The past, present & future of India’s National Institute Ranking Framework

The India-centric ranking framework that was launched by the Narendra Modi government in 2015 has gained popularity over the years and witnessed a 103% increase in the number of higher education institutions participating in it between 2016 and 2022. But seven years since it was launched, how close is the ranking system — which found IIT-Madras, IISc-Bangalore, and IIT-Bombay as the top scorers — at par with international systems like QS rankings?

HT spoke to several stakeholders, including officials from the education ministry, top universities and institutes and educationists, and found that the introduction of NIRF has created “internal competition” among Indian higher education institutions, while encouraging them to adopt the best practices of their counterparts. However, there are still apprehensions over the comparison of multidisciplinary universities with single-discipline institutes, and the yearly cycle of NIRF.

NIRF Ranking 2022 List: Delhi University slips down, list of top-25 institutes

As the government aspires to make NIRF global, HT looks at this genesis and explains why and when did the government decide to rank universities and colleges, and how helpful it turned out for Indian institutions.

The background

In August 2014, just months after the Modi-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government took charge, a one-day workshop on rankings was held where representatives from central universities, NITs, IIITs, and other higher education institutions were invited. During the workshop, it was decided to constitute a committee on evolving a National Ranking Framework in the country. In October of the same year, a 16-member committee was constituted comprising directors of IITs and IIMs.

The idea of NIRF originates from global rankings, including QS World University Rankings and the Times Higher Education World University Ranking, and the performance of Indian universities in these rankings. There was a mutual feeling between the government and government-run higher education institutions to have a ranking system of their own.

According to a senior official who was associated with the Union education ministry between 2010 to 2015, the University Grants Commission (UGC) first started the discussion on India’s own ranking system in 2010. “India wanted to launch its own ranking system because our higher education institutions were not performing well in global rankings due to several subjective criteria used by them including academic reputation and internationalization. It was constantly demotivating the universities. When Smriti Irani took over as the Union education minister in 2014, Irani pushed the process and made it a reality,” the official said.

A year later, in September 2015, the Union education ministry, earlier known as Union human resource and development ministry, announced the creation of the “India-centric ranking framework”.

In the NIRF methodology document launched in September 2015, Irani said, “The primary purpose of this framework is to galvanize Indian institutions towards a competitive environment that exists in the world today. Clear definition and identification of key parameters can help institutions work sincerely towards improving their ranking. These parameters are strong pointers for the quality of scholarship of the faculty and students and the student-caring culture of the institutions. There is also a strong message in the chosen parameters, which is particularly relevant to the education scenario in our country.”

“The Ranking framework will empower a larger number of Indian Institutions to participate in the global rankings and create a significant impact internationally too. I see this as a sensitisation process and an empowering tool, and not a tool for protection,” she added.

The first NIRF rankings were launched in 2016.

The methodology: Theirs Vs Ours

The major challenge for the core committee was to come up with parameters that make it more suitable for Indian institutions. The NIRF decided to assess education institutions on five broad parameters: teaching, learning and resources; research and professional practices; graduation outcomes; outreach and inclusivity; and perception. The NIRF gives the same weightage, 100 marks, to all five broad parameters. It also takes micro details such as financial utilisation, research publications, women enrolment, and a percentage of students from socially backward backgrounds into consideration under these five parameters.

However, on the other hand, the global ranking systems majorly use broader and subjective parameters to assess institutions. For instance, the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings (WUR) considers the following parameters: Academic reputation (40%), employer reputation (10%), faculty/student ratio (20%), citations per faculty (20%), international students (5%) ratio and international faculty ratio (5%). Here 50% weightage is given to the reputation of universities globally, and academicians say that it’s totally “subjective” in nature. Besides, the representation of foreign students and faculty is another area where Indian universities are at disadvantage.

NIRF also gives weightage to “perception” as a parameter, but assesses it in the Indian context and not globally. “This is done through a survey conducted over a large category of academics, institution heads, members of funding agencies in government, private sector, NGOs, and so on. It makes a huge difference when we carry out such a survey for Indian universities in India and when it happens globally,” a senior ministry official said.

Presently, the NIRF ranks institutions under 11 categories — overall, university, colleges, engineering, management, pharmacy, law, medical, architecture, dental, and research. A new category ‘innovation and entrepreneurship will be added to the list next year.

