Higher Education Institutions - Some Guidelines For Obtaining and Sustaining Autonomy in The Context of Nep 2020

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/348408191
Higher Education Institutions -Some Guidelines for Obtaining and Sustaining

Autonomy in the Context of Nep 2020
Article · January 2021
CITATIONS READS
0 178
2 authors, including:
Badrilal Gupta
National Institute of Technical Teachers' Training and Research, Bhopal
54 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Badrilal Gupta on 12 January 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of All Research Education and Scientific Methods (IJARESM), ISSN: 2455-6211
Volume 9, Issue 1, January-2021, Impact Factor: 7.429, Available online at: www.ijaresm.com
Higher Education Institutions – Some Guidelines for

Obtaining and Sustaining Autonomy in the Context of
Nep 2020
B. L. Gupta 1, Ajay Kumar Choubey2
1
Professor, Department of Education Management, NITTTR, Bhopal, India
2
JRF Department of Education Management, NITTTR, Bhopal, India
--------------------------------------------------------*****************--------------------------------------------------
ABSTRACT
The national education policy 2020 is the first policy of 21st century contemplating to reengineer the higher
education institutions for quality education and excellence. The policy states that HEIs will transform themselves to
provide quality education and thereby will get the accreditation. The accreditation of the institute will enable them
to receive autonomy, which will again result in quality improvement in education and research. They will get higher
level of accreditation, which will result in higher level of autonomy. The HEIs may traverse a path of quality,
accreditation and autonomy and may become multidisciplinary university. Autonomy is in focus for making
institutions accountable to the stakeholders. Harnessing the full potential of the institute and making them
responsive and innovative in due course of time. In this paper, literature on autonomy related to educational
institutions in India and overseas is reviewed on different dimensions perspectives and levels of autonomy. Based on
literature review, experiences of the authors and interaction with experts working in the autonomous institutions,
guidelines for obtaining and sustaining autonomy are stated.
Keywords: Autonomy, accountability, learners’ autonomy, types of autonomy.
I. INTRODUCTION
Government of India declared National Education Policy 2020. Quality universities and colleges are the vision for the
Higher education system. It is stated in the policy that quality higher education must aim to develop good, thoughtful, well-
rounded, and creative individuals. Policy provisions for higher and professional education are addressed in part II and part
III of the NEP 2020.
NEP 2020 Section 9.3 envisions a complete overhaul and re-energizing of the higher education system to overcome the
challenges and thereby deliver high-quality higher education, with equity and inclusion. It recommends to establish
multidisciplinary universities and higher education clusters and autonomous colleges. It states to move towards faculty and
institutional autonomy. It states that governance of HEIs will done by high qualified and independent boards having
academic and administrative autonomy.
NEP 2020 Section 10 states that an autonomous degree granting college (AC) will refer to a large multidisciplinary
institution of higher learning that grants undergraduate degrees and is primarily focused on undergraduate teaching though
it would not restricted to that and it need not be restricted to that and it would generally be smaller than a typical university.
NEP 2020 Section 10 states that a stage-wise mechanism for granting graded autonomy to colleges, through a transparent
system of graded accreditation, will be established. Colleges will be encouraged, mentored, supported, and incentivized to
gradually attain the minimum benchmarks required for each level of accreditation. Over a period of time, it is envisaged
that every college would develop into either an Autonomous degree-granting College or a constituent college of a
university - in the latter case, it would be fully a part of the university. With appropriate accreditations, Autonomous
degree-granting Colleges could evolve into Research-intensive or Teaching-intensive Universities, if they so aspire.
Through the attainment of suitable accreditations, all HEIs will gradually move towards full autonomy - academic and
administrative - in order to enable this vibrant culture. The autonomy of public institutions will be backed by adequate
IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 72

public financial support and stability. Private institutions with a public-spirited commitment to high-quality equitable
education will be encouraged.
Autonomy is used to provide quality education, satisfy the needs and expectations of the stakeholders, and it is the power to
make our own decisions to achieve the vision, missions and goals of the institute harnessing the full potential of internal as
well as external stakeholders for implementing the decisions. In the operational terminology, autonomy is the authority to
make decisions in areas such as academia, administration, finance, governance and management of the institute. Autonomy
is closely associated with accountability. Technical institutions are facing the challenge of providing quality education at
the same time they have to be financially sound. They are expected to function under rules and regulations, which restrict
to satisfy the expectations of external and internal stakeholders. A brief literature survey was carried out on the autonomy
of higher and technical education and found that most of the content available is conceptual and based on the personal
views of the people.
II. EDUCATIONAL POLICIES RELATED TO AUTONOMY
Rahul Deo (2014) evaluated the service quality of autonomous and non-autonomous institutes in Indore city, and results
showed that autonomous institutes have greater responsibility and they offer flexibility in academic curricula.
Raghavendran V. (2018) conducted a micro-level study across Karnataka state. The author investigated that, autonomous
colleges need to energize within themselves in terms of curricular aspects, teaching-learning, research, consultancy and
collaboration, providing full learning resources, student support and progression, adopting the best innovative practices.
Nikhitha Mary Mathew (2016) investigated the functioning of autonomous colleges according to the prescribed guidelines,
investigation of improvement, potentially disadvantages of the system in Kerala. The results indicated that a lack of
autonomy in higher education results in the poor quality of education. Many engineering colleges follow the strategies for
long-term sustenance at various autonomy (managerial, administrative, financial, academia) and levels (national, state,
institute, department, faculty, experts, learner, and stakeholder) under the rules of some accreditation board, similarly,
various organizations are using novel strategies for the same purpose.
E. C. Subbarao (2013) analyzed the reason for lack of autonomy, with respect to the various factor of Indian higher
engineering education, and these factors include cited publications, exploitable patents, innovative products and
entrepreneurship. These factors are responsible for lack of autonomy. The author states that there are a large number of
State Government Engineering Colleges, often affiliated to a University and having limited or no autonomy about
curriculum, examinations, degree-granting, etc. The great demand for engineering and technical education has led to the
mushrooming of a large number of private engineering colleges, many started by politicians or as moneymaking ventures.
The rapid expansion of engineering institutions leads the quality deterioration and creates a shortage of poor laboratory,
limited library facility, and limited infrastructure. If the technical institutions need greater autonomy then it is necessary to
work towards the improvement in curricula, recruitment of faculty, students, staff, financial matters, including alumni and
industry funding and administrative issues. This paper reveals the data of the NASSCOM report as per this report only 15
to 20% of the graduate engineers are employable. This paper concluded that poor linkage with industry, poor visibility in
terms of publications, patents, new products, and low or no international collaboration in teaching and research, are the
other responsible factors for lack of autonomy.
G. Owen Schaefer et al. (2013) identified one feature of autonomy common to many mainstream accounts i.e. reasoning
ability; autonomy can then be enhanced by improving people‟s reasoning ability.
Amlendu Dubey et al. (2019) evaluated the significant impact of technical education quality improvement project (TEQIP-
II) on the quality of the technical education in India. They stated that the design, strategy, and implementation of TEQIP
have crucial lessons for developing countries who want to make their technical education sector for rapid economic growth.
They concluded that the lessons of TEQIP-II need to implement systematically in the Indian technical education sector.
Annemarie Neeleman (2019) presented the mixed-methods construction and validation of an empirically based
classification of school interventions that allow for the identification, analysis, and comparison of the actual use of school
autonomy. The classification is based on responses of almost 200 secondary-education school leaders who conveyed over
700 interventions. The study was set in the Netherland, which is known for its high level of school autonomy. The study
was carried out among secondary-education school leaders in the Netherlands.
Discussion: The papers highlighted that autonomy results in quality, responsiveness, innovations, accountability, and

