is being asked of us?” he said. In principle, accreditation is designed as a two-way, diagnostic exercise, but that message has not adequately reached institutions.

There are practical barriers as well. Some institutions opt out after a single accreditation cycle, wary of possible downgrades. Others find the process cumbersome, language-heavy, or dependent on external help. Incentive schemes, including funding linked to accreditation grades, have had limited impact in expanding participation, he added.

The outcome is an uneven landscape: a handful of institutions align themselves with global benchmarks, while a large majority remain outside any formal quality assurance system.

Rao’s focus, therefore, is on expanding “access to quality”. This means widening accreditation coverage across govt, aided, autonomous and private institutions, segments where the gaps remain significant. Nearly 90% of private colleges, 80% of govt colleges and around 60% of aided institutions are yet to be accredited. “We have to target the colleges where most students are. That is where NAAC’s reach is missing,” he said.

The implications, he pointed out, are long term. “If we aim for a developed India by 2047 with only 17% of institutions accredited, it will not serve the purpose.”

Addressing this, he suggested, will require both simplification and trust-building, making processes easier, possibly in regional languages, reducing procedural complexity and repositioning NAAC as a facilitator rather than an “inspector”.

He also acknowledged aspirations for higher grades by institutions, and improvements in NAAC governance to control it will need closer scrutiny. For now, however, the immediate priority is operational: to restart accreditation, expand its footprint and restore momentum to a system that sits at the heart of quality assurance in higher education.