The higher education institutions apply to participate in the rankings and provide the necessary details and data through an online Data Capturing System (DCS) every year. Besides, data is collected through various third-party sources. Once the institutes submit the required information, the NIRF verifies and analyses the data and releases the rankings. According to officials, it takes five to six months to complete the process and declare the rankings.

How NIRF helped higher education: Stakeholders speak

According to academicians, the NIRF has helped Indian institutions in different ways including by adopting best practices from each other. V Ramgopal Rao, former director of IIT Delhi, said that it helped higher education institutions understand what their counterparts are doing and implement their good practices on their campuses. “For instance, in the case of IIT-Madras, which is constantly dominating the NIRF ranking, the technology park they have maintained at their campus has made a huge difference. This has pushed them ahead of other institutions. Many other institutions are now building technology parks at their campuses,” he said.

Academicians said that the NIRF helped develop the culture of “healthy internal competition” among Indian universities. “NIRF has started the culture of rankings in India. It’s like a mirror to us. And every year it makes us realise where we stand and what we have to do to perform better. It has helped generate a competitive spirit among Indian education institutions which was lacking earlier,” said Najma Akhtar, vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia.

Some also think that NIRF has helped increase the visibility of Indian universities. “NIRF is more realistic. It has helped Indian universities increase their legitimacy and visibility over the years,” said Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) vice-chancellor Santishree Pandit.

However, these academics said there is still scope for NIRF to further improve. For instance, Rao suggested that the rankings can be done after every two years instead of every year. “Nothing much changes in any institute in one year. In a two-year cycle, even the data verification can be completed following the peer review process under which the institute ranked below must verify the authenticity of the data submitted by the institute ranked above. That way, they get to learn more about the institution ranked above and learn from their best practices. Since all data will be verified by a peer institution, there will be much better transparency in the process,” he said.

Pandit said that the NIRF should not assess multidisciplinary universities along with single-discipline institutions on the same parameters. “The parameters are good. But need to differentiate between universities and single discipline institutes. It needs to have more variables of reducing economic and social disparity, inclusion, and diversity,” she said.

Why are Indian universities still lagging in QS rankings?

In QS rankings, while Indian institutions perform well in other indicators, they struggle to score better in the “reputation” parameter, which carries 50% weightage overall, and in attracting a high number of international faculty and students.

To identify the issue, the government in 2018 launched a Study in India programme to attract foreign students. However, despite all efforts, only three Indian institutions including the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) in Bangalore, and the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) in Bombay and Delhi, have made it to the top 200 in the QS rankings so far.

The efforts to improve the intake of foreign students in Indian universities are still on. In the recently held three-day education summit in Varanasi, organised by the education ministry, universities were also asked to attract greater numbers of international students and achieve the goal of internationalisation at home. They were encouraged to create provisions for supernumerary seats for foreign students to increase their enrolment.

How will the globalisation of NIRF help?

Seven years after its launch, the NIRF is yet to go global. However, the education minister Dharmendra Pradhan on Friday said that India will soon invite foreign institutions to participate in NIRF. Presently, only Indian institutions are allowed to participate in NIRF rankings.

A senior official in the ministry, requesting anonymity said, “This will enable any university from across the world to participate in India’s NIRF ranking like Indian institutions are participating in global ranking systems. The ministry is still preparing a roadmap for this shift. We may first start with some neighbouring countries.”

The basic idea behind the proposed move is to make NIRF more “credible” and to help increase the “reputation” of Indian universities globally. “Once NIRF becomes global, it will give a new identity to Indian universities. When the foreign universities compete with our universities, it will make our higher education institutions more visible in their respective countries,” the official quoted above said.

The idea was also supported by academicians. Former IIT-Delhi director Rao said, “The time has come for India to identify the top 50 higher education institutions from across the globe and compare them with the top Indian higher education institutions. There is a lot of data available in the public domain based on which the comparison can be made. It will help the top Indian institutions to understand where they are standing and help them to set new benchmarks for themselves,” Rao said.

Akhtar said that taking NIRF globally will help attract foreign students to Indian universities. “This will also encourage more collaborations between Indian and foreign universities. It will automatically help Indian institutions to perform better in the International ranking system,” she said.