satisfaction of internal and external stakeholders. Autonomy is a tool and technique to decision making which should be
operated in under certain policies, rules, regulation, and guidelines to harness the full potential of autonomy.
III. TYPES OF AUTONOMY IN HEIS
Payal Jayraj Pandya (2016) investigated the method for implementation of educational policy for teachers, to identified
barriers to higher education. For solving these issue Yashpal Committee made, and the committee was suggested many
recommendations. These recommendations showed that the project can succeed in full measure if the central and state
governments work hand-in-hand with utmost cooperation by treating education as the national issue. The percentage of
successful implementation of educational reforms lies with well-equipped, motivated, and dedicated teachers.
Sjur Bergan et al. (2016) prepared a report on academic freedom and institutional autonomy. This report contains an in-
depth discussion of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and focused on that 'how academic freedom and
institutional autonomy may be developed on key values of the EHEA. The main aim of this report was to explore various
aspects of academic freedom with institutional autonomy and identify possible EHEA policies, measures, assessment
criteria, to make recommendations to the 2018 Ministerial conference. According to this report, academic freedom and
institutional autonomy are the two sides of the same coin, since the imagination of a high degree of academic freedom
cannot imagine without institutional autonomy. Also, "open academic culture" is a key issue, this concept is related to
political and economic considerations, it is very useful for higher education and it plays a major role in sustainable
development and equal society. This report critically reviewed legislation, public vs. institutional policies, actors,
governance, policy instruments.
Sumanth S. Hiremath et al. (2016) investigated and discussed several critical issues, of quantity and quality of higher
education‟ in India and studying abroad - from its core. It is meant to be a modest contribution to assessing higher
education‟ against the background of the current scenario and the possibilities of meeting the challenges. India has to rise
to the occasion urgently and reorient its higher education system to be vibrant, competitive, meaningful, and purposeful;
besides, there is absolutely no substitute for quality of higher education, although the country has been facing for a long
time with the serious problem of meeting the quantity needs of our society. The paper was an outcome of a review of a
substantial number of secondary sources on the current scenario and challenges of higher education in India. The following
are the three major areas, for instance: The quality of education in terms of infrastructure, teachers, and accreditation. The
affordability of education, ensuring poor and deserving students are not denied of education, and the ethics in education
avoiding over-commercialization of the education system, are to be focused to ensure that the Indian higher education
system is sustainable and meets global standards.
Vedhathiri Thanikachalam (2016) evolved the transformation in Indian engineering education through academic autonomy.
For this purpose, sets of the population are prepared at the international and national levels. The international population set
consists of 10 high-performing Indian engineering faculty members who are working in various universities in the USA,
UK, and Canada and also completed development projects. However national population set consists of 20 senior
professors who are working in state engineering universities, national institute of technology (NITs), private universities,
and autonomous colleges and who also completed many consultancy projects and CSIR, department of science (DST), and
multinational companies (MNCs) sponsored research programs. Ten questions were administered, and the feedbacks were
collected and compared through the Qualitative Analysis. They found that the transformation in engineering education is
desirable only through cultural change and decentralization of administration.
Discussion: There are four types of autonomy commonly found in Indian HEIs. The four types of autonomy of the institute
should be operated in a balanced manner to reap the fruits of autonomy. The innovations, researches, patents,
professionalism, accountability, and freedom are reported because of autonomy.
IV. MANAGERIAL AUTONOMY
Purna Prabhakar Nandamuri et al. (2015) investigate the present status of autonomy in school management, for this purpose
a sample of 188 secondary schools was selected by the 'stratified sampling' technique. A questionnaire was administered,
and interviews were conducted for the collection of primary data. Chi-square test and simple percentages are used for
analyzing data. The results showed that administrative and financial autonomy was not prevalent while partial autonomy
was experienced in the academic aspect. Most respondents from all categories of school management opted for autonomy
in all aspects - administrative, academic, and financial. However, a strong voice for complete autonomy emerges from the
unaided schools.

Wieland Wermke et al. (2019) has investigated the teacher‟s autonomy at different levels of different educational, social,
development, and administrative domains of German and Swedish teachers. For this purpose, an interview study on
autonomy with a limited sample of 10 Swedish and 15 German teachers embeds. They concluded that Swedish teachers are
more likely to mention control issues.
Andrea Frankowski et. al. (2018) analyzed the method in which the Dutch government tried to reach overarching goals in
education, in a system characterized by a high degree of distributed autonomy of educational institutions and the
participation of multiple actors, and consequently a government highly dependent on the collaboration with stakeholders.
The paper first time introduced four perspectives on governance - „traditional public administration‟,
„new public management‟, „network governance‟, and „societal resilience‟. Based on these three cases showed that the Dutch
government used simultaneously different perspectives in each case and across the cases, in various combinations. Each
combination proved to have its pros and cons. The paper argues for a deliberate consideration and choice of governance
perspectives as an important element of policy preparation.
Discussion: Managerial autonomy is related to freedom as well as control. The degree of managerial autonomy is limited.
It is used for governance, administration, and management for taking decisions towards improving the performance of the
institute.
V. AUTONOMY AND EXCELLENCE OF UNIVERSITY
Francisco Michavila et al. (2018) present the excellence of universities versus autonomy, funding, and accountability. The
author stated that universities need major changes in their organizational structures and functions to be able to respond
adequately to current social expectations. A greater provision of funds and an increase in university autonomy are priorities
of today‟s university policy.
Kenan Dikilitas et al. (2018) evaluate personal and informal processes in teacher autonomy for autonomy development
processes. Autonomy was categorized into three groups, namely gaining agency, developing motivation, and gaining
awareness. 11 participants undertook a task that allowed a highly personalized interpretation of all aspects of the text.
Teachers were entirely free to interpret their texts and responsible for their learning from it. Miho Taguma et al. (2018)
discussed curriculum flexibility, autonomy, and agency. For this purpose, the author summarizes the literature on the topic
of curriculum flexibility and autonomy. This review on curriculum describes school and teacher curriculum flexibility. The
conclusion of the paper describes under which conditions curriculum flexibility and autonomy contribute to teacher agency,
teacher performance, teacher well-being, and student agency, student performance, student well-being.
Raghavendran V. et al. (2018) conducted a micro-level study on the quality of higher education specifically in autonomous
engineering colleges and universities across Karnataka state. For the investigation of quality on the autonomous
engineering colleges, the mainstream bodies had adopted 7-point broad facets and deeply subgrouping in each to direct all
the autonomous engineering colleges considering the NAAC agency. From the findings, the researchers were able to
originate that autonomous colleges need to energize within themselves in terms of curricular aspects, teaching-learning, a
research consultancy, and collaboration, providing full learning resources, student support, and progression, adopting best
innovative practices.
Shweta Tewari (2018) conducted a study on autonomy in curriculum planning and find the level of decision-making and
collaboration. These studies were conducted in Delhi, and total 46 TGT level government schools were interviewed. They
have teaching experience of at least one year. The value of reliability calculated was around 0.64, in addition, content
validity was ensured by 3 experts in the field of education. The results showed that teachers feel few changes in curriculum
and they were free to decide „how to teach‟ and „what to teach‟.
Gordon Redding (2017) showed that a key assumption is necessary for a functioning social system, and for those processes
to be effective, the decisions as to what changes need monitoring, and then how to adapt to them, are best left to open
debate. These processes also required framework and guidance from a society‟s thinkers, but their freedom to think
would remain a cornerstone of any successful evolutionary process.
Kaushlendra Mani Tripathi et al. (2017) explore the prevalent status of autonomy and accountability of higher education in
India. The paper also throws light on the antecedents and consequences of providing autonomy in higher education and
illustrates the accountability of higher education towards creating a positive and constructive social, cultural, economic, and

