Reclaiming the social dimensions of higher education in India

The Hindu

19 hours ago

As admissions unfold across universities and colleges in India, one cannot help but notice the aggressive advertising blitz of private institutions and coaching centres. From glowing endorsements of alumni who cracked top-tier competitive exams to slick presentations of rankings and accreditations, higher education is increasingly being packaged and promoted as a premium commodity. These campaigns — ubiquitous across billboards, social media platforms, and even IPL ad breaks — rarely speak of learning, community, or growth. Instead, they sell a vision of education defined by metrics, placements, and prestige.
Setting aside valid concerns raised by scholars about the opaque and often dubious nature of many ranking mechanisms, the deeper issue is what this kind of messaging reveals — and obscures — about our understanding of higher education. In its current form, it reflects a predominantly commodified imagination: education as a product, students as customers, and degrees as guarantees of personal return on investment. Lost in this model is the idea of education as a public good — one that nurtures not only individual potential but also collective responsibility, critical thinking, and civic engagement.
Narrow vision
At the heart of this commodification lies the increasing privatisation of Indian higher education. Severe and sustained underfunding of public universities has created a vacuum eagerly filled by private institutions and coaching industries. These cater largely to the upper and upper-middle classes, reinforcing a narrow and exclusionary vision of higher education — accessible primarily to those who can afford it, and tailored towards individual success rather than societal contribution.
Such privatisation has also shaped how we now conceive the delivery of education. The rise of online degrees, micro-credentials, AI-based tutoring, and other forms of 'flexible learning' is often celebrated as innovation. However, these tools are frequently deployed within a hyper-individualised framework, where learning is imagined as a solitary activity — on screens, in apps, through automated feedback loops. But education is not a transactional download of information; it is a social, dialogic, and developmental process. The COVID-19 pandemic revealed, with brutal clarity, the hollowness of isolated learning — widespread reports documented sharp declines in engagement, comprehension, and well-being among students across levels.
What is increasingly overlooked is the unique value of physical universities: spaces that, at their best, foster diverse interactions, cultivate critical inquiry, and nurture habits of collective deliberation. These are not incidental features; they are essential to the democratic and transformative potential of education. When we reduce education to a mere skill-building exercise for the job market, we strip it of its deeper purpose: to cultivate thinking citizens, empathetic leaders, and socially conscious individuals.
Certainly, one cannot ignore the genuine concerns driving many families and students to embrace a utilitarian view of education. In a country grappling with chronic unemployment and economic insecurity, the pressure to secure a stable, well-paying job is immense. But what is more troubling is how this instrumental vision is being institutionalised and encouraged by universities themselves. Many are increasingly aligning their curricula, research, and training programmes with the immediate demands of the private sector and prioritising short-term industry needs over long-term social relevance.
This trend is reflected in the rhetoric around 'skills-based education', now a buzzword in policy and institutional circles. While skilling is important, equating it with education risks reducing universities to glorified placement agencies. The ultimate marker of success, as often celebrated in university brochures, is the student's placement in a multinational company with a lucrative salary package. What is absent is any discussion on whether this trajectory contributes to the larger public good or whether it merely serves the interests of a few.
Ironically, while private industry increasingly shapes the objectives of higher education, its financial contribution remains negligible. It is the public that largely funds the production of human capital, only for the benefits to accrue privately. This arrangement is neither fair nor sustainable. It reinforces inequality, exploits public investment, and erodes the possibility of imagining education as a shared societal endeavour.
Shift in orientation
What is urgently needed, then, is a collective effort to reclaim the social dimensions of higher education — how it is funded, how it is delivered, and to what ends it aspires. This begins with a renewed commitment to robust public investment in universities, not just in infrastructure but also in faculty, research, and student support systems. It also demands a reorientation of our pedagogical models to prioritise collaboration, dialogue, and critical engagement over isolated content consumption