political context.
Peter Serdyukov (2017) presented an analytical review of the educational innovation field in the USA. This study is based
on a literature review. One of the critical areas of research and innovation can be cost and time efficiency of the learning.
Discussion: The autonomy results in an improvement in curriculum design, teaching-learning, and assessment. Autonomy
leads to innovation, improvement in efficiency, accountability. The autonomy results in a positive, constructive, cultural
and learning environment in the institute.
VI. ACCOUNTABILITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Rakesh Sandhu (2015) investigated autonomy and accountability in higher education; they developed an international
dimension between students and academic staff. The author stated that if institutions do not work for funding then they
cannot exist. The author investigates major components for making a balancing in autonomy and accountability; these
components are institutional autonomy, government funding, institutional governance, institutional leadership, and quality
assessment. They concluded that the government should frame policy, which may help in achieving the public goals in
higher education through influence rather than direction because the autonomy of educational institutions should not be
dependent on single sources of funds.
The „Advancing School Autonomy in the Irish School System‟ Consultation Paper, published by the Department of
Education and Skills in November 2015. This research paper discussed a brief review of school autonomy in the Irish
school system. According to the paper, several commitments were contained in the program for government 2011-2016 in
relation to increasing the autonomy of schools. Increasing the autonomy of schools generally involves decentralizing
decision-making to schools, enabling them to make a greater number of decisions about their operation and work. It can
also involve parents, patrons, communities, or a combination of all of these having a greater say in the operation and work
of schools. In this paper objective made on issues such as - The desirability of achieving the intended impacts of greater
autonomy, the advantages, and disadvantages of a range of options for advancing school autonomy, changes to
accountability mechanisms that may be needed as school autonomy increases, the current educational and cultural context
of the Irish school system.
Bagyo Yuwono Moeliodihardjo (2014) discussed the growth and development of higher education in Indonesia. The author
showed that the significant increase in government funding has pushed the gross enrolment rate (GER) to almost 30%. The
rapid growth requires aspects such as institutional reform, institutional focus, and national commitment.
Joyti Sehrawat (2014) described the importance of teacher autonomy. The author states that a teacher is the controlling key
of the educational process and if he has the freedom of innovation then it is better for social changes. The author reveals the
facts of the NCF (2005) report, as per the report teacher autonomy is essential for ensuring a learning environment, learner
space, freedom, flexibility, and respect for teachers. This autonomy is to develop a system between administrative
hierarchies, examinations, and centralized planning for curriculum reform; all constrain the autonomy of the headmaster
and teacher.
Rob Cirin (2014) provided the department for education with a useful understanding of academics‟ behavior. For this
purpose, a representative online survey of 720 academies was open in May 2013 examined their uses of autonomy
available to them to decide how best to run their schools. The results show that 79% of schools have changed or plan to
change their curriculum, 90% have procured of planned to procure services, 84% were now linking pay to performance.
Two-thirds believe changes have improved attainment. Many institutes were now using innovative approaches to
education, changing their leadership, and working in partnerships with others. They believe that these changes improve
outcomes for their pupils. The author suggested that being an academy is not easy. There was evidence of academies in
multi-academy trusts (MATs) supporting not only the schools in their trust but also standalone schools and even academies
in other MATs. Academies were not feeling constrained by geographical boundaries in the way some reported in the survey
that they once did, and few were reporting being able to work with like-minded schools from different areas. This
collaboration was felt to be helping to improve the education for pupils in the schools and academies involved.
B. L. Gupta et al. (2013) described the definition of excellence, dimensions, and characteristics in the context of
educational institutions. Author also discussed changes in the external environment of educational institutions and their
effects on the functioning of institutions. This paper is based on a literature review, experiences of the authors, and views of
experts. As per the author's center of excellence involved vision, values, beliefs, ethics, norms, leadership, participative

governance and management, autonomy, challenging goals, continuous improvement efforts, and attitude for collective
learning.
Stephen Machin et al. (2013) presented new evidence on the effect of school academies on the age-16 GCSE attainment of
students of different abilities up to 2009 before the Coalition Government changed the nature of the Labour academy
program. For this purpose, the author surveys the UK-based literature on school structures and school autonomy to identify
settings in which alternative and more autonomous school arrangements can improve the educational attainments of pupils
in the bottom tail of the achievement distribution. The conclusion of the paper showed that schools that converted to
academies between 2002 and 2007 improved their overall age-16 GCSEs results by further raising the attainments of
students in the top half of the ability distribution, and in particular pupils in the top 20% tail. Besides, they found little
evidence that academies helped pupils in the bottom 10% and 20% of the ability distribution. This research paper also got
key findings by comparing the experience of UK academies to that of US charter schools and Swedish free schools, and by
providing some insights into the reasons why UK academies did not serve „the tail‟ as is the case for some US charter
schools.
Sijbolt Noorda (2013) described three factors that were important for the success of academic self-government. These three
factors are; 1) The missions and profiles of universities are always contextual, so academic autonomy should be practiced
as a dynamic project, changing over time and responsive to new demands. 2) Even more important are the internal structure
and culture of the autonomous university. Because it is at the same time a complex and a professional organization,
academic autonomy should be organized at all levels, in all fields and work processes of the university. 3) Self-government
cannot be practiced without changing traditional fragmentary models of academic organization. This requires strong
academic leadership at all levels and in all fields.
Jo Ritzen (2016) discussed university autonomy and funding aspect in university-level education due to its impact on
graduates‟ competencies, and on the quality and quantity of research produced. This paper showed that political factors
influence the amount of autonomy allotted to public universities in specific countries. The results showed that there is
sufficient evidence to suggest that an increase in autonomy for universities would provide better educational outcomes and
have a direct impact on labor market productivity.
Discussion: The varying degree of autonomy changes the level of accountability of educational leaders and faculty
members. The autonomy results in the strategic planning of the institute to make it responsive and relevant in the future. It
forces the institute to be self-governed, self-managed, self-evaluative, and self-accountable. The autonomy results in a
flexible organizational structure which is effective, efficient, and responsive.
VII. CURRENT STATUS OF AUTONOMY IN HIGHER EDUCATION
K.S. Reddy et al. (2016) examined the current state of higher education, high-impact research metrics, and world university
rankings in an emerging market of India and comparison with China. The authors formulated three objectives for this
investigation and in the first objective, they present an overview of the higher education system, government schemes for
academic research, and related educational statistics. The second objective involves a comparison between India and China
on various citable documents, a number of citations, cites per document, and H-index in three categories, progress of
management research metrics, accreditations, rankings, abstracting, and indexing of publishing journals. In third objective
author, contain several studies that use different world university rankings for a different purpose. In addition, this paper
critically discussed various challenges, which belongs to Indian higher education and academic research. The results
showed that an overview of higher education and government schemes for academic research, a theoretical note on the
academic scholarship, the determinants of high-impact research, most recent world university rankings. And on the basis of
these characteristics author candicates that for citable documents in the „all subjects‟ category, the United States is
ranked first, followed by China in second, the United Kingdom in third, and India in ninth. Overall, world university
rankings and research metrics of Indian universities are found to be far behind those of Chinese universities.
Sankaran et al. (2016) described the need for autonomy in higher education on the ground of academic excellence,
expansion, and innovation in India. This article demonstrates how the whole field of higher education is plagued by a
multiplicity of controls and interventions exercised by the government, and the result is quantitative expansion without
excellence and innovation. Higher education has more than six organizations, like UGC, NAAC, AICTE, NBA, MHRD,
and parent University, that control the program and take a regulatory view, this goes against the spirit of experimentation,
innovation, and co-thinking of the teacher and the student. Also, in addition to teaching, most of the working hours of the
faculty are involved in massive amounts of paperwork. For making a good system, it is necessary to recognize the student‟s

diversity and teacher approaches towards the student. This article reveals, NAAC has admitted that most
colleges/universities do not have enough autonomy to make their own decisions and government interference slows down
the speed of progress in higher education. The author stated that administrative autonomy is one of the important types of
autonomy and financial autonomy necessary to run the courses through an institution. The Union budget 2017-18 has
recognized the need for autonomy in higher education and Ex. Finance Minister Mr. Arun Jaitely has promised to
undertake reforms in the UGC. They concluded that a revised framework will be put in place for outcome-based
accreditation and credit-based programs.
Nikhitha Mary Mathew et al. (2016) evaluated a study of autonomous colleges in Kerala. This study identifies the lack of
autonomy in higher education, and the poor quality of education is the key problem. This paper concern about neglecting
research at the undergraduate and post-graduate levels. The main objective of this study is to find the functioning of
autonomous colleges according to the prescribed guideline, and investigation of improvement. The study also aims to
identify the disadvantages it could potentially have on the system. The results showed that academic autonomy was
implemented well in colleges concerning the conduct of examinations and evaluations, but it is also observed that not all
autonomous colleges reshape courses.
Discussion: Quantitative expansion of higher education in the country took place at an accelerating rate in the past three
decades but qualitative improvement in higher education towards achieving excellence has not taken place with the pace of
quantitative expansion. The autonomous institutions are very few in cooperation with affiliating institutions.
VIII. DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION IN INDIA
Surendar K Rawat et al. (2013) discussed the current development of technical education in India, and they presented a
comparison of a few selected Indian institutions (IIT, NIT, and private engineering college). They compared teaching
efficiency from UG teaching institutions, this comparison is done based on student output, the ratio of postgraduates to total
degrees, student to faculty ratio, selectivity, placements, faculty salary, publications, and funding. The author concluded
that IIT‟s, NIT‟s and private institutions adopted a unique and innovative industry-linked engineering education and
training system which follows strategic plans, policies, and programs for implementation as per the eleventh five-year plan
for higher and technical education and AICTE guidelines to meet future technological global challenges were outlined.
Jonathan Berry (2012) investigated implications for policy and practice into teacher‟s autonomy in England. This study
discussed that such autonomy cannot exist in a system that is ideologically driven by market forces and neoliberal policy.
For this purpose, data was gathered from two rounds of interviews with 22 serving teachers complemented by some written
responses from them. Six others with a professional interest in education policy- making, four of whom are headteachers,
were also interviewed. The conclusion is drawn that teachers‟ autonomy remains restricted, with any independence of action
largely contingent upon the production of outcomes measured against limited, pre-determined, and ideologically driven
outcomes. The study identifies a disconnection between the aspirations of teachers with regard to their professional
autonomy and those of some, but not all, headteachers.
Meredith I. Honig et al. (2012) investigated a new “autonomy initiative”, for improvement of autonomy in terms of
decision-making authority. The author prepared questions with a comprehensive research review. The author used the
ERIC and JSTOR databases for searches of the peer-review journal. This initial search yielded almost 1,575 documents,
including teacher autonomy, school systems outside the US. These documents sorting in various policy categories, and this
careful sorting process yielded 13 documents, which was based on studies conducted in U.S. school systems. This process
yielded an additional 37 documents, which based on empirical studies of the High School Redesign Initiative. The initiative
involves Boston, Chicago, New York City, Oakland High schools. Results revealed that these reforms are posting better
results than previous efforts but, overall, results are still quite limited. Zia Kemala (2016) investigated the factors
influencing autonomous learners in learning English. This study was conducted in the second grade of one senior high
school in Bandung. Qualitative data analysis was used for this case study. The case study deals with the autonomous
learner as a single case, which was analyzed and described. The data were obtained from the students, which were collected
through observation, questionnaires, and interviews. Based on qualitative data analysis, the author investigated related
research questions. The instruments used by the authors were data triangulation, which was a powerful technique that
facilitates the validation of data through cross verification from more than two resources. The result of the analysis showed
that autonomous learner was influenced by five factors, these factors were - motivation, social environment, task, teacher,
and material. These important findings showed that the teacher will encourage students to become autonomous learners,
and the student will get more benefit from becoming autonomous learners.

Discussion: The status of autonomy in HEIs is poor all over the globe. Educational leaders and faculty members are
demanding more autonomy. The autonomy at the teacher level is very important to take fast decisions related to students‟
instruction.
IX. SUSTAINABILITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS
Agnieszka Talkowska et al. (2015) evaluated some factors, which influence sustainability in higher education institutions
of the United Nations because these factors work as key players to improve the effectiveness of their potential or current
sustainability initiatives. For this study, published and unpublished articles, conference proceedings, university reports,
books, and website documents were reviewed. The review material involved engineering, economics, sociology, and
related sciences; the time frame of the literature survey was from 1990 to 2002. The author concluded that there was no
condition to implement for successful sustainability of program and journal, papers, conferences, communication necessary
for successful sustainability of any program.
Alexander G. Shchitov et al. (2015) described the experience of LMS Moodle used for teaching the Russian language and
other language disciplines to Russian and foreign students at Tomsk Polytechnic University. The objective of this study is
to develop an educational process through an electronic textbook. The tool was adapted to studying linguistic disciplines
and is able to control thinking and educational processes within the boundaries of curriculum competencies. At the first
stage, comprehensive training for working with tools of LMS Moodle was completed; at the second stage, the theoretical
discipline model oriented to the curriculum and the FSES was worked out; at the third stage, the prepared training module
was subjected to an external review. The result of the study is the experience of creating electronic educational resources on
the LMS Moodle platform, pedagogical reflection, tool adjustment, and making practical recommendations. The author
concluded that the pedagogical conditions for successful use of the educational resource LMS Moodle were; students‟
motivation and teachers‟ educational activity; a set of didactic recommendations (the modular structure of the curriculum,
the multimedia training course, and the examination of teaching materials); a set of creative personnel decisions (teachers‟
commitment to work in a multimedia environment; teachers‟ experience and students‟ learning activity); technical
and technological requirements (a tutorial, available technology, and training system maintenance).
X. FACTORS OF AUTONOMY
Amy Junge et al. (2015) identified fifteen potential areas in which teachers could secure collective autonomy such as
learning program, school-level policy, schedule, determining teacher work hours, selecting colleagues, choosing school
leaders, professional development, evaluating colleagues, setting tenure policy, terminating/transferring colleagues, setting
the budget, determining compensation, setting staff pattern, determining assessments, broadening assessments. Out of
fifteen teams of teachers are able to secure these 15 areas. These autonomies continue to evolve over time as the initiative
progresses and it is a series of real-life examples of decisions teams of teachers.
Asghar Salimi et al. (2015) investigated Iranian English teachers‟ beliefs about learner autonomy. For this purpose, 35
English teachers were selected from private institute to answer the question items in a questionnaire, they consisted of 7
males and 28 females with teaching experience of 1 to 25 years for all levels of children, teenagers, and adults, and their
educational qualification was in the range of Bachelor to Doctorate. The instrument principle is based on the Borg & Al -
Busaidi (2012) instrument, but some modifications were done to the questionnaire according to the purpose of the study.
The instrument consisted of 2 sections; section-1 consisted of 30 questions which were in the form of Likert-scale items on
a five-point scale of agreement. The questionnaires were distributed among the teachers by referring to the language
institutes. They could complete them at that time or take it back in 2 days. The collected data were analyzed and interpreted
in the form of a percentage level for related items and questions. The mean and percentage were calculated using SPSS
software (version 19) to draw conclusions about teachers‟ beliefs. The questionnaire items with the related content were
grouped together and after that mean and percentage were calculated for them. The results of the study showed that teachers
are familiar with the concept of learner autonomy and believe that it has an essential role in effective language learning. In
the questionnaire, 94.28 percent of the teachers agreed that learner autonomy has a positive effect on language learners‟
success, while 74.28 percent agreed that learner autonomy allows language learners to learn more effectively.
Jitendra Shreemali et al. (2015) showed areas that institutions of higher education need to focus on based on student‟s
perspectives for colleges in and around Udaipur, Rajasthan. It gets educational quality inputs at the point of contact with
students. This study was descriptive research using a positivistic approach of collecting data using the survey method with
„convenience sampling‟. College-level students at the UG and PG levels were surveyed for this research. A structured
questionnaire using 5-point scale was developed and data collected were statistically analyzed for a level of significance of

5% using a five-point Likert scale. A total of 72 student responses from three institutions of higher education were
received. The study identified sixteen parameters important to students studying in colleges. On as many as eight of the
sixteen parameters, the majority of students are not satisfied with a college education. These include - facilities for medical
emergencies; industry exposure; placement support; all- round development; opportunities for co-curricular activities; and
facilities for sports. Also, these areas, the following areas require attention on priority: Overall experience of students; and
practical knowledge of subjects taught. These represent the challenges that must be addressed by institutions of higher
education to enhance student perception of education quality.
Juan L. Nunez et al. (2015) review the concept of autonomy support in the classroom within the self-determination
framework. The author stated that autonomy is a form of voluntary action, stemming from a person‟s interest, and with no
external pressure. They discussed social environments that support autonomy provide a meaningful rationale, acknowledge
negative feelings, use non-controlling language, offer meaningful choices, and nurture internal motivational resources. In
this paper, the self-determination theory discussed briefly, self-determination theory is a theory of human motivation to
explain students‟ classroom behavior, learning process, and relationship with the environment. The paper concluded that
if teachers support autonomy, students improve their academicperformance, were more creative and better adjusted,
engage more in school, and feel less stressed.
Conclusion: Autonomy evolves over time. Faculty members may be granted autonomy related to their roles and
responsibilities. Some degree of autonomy may be granted through decentralization and remaining through delegation.
Students may be granted autonomy related to their learning outcomes, learning method and learning time. Learner
autonomy will result in better achievements. Learner autonomy should be encouraged by faculty members especially in
outcome-based education environment.
XI. LEARNER AUTONOMY
Zejun Ma et al. (2012) investigate the link between motivation and learner autonomy, especially how motivation and
autonomy can mutually reinforce each other with the emphasis on how the development of learner autonomy through
developing a negotiated syllabus helps to motivate students in language learning. In this paper, students – initiated teaching
combined with syllabus negotiation brought all the learners to be more open-minded to other‟s ideas, thoughts,
suggestions, and even criticism, because greater control over the learning process, resources, and language cannot be
achieved by each individual acting alone according to his or her performance. In the classroom group, genuine autonomy
has to be exercised in an interdependent way. This practice of negotiated syllabus helps students to break out of the cocoon
of dependence on the teacher. Once this has happened, negotiation inevitably becomes an ongoing process. It is thus that
the foundations of autonomy are laid. The process of negotiation functions as managing teaching and learning as a group
experience and students are highly motivated when they are given the power to make the decisions, options, and choices by
themselves, when their wants and needs are taken into account and when they have their voices heard by others.
Gustavo Arcia et al. (2011) described school autonomy and accountability, and the main objective of this paper is to
present an assessment scale for benchmarking school autonomy and accountability. This scale was one of the tools being
developed under the System Assessment and Benchmarking for Education Results (SABER) initiative created by the
World Bank as part of its education strategy. The purpose of this scale was to reinforce the monitoring and evaluation of
education system performance to foster a better environment for teaching and learning. The goal of this effort was to align
the personal and managerial incentives at the school level to produce increased student learning. The application of the
assessment scale can be an important tool for education system reform if it was used as an instrument for planning and
monitoring the enabling conditions for improving system performance. As such, it starts with the assumption that increased
school autonomy and improved accountability are necessary conditions for improved learning because they align teacher
and parent incentives. Viewed in this context, the assessment scale presented here should be considered as an essential
component of an overall strategy for improving learning outcomes. This assertion was consistent with the SABER
framework for fostering better school performance that includes three important factors: (a) the periodic measurement of
learning outcomes and of teacher performance as the basis for school accountability, (b) the use of school and student
performance indicators that can be compared across localities and across time, and (c) the use of rewards/sanctions and
policy interventions for aligning personal and school incentives with improved student performance. Results showed that
SAAS values show that school autonomy as a tool for increasing accountability and inducing improved learning works well
in contexts where formal educational institutions are weak and, by inference, where governments are unable to provide
public goods of sufficient quality.
Stephen Machin et al. (2011) consider the impact of an academy school conversion on their pupil intake and pupil
performance and possible external effects working through changes in the pupil intake and pupil performance of

neighboring schools. These lines of inquiry were considered over the school years 2001/02 to 2008/09. The author bypasses
the selection bias inherent in previous evaluations of academy schools by comparing the outcomes of interest in academy
schools to a specific group of comparison schools, namely those state maintained schools that go on to become academies
after our sample period ends. This approach allows us to produce a well-balanced treatment and control group. The result
suggests that moving to a more autonomous school structure through academy conversion generates a significant
improvement in the quality of their pupil intake and a significant improvement in pupil performance. This study also
investigates significant external effects on the pupil intake and the pupil performance of neighboring schools. All of these
results are strongest for the schools that have been academies for longer and for those who experienced the largest increase
in their school autonomy. In essence, the results paint a (relatively) positive picture of the academy schools that were
introduced by the Labour government of 1997‐ 2010. The caveat is that such benefits have at least for the schools we
consider taken a while to materialize.
Susan Mbula Kilonzo (2011) discussed the challenges of autonomy in higher institutions of learning in Kenya. The author
described that; Kenya government may be partial to be blamed for insisting on autonomy and almost completely moving
out of the governance and management procedures of these institutions. The decentralization of power in the decision-
making processes is therefore questioned. This is because the government is responsible neither is it accountable for the
performance, quality of learning, and research activities in these institutions. The partial funding received from the
government is not enough to sufficiently run the noted activities and therefore these institutions have been left with no
choice but to open an arena of competition where numerous campuses are run by both private and public universities to
ensure that there is funding not only to pay the staff but also to run the activities of the institutions. The paper concludes
that there is a need to encourage autonomy, not solely by the institutions but with the help of government funding. This can
be done through improvement of and/or establishing relevant tertiary level institutions/colleges. The government should
also be committed to funding academic research activities so as to improve the quality of research and publications. On
the other hand, the dons‟ pay should be revised and improved to encourage not only their performance but their
enthusiasm in teaching. Sanctions should be ensured not just on the number of courses taken up per lecturer, but also the
qualifications of those handling such courses in these institutions. This will be relevant in ensuring quality.
Xiang (2011) studied the new educational approach of a big cultural change, with the help of autonomy and awareness of
the global community in China. Another issue in education in China relates to the enormous differences between regions
and especially between rural and urban regions. Big investments are made in human capital development for people in
urban areas, but educational investment in rural areas lays far behind. However, education for rural people is also very
important for the economic development of China. The author stated that not all educational resources should be invested
in urban; rural development also requires the provision of educational facilities to give the rural population a better future
perspective.
Discussion: Learner autonomy is associated with the motivation for learning and motivation for learning results in better
and further learning. In HEIs learner autonomy should be encouraged using principles of adult learning. Autonomy should
percolate down to the bottom most layer i.e. students. Use of autonomy at different levels in the institute should be
monitored and feedback should be provided for better using the autonomy. Autonomy may bring cultural change in the
HEIs to responds to needs of the students and stakeholders.
XII. STRATEGIES FOR LONG-TERM SUSTENANCE OF AUTONOMY
Reehana Raza (2009) examined the right balance of autonomy and accountability in tertiary education institutions (TEIs).
TEIs develops one particular set of institutions such as public, or private institutions without investigating other contextual
factors, and that set delivers the right balance of autonomy and accountability. In India, the existing system offers little
autonomy to either public or private TEIs and very little relevant accountability. This work showed that, at the upper end of
the tertiary sector, there are few high-quality TEIs that are important for developing knowledge economies while at the
lower end, the poor quality of TEIs is hampering India‟s manpower needs as the economy grows. In 2004, rates of return for
a year of college education in the regular wage-earning sector (as opposed to the casual labor sector) has been rising
rapidly, equalling 15.4%. These higher returns are also reflected in growing investments in tertiary education. Students
enrolling in undergraduate and post-graduate degrees have increased on average by almost 5% a year, double the rate by
which the population of that relevant age group has increased. In 2006, The National Commission on Knowledge (NCK)
describes the governance structure of India‟s tertiary sector as “over-regulated and under governed.” Therefore, the
existing system is over wielding with overlapping areas of accountability, which not only limits institutional autonomy but
also fail to offer adequate and appropriate levels of accountability.
O. Ogunjimi et al. (2008) used a population t-test and Ex-post facto design to analyze the data collection, in Nigeria. In this

test data collected from 160 subjects randomly drawn from primary, secondary, and tertiary institutions, including the
education inspectorate divisions. They stated that regular inspection/supervision of institution and provision of adequate
funds to ensure sustainability, workshops/seminars should be organized to properly educate all stakeholders.
Terezinha Maria Sprenger et al. (2008) described the process of updating a course syllabus designed to foster the
development of language teacher autonomy for course planning and materials preparation. For this purpose, three main
factors were taken into account. These factors were participant‟s reactions and evaluations concerning the first version of
the course, the new context, and the developments in the literature related to learner and teacher autonomy. From these
three factors, V1 and V2 made, i.e. version 1 and version 2 made. V1 belongs to the new context (including the target
public, institutional specifications as well as the educational software available), the developments in research, teacher
students‟ reactions and evaluations concerning teacher development and autonomy. V1 was designed for an
independent online teacher development course offered to teachers of English from state schools who had been enrolled in
Teachers‟ Links (TL) before. Teachers‟ Links is a continuous education course for teachers of English developed by the
Pontifícia Universidade. V1 was organized into ten units, such as getting ready, the aim of the course, learning adopt in the
course, design a task, participation in a task, need analysis, transform, analyze the task/result, collaborate, evaluation. The
second version of the course V2 belongs to account studies that deal with learner and teacher narratives and how they affect
the development of autonomy, language learning, and teacher education. V2 module was organized into four units,
these units were Teachers‟ portraits, Teachers‟ Landscapes, Course planning, Evaluating and preparing materials, each one
to last approximately three to four weeks totaling fifteen weeks. The author concluded by raising some questions
concerning the theoretical and practical decisions made in the second version of the course and their implications. The
results were explained that many aspects were not looked at properly in V1 compare to V2.
Vera Lucia Menezes de Oliveira e Paiva et al. (2008) examined few complexities of autonomy, an instance of learners‟
autonomy in relation to the learner, teacher, contexts, and technology. For this study observation, a group of 80 English
language-learning narratives, collected in Brazil, these data were examined and interviewed with the theoretical discussion.
Results showed that no learner is entirely free. Learners have their autonomy limited by several constraints. In formal
contexts, autonomy cannot be seen as individualization, but as a possibility of sharing potentials. Teachers‟ roles should
include a higher level of tolerance to avoid conflict with more autonomous learners so as to stimulate them to share
their knowledge with their classmates instead of silencing them.
Deng Dafei (2007) investigated the relationship between learner autonomy and English proficiency in China. For this
purpose, 129 non-English teacher colleges were selected for the preparation of the questionnaire using an interview. T-test
and F-test with SPSS11.0 were used to analyze data. The findings of the current study suggest some implications both for
English foreign language teaching and learning, especially in China. First, the findings can be helpful in the way of
enlightening teachers so that learners can mainly depend on themselves in learning English. Secondly, teachers ought to
enhance the students‟ learner autonomy in order to better their English proficiency, which will be much effective than
only a large quantity of teachers‟ efforts. Thirdly, learner autonomy, affected by learners‟ motivation, is one of the most
important factors deciding learners‟ English proficiency, for English as a language needs learners‟ own efforts and
investment of time and energy in it. Therefore, it is important to inform the students of the importance of learner autonomy
and increase their awareness of learner autonomy in order to facilitate the language learning process. A limitation of this
study is that it used only the limited subjects from a single college and future research should include testing subjects in
elementary or middle schools throughout the country and around the world.
John Stevenson et al. (2007) examine theoretical issues related to technical education and training. In this study, the
theoretical relationship between knowledge, skills, activity, and meaning critically investigated. The author concluded that
the reforms in technical and further education have pursued an image of relevance but have mistaken how individuals
construct meaning in workplace activities and the relationships among these kinds of meanings and those used in wider
individual and social activities. It was also concluded that this mistake has serious implications for the current directions of
the sector and its effectiveness in preparing people for their working lives.
Leo van Lier (2007) examined various situated aspects of the agency, such as the issue of power and control, democracy in
the classroom, and the relationship between structure and process. An „action-based (AB) teaching and learning‟ approach
applied at the center of the learning process. This approach was related to other approaches, such as content-based, project-
based, and task-based teaching and learning. This paper concluded that pedagogical strategies and actions are illustrated,
such as a coherent and non-trivial model of pedagogical scaffolding that integrates structuring and micro-genesis.
Conclusion: A balance between autonomy and accountability is required at all levels. If accountability is very high people
will not take any risk, work in uncertain situation, accept challenging goals, experiment. If accountability is very less

people will implement immature ideas which may lead to failure. The failure may result in waste of time, money and
resources.
XIII. CHANGES IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Pawan Agarwal (2006) reviewed critically the autonomy of higher education in India. This paper takes a comprehensive
look at the various facets of higher education in India. It adopts a systems approach for achieving policy coherence and
multi-level coordination required to address genuine concerns in Indian higher education on a long-term basis and uses the
experiences of other countries to suggest measures to tackle its various systemic deficiencies. The author concluded this
paper via the following important points –
 The overall public funding support for research through higher education institutions needs to be substantially
enhanced.
 Private funding of research needs to be encouraged by evolving a system of incentives.
 The mechanism for funding should be reviewed to include selective funding of higher education institutions to
nurture excellence.
 Competitive grants should be increased. Research assessment exercise (based on simple parameters, to begin with)
should be introduced to bring objectivity in research funding and disbursement of competitive grants.
 A policy for setting priorities for funding research should be put in place. For research coordination, and NSF-type
foundation could be established; initially, a research portal could be set up.
 Existing research infrastructure and experimental facilities should be optimally utilized by putting in place a system
of sharing such facilities.
 Research partnerships should be encouraged. Various measures are required to improve access to information
resources.
 Steps are required to be taken to improve the quality of doctoral education.
 An initiative to create highly skilled manpower through a collaborative approach could be initiated. An Incentive
system to promote useful research should be put in place.
 Proactive efforts are required to attract private investment and participation of world-class universities in
postgraduate education and research in science and technology.
Conclusion: Autonomy is associated with funding of HEIs. The HEIs should explore adequate sources for funding so that
they can design and implement the innovative projects in the institute. Research is a major concern and it requires generous
funding.
XIV. ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Kai Ren et al. (2013) showed the reflection of three papers which has been published by Higher Education Policy (HEP)
and these papers based on academic freedom and university autonomy. The HEP research contributed to academic
freedom, which addresses both the original theoretical issues and the burning current issues. The author concluded that
HEP has gone beyond academic circles and reached a broad readership, making a real difference to policy development to
safeguard academic freedom.
Kiran Devade et al. (2013) have suggested a few solutions for strengthening the weak links of autonomy for improvement
in autonomous structure. In this study, the weakness of autonomy is categorized into three groups, these are academic,
administrative, and financial autonomy. Academic autonomy deals with issues, which relate to curriculum, instructional
material, pedagogy, techniques of students‟ evaluation. The main issues under administrative autonomy are exam
code and conduct, the procedure of admission, industry interference, and institute collaborations. The issues in financial
autonomy involve fee structure, Grants, Funds, scholarships, salary, and accountability. They stated that academic and
administrative autonomies will become weak links if not supported with financial autonomy, and for successful autonomy
structure the institutes' autonomy should be addressed in terms of academic, administrative, and finance.
M. Gandhi (2013) analyzed critically the steps taken for grant of autonomy, accountability, perception, attitude, and
approach of higher education institutions towards the concept of autonomy in India, as per the criteria, of MHRD and
UGC. This study demonstrates initiatives relating to the grant of autonomy vis-à-vis the status of autonomy in India. The
concept of autonomy colleges can be systematically dovetailed in the said issues. It reiterates that the whole exercise will
serve no purpose if the Union Government and State Governments keep enjoying their control through its departments. The
author concluded that the issues related to granting autonomy and accountability can be resolved when a definite and
meaningful action plan is applied.

Nataliya Serdyukova et al. (2013) investigated student autonomy in online learning; they suggest „a self-sufficient,
autonomous learner is more efficient than teacher-dependent student‟. The author stated that online education offers
students significantly greater choices and more freedom for independent learning compared to traditional campus- based
programs, college education based on an instructor-cantered teaching approach still rigidly controls both the learning
content and process thus restricting students‟ initiative and flexibility. This paper showed that there are many students
who do not possess the necessary independent study skills and dispositions and are fearful of engaging in independent
learning. They concluded that online learner autonomy is critical for a person‟s continuous development and learning
efficiency, and the present research investigates students‟ perceptions on the matter suggesting ways to promote
students' independence within a college class.
Concussion: Autonomy in HEIs is granted on academic, administrative, managerial and financial areas of functioning of
the institute. All four types of autonomy are mutually dependent on each other. In some cases financial autonomy becomes
crucial to exercise other three types of autonomy.
XV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OBTAINING AND SUSTAINING AUTONOMY IN HEIS
In the backdrop of research studies and conceptual papers, the following recommendations are made for obtaining and
sustaining autonomy in HEIs.
1. Constitution of regulatory bodies: The regulatory bodies stated in NEP 2020 viz. the Higher Education Commission of
India (HECI), the National Higher Education Regulatory Council (NHERC), National Accreditation Council (NAC), the
Higher Education Grants Council (HEGC), the General Education Council (GEC) should be constituted as early as
possible. The scope of work, authority, roles, and responsibility of these regulatory bodies should be clearly defined to
remove the conflicting and overlapping roles.
2. Evolve the framework for granting a varying degree of autonomy: The regulatory system of higher education should
evolve rules, regulations, policies, and frameworks for granting a varying degree of autonomy to HEIs. The autonomy is
linked with the quality of education and different levels of accreditation. The accreditation should come out with the
manual, guidelines, formats, procedures, and benchmarks for different levels of accreditation considering the
multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and cross-disciplinary programs.
3. Evolve common terminology: Evolve common terminology for higher education for the institute, program, curriculum,
courses, credits, certification, and like. The evolved terminology should be followed by all HEIs to ensure national level
portability in multipoint entry and multiple exit system of a flexible education system. The system will prevent conflict,
confusion, and grievances of students, faculty members, and the institute.
4. Evolve national performance benchmarks for HEIs: Evolve national performance benchmarks in quantitative and
qualitative terms, which can be followed by all HEIs in the country. The national benchmarks will help the country to
ensure a minimum level of quality of education at HEI level.
5. Evolve guidelines for various areas of functioning of the institute: Evolve common guidelines for various areas of
functioning of the institute. The guidelines may be issued for admission, curriculum development, curriculum
implementation, industrial training and internship, guidance, counseling, mentoring and coaching, entrepreneurship,
training and placement, online learning, examination reforms, grievance management. The guidelines should be evolved
for the areas of national and international importance such as professional ethics, environment protection, global
warming, water harvesting, cybersecurity, energy conservation, the constitution of India, cleanliness, and sanitation,
happiness, international students admission, and the like.
6. Constitution of various statutory bodies at institute level: Evolve guidelines for constitution of various bodies at
institute level along with their scope of work, authority, responsibility, and code of conduct.
7. Teams’ structure for HEIs: Evolve teams‟ governance and management structure of the institute to produce a synergetic
effect with respect to the quality of graduates, type of research, and quality of services rendered by the institute. It is
useful to conceive, design, and implement the curricular, co-curricular, and extra-curricular innovations at the institute
level. It is useful to create a conducive academic environment for quality education, research, and learning organization.
Teams‟ structure will overcome the traditional practices, individual differences, different academic backgrounds of the
students and faculty members.
8. Collaboration, networking, and partnership: Collaboration, networking, and partnership are the strategies to best use
the autonomy at all levels. Collaboration, networking, and partnership are used to cover up theweaknesses, remove the
deficiencies, and filling the gaps. These types of the tie-up with research organizations, sister institutions, and industry
produce a synergetic effect on the achievement of the institutional goals and personal goals of the faculty members and
students. The initiatives for collaboration, networking, and partnership should be initiated through policy initiatives at
the government level.

9. Prepare institutional development plan: The HEIs should prepare institute development plans like strategic, perspective
and annual integrating the provisions of higher education envisaged in NEP 2020. The education technology,
technology, and information communication technology development and use should be an integral part of the
institutional development plan. Vocational education, entrepreneurship, and inclusive education should be an integral
part of the institutional development plan. HEIs should set goals in all areas of functioning of the institute and achieve it
in order to achieve accreditation and a greater degree of autonomy. The departments should prepare a plan for academic
programs, research studies, academic events, and services. Similarly, the faculty members should develop their
professional development and self-development plan. The top-down and bottom-up, proactive, and blueprint and process
approach of planning should be used for perfect alignment among the plans of different levels. A participative approach
to planning and implementation should be used for consensus, commitment, and owning of the plans and achieving the
goals at different levels in the institute.
10. Full use of authority: The educational leaders in different positions should use the full authority and their personal
power for achieving the goals of the institute. They should not afraid of complaint and inquiry because the decisions
taken in good faith are always appreciated. At the institute level decentralization, delegation, and empowerment
formula should be used so that educational leaders concentrate on innovation and change. Risk-taking should be an
integral part of the decision making process. The institute will develop unique image if takes risk and work in
unexplored areas.
11. Transparency: The website should be professionally designed and updated to provide updated information to different
stakeholders on figure tips. Information of wider interest and frequently required by stakeholders should be available on
the web site of the institute. The mandatory disclosers should contain accurate information and updated from time to
time.
12. Documentation: At the institute level system of capturing information at right time from the right source should be
created. The documentation should be done in soft copy and should be available to concerned persons on figure tips.
The report generation should be automated to save the time and efforts of educational leaders and faculty members.
13. Strategic human resource management practices: The competent, committed, capable, and empowered people may
harness the full potential of autonomy. The strategic human resource management practices (SHRMPs) will help the
institute to identify, channelize, and harness their full potential. SHRMPs will supplement and complement the design
of educational innovations and implement them in the light of NEP 2020 and industry 4.0. SHRMPs will ensure the
satisfaction of human resources of the institute and delight of students and external stakeholders.
14. Make the institute learning organization: Create an environment to challenge the existing systems, processes,
practices, and habits. Use the principle there may be a better way. The institute should revisit its systems, processes,
practices in the context of NEP 2020 and developments taking place in the world of work. The institute should
introduce a 360-degree objective feedback system, suggestion scheme, and audit system for improving the system and
processes.
15. Further professional ethics: The institute should chart out professional ethics for educational leaders, faculty members,
mentors, students, and other team heads. Adherence to professional ethics should be encouraged through self-
consciousness and social pressure. Violation of professional ethics should be considered a severe offense in the
institute.
16. Celebration of success: Institute should create occasions, forums, and platforms where accomplishments are
celebrated. The celebration of success will boost up the morale of the people in the institute. They will be charged for
accepting the higher level of challenges and take more risks. Celebrations of achievements will result in competitive
spirit development, positive energy, and a conducive academic and research environment in the institute.
17. Adhere to rules and regulations of regulatory bodies: HEIs should adhere to rules and regulations of the regulatory
and statutory bodies to obtain and sustain autonomy. In other words for getting short term benefits institute should not
use mal and corrupt practices which will spoil the image of the institute. Institute should not camouflage the
information and should not provide confusing information.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
NITTTR, Bhopal has sponsored a research project on strategies and framework for sustaining autonomy of engineering
colleges and polytechnics of India. We sincerely thank the Board of Governors and Director of NITTTR, Bhopal for
extending guidance and support for the study. This paper is the outcome of the literature review done by the investigators.
REFERENCES
[1] Rahul Deo, Namrata Kohli, “A study of student satisfaction in autonomous and non-autonomous institutes in Indore
city”, Prestige e-Journal of Management and Research, Vol 1, Issue 1, pp. 1-8, 2014.

[2] Raghavendran V, Kumuthadevi. K, “Quality of autonomous engineering colleges in Karnataka”, International Journal
of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 118, Issue 11, pp. 827-833, 2018.
[3] Nikhitha Mary Mathew, Martin Patrick, "Autonomous Colleges in Kerala: An Evaluative Study", Centre for Public
Policy Research, 3, pp. 1-33, 2016.
[4] E. C. Subbarao, "India‟s higher engineering education: opportunities and tough choices", Current Science, Vol 104,
Issue 1, pp. 55-66, 2013.
[5] G. Owen Schaefer, Guy Kahane, Julian Savulescu, “Autonomy and Enhancement”, Neuroethics, Vol. 7, pp. 123–
136, (2014).
[6] Amlendu Dubey, Amit Mehndiratta, Mahim Sagar, Smita Kashiramka, "Reforms in technical education sector:
evidence from World Bank-assisted Technical Education Quality Improvement Programme in India", Higher
Education, Vol. 78, Issue 2, pp 301–304, 2019.
[7] Annemarie Neeleman, “The scope of school autonomy in practice: An empirically based classification of school
interventions”, Journal of Educational Change, Vol. 20, pp. 31–55, 2019.
[8] Payal Jayraj Pandya, “Improving Quality of Higher Education in India”, The Churning : An Inter- Disciplinary
National Peer & Double Reviewed e-Journal of Languages, Social Sciences and Commerce, Issue 1, pp. 52-78, 2016.
[9] Sjur Bergan, Eva Egron-Polak, Sijbolt Noorda, Patricia Pol, "Academic freedom and institutional autonomy – What
role in and for the EHEA?", thematic session report of EHEA, pp. 1-10, 2016.
[10] Sumanth S. Hiremath, Dasharath R. Albal, “Current Scenario of Higher Education In India: Reflections on Some
Critical Issues”, IRJSSH, Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 73-78, 2016.
[11] Vedhathiri Thanikachalam, “Transformation in Indian Engineering Education through Academic Autonomy to High
Performing Faculty Teams”, Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, Vol. 30, Issue 1, pp. 17-25, 2016.
[12] Purna Prabhakar Nandamuri, “Autonomy in school management-A policy perspective”, 2016.
[13] Wieland Wermke, Sigrid Olason Rick, Maija Salokanga, “Decision-making and control: perceived autonomy of
teachers in Germany and Sweden, Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 51, Issue 3, pp. 306– 325, 2019.
[14] Andrea Frankowski, Martijn van der Steen, Daphne Bressers, Martin Schulz, Claire Shewbridge, Marc Fuster, Rien
Rouw, “Dilemmas of central governance and distributed autonomy in education”, OECD Education Working Papers
No. 189, 2018.
[15] Francisco Michavila, Jorge M. Martinez, “Excellence of Universities versus Autonomy, Funding and
Accountability”, European Review, Vol. 26, Issue S1, pp. 48–56, 2018.
[16] Kenan Dikilitas, Simon E. Mumford, “Teacher autonomy development through reading teacher research: agency,
motivation and identity”, Innovation in language learning and teaching, pp. 1-12, 2018.
[17] Miho Taguma, Eva Feron, Meow Hwee Lim, “Directorate for education and skills education policy committee”,
2018.
[18] Shweta Tewari, “A study of the autonomy of secondary school teachers in curriculum planning in government
schools of Delhi”, MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends & Practices, , Vol. 8, Issue 1 pp. 74 – 82, 2018.
[19] Gordon Redding, “Critical thinking, university autonomy, and societal evolution; thoughts on a research agenda”,
Centre for Global Higher Education, Working paper no. 11, 2017.
[20] Kaushlendra Mani Tripathi, Rakhi Gupta, “Autonomy and Accountability in Higher Education”, Journal of Human
and Work Management, Vol. 4, Issue 2, pp. 1-8, 2016.
[21] Peter Serdyukov, “Innovation in education: what works, what doesn‟t, and what to do about it?”, Journal of
Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning Vol. 10, Issue 1, pp. 4-33, 2017.
[22] Rakesh Sandhu, “Autonomy and Accountability in Higher Education”, International Journal of Research in IT,
Management and Engineering, Vol. 5, Issue 1, pp. 15-22, 2015.
[23] Bagyo Yuwono Moeliodihardjo, “Higher education sector in Indonesia”, International seminar on Massification of
Higher Education in Large Academic Systems, pp. 1-14, 2014.
[24] Joyti Sehrawat, "Teacher autonomy : Key to teaching success", Bhartiyam international journal of education &
research, Vol. 4, Issue 1, pp. 1-8, 2014.
[25] Rob Cirin, “Do academies make use of their autonomy?”, Research report, Department for Education , pp. 1-53,
2014.
[26] B. L. Gupta, Meenakshi Gupta, “Academic Excellence in Technical Institutions”, Issues and Ideas in Education, Vol.
1, pp. 23-42, 2013.
[27] Stephen Machin, James Vernoit, “Changing school autonomy”, Centre for the Economics of Education London
School of Economics, 2011.
[28] Sijbolt Noorda, “Academic Autonomy as a Lifelong Learning Process for Universities”, Handbook, Leadership and
Governance in Higher Education, Vol. 4, 2013.
[29] Jo Ritzen, “University autonomy: Improving educational output”, IZA World of Labor, 240, 2016.
[30] K.S. Reddy, En Xie, Qingqing Tang, "Higher education, high-impact research, and world university rankings: A case

of India and comparison with China", Pacific Science Review B: Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol. 2, pp. 1-21,
2016.
[31] K. Sankaran, G. V. Joshi, “Autonomy for excellence in higher education in India”, NITTE Management Review,
Vol 10, Issue 2, pp. 1-10, 2016.
[32] Surendar K Rawat, Shruti Karkare, “Development of Technical Education in India”, 43rd ISTE National
Convention, pp. 1-24, 2013.
[33] Jonathan Berry, “An investigation into teachers‟ professional autonomy in England: implications for policy and
practice”, PhD Thesis, Submitted to the University of Hertfordshire, pp. 1-250, 2012.
[34] Meredith I. Honig, Lydia R. Rainey, “Autonomy and School Improvement: What Do We Know and Where Do We
Go From Here?”, Educational Policy, Vol. 26, Issue 3, pp. 465 –495, 2012.
[35] Zia Kemala, “An analysis of factors influencing the autonomous learners in learning English”, ELTIN Journal, Vol.
4, Issue I, pp. 11-20, 2016.
[36] Alexander G. Shchitov, Ol‟ga G. Shchitova, Daria A. Shchitova, Polina Stasinska, Doan T.C. Chieua, "Features
of the learning modular system Moodle use in teaching the Russian language to Russian and foreign students at an
institution of higher education", Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 215, pp. 170 – 175, 2015.
[37] Amy Junge, Kim Farris-Berg, “15 Areas of autonomy secured by teams of teachers designing and running teacher-
powered schools”, teacher powered schools, pp. 1-6, 2015.
[38] Asghar Salimi, Navideh Ansari, “Learner Autonomy: Investigating Iranian English Teachers' Beliefs”, Theory and
Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 5, Issue 5, pp. 1106-1115, 2015.
[39] Jitendra Shreemali, Amit Jangir, Dinesh Kumar, Mayank Soni, “A Study of Student Satisfaction with College
Education at Colleges in and Around Udaipur, Rajasthan”, IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, Vol.
5, Issue 6, pp. 36-43, 2015.
[40] Juan L Nunez, Jaime Leon, “Autonomy Support in the Classroom a Review from Self Determination Theory”,
European Psychologist, Vol 20, Issue 4, 2015.
[41] Zejun Ma, Ruixue Ma, “Motivating Chinese Students by Fostering Learner Autonomy in Language Learning”,
Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 2, Issue 4, pp. 838-842, 2012.
[42] Gustavo Arcia, Kevin Macdonald, Harry Anthony Patrinos, Emilio Porta, “School Autonomy and Accountability”,
System Assessment And Benchmarking For Education Results, 2011.
[43] Stephen Machin, Olmo Silva, “School Structure, School Autonomy and the Tail”, Special Paper, Vol. 29, pp. 1-18,
2013.
[44] Susan Mbula Kilonzo, “Challenges of Autonomy in Higher Institutions of Learning in Kenya: Diluted Education?”,
isa.e-Forum, pp. 1-12, 2011.
[45] Xiang Jifa, “Can agricultural labour adjustment occur through continuing vocational education and training
in China”, Proceedings of the ECER VETNET Conference, pp. 1-10, 2011.
[46] Reehana Raza, “Examining Autonomy and Accountability in Public and Private Tertiary Institutions”, Human
Development Network, The World Bank, 2009.
[47] L. O. Ogunjimi, C. A. Ajibola, L. U. Akah, “Sustenance of education sector reforms in Nigeria through adequate
participation by all stake holders”, International NGO Journal Vol. 4 Issue 4, pp. 104-108, 2009.
[48] Terezinha Maria Sprenger, Maria Paula Salvador Wadt, “Autonomy development and the classroom: Reviewing a
course syllabus”, DELTA, Vol. 24, pp. 551-576, 2008.
[49] Vera Lucia Menezes de Oliveira e Paiva, Junia de Carvalho Fidelis Braga, “The complex nature of autonomy”,
DELTA, Vol. 24, pp. 441-468, 2008.
[50] Deng Dafei, “An exploration of the relationship between learner autonomy and English proficiency”, Professional
Teaching Articles, pp. 1-23, 2007.
[51] John Stevenson, Griffith University, “Technical and Further Education Reforms: Theoretical Issues”, The Australian
Educational Researcher, Vol 34, Issue 3, pp. 15-35, 2007.
[52] Leo van Lier, “Action-based Teaching, Autonomy and Identity”, Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching,
Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 46-65, 2007.
[53] Pawan Agarwal, “Higher Education in India the Need for Change”, ICRIER working series, 2006.
[54] Kai Ren, Jun Li, “Academic Freedom and University Autonomy: A Higher Education Policy Perspective”, Higher
Education Policy, Vol. 26, Issue 4, pp. 507–522, 2013.
[55] Kiran D. Devade, Sunil B. Ingole, Mahesh G. Bhong, Ramesh V. Kulkarni, “Structure of Autonomy in Technical
Education: Proposition”, 43rd ISTE National Convention, 2013.
[56] M.M. Gandhi “Autonomy and Accountability in Higher Education An Indian Perspective", IOSR Journal of
Research & Method in Education, Vol. 3, Issue 5, pp 33-37, 2013.
View publication stats

Higher Education Institutions - Some Guidelines For Obtaining and Sustaining Autonomy in The Context of Nep 2020

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Higher Education Institutions - Some Guidelines For Obtaining and Sustaining Autonomy in The Context of Nep 2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Higher Education Institutions -Some Guidelines for Obtaining and Sustaining

Article · January 2021

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Higher Education Institutions – Some Guidelines for

Keywords: Autonomy, accountability, learners’ autonomy, types of autonomy.

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 72

II. EDUCATIONAL POLICIES RELATED TO AUTONOMY

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 73

III. TYPES OF AUTONOMY IN HEIS

IV. MANAGERIAL AUTONOMY

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 74

V. AUTONOMY AND EXCELLENCE OF UNIVERSITY

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 75

VI. ACCOUNTABILITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 76

VII. CURRENT STATUS OF AUTONOMY IN HIGHER EDUCATION

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 77

VIII. DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION IN INDIA

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 78

IX. SUSTAINABILITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 79

XI. LEARNER AUTONOMY

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 80

XII. STRATEGIES FOR LONG-TERM SUSTENANCE OF AUTONOMY

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 81

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 82

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 83

XV. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OBTAINING AND SUSTAINING AUTONOMY IN HEIS

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 84

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 85

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 86

IJARESM Publication, India >>>> www.ijaresm.com Page 87

View publication stats

You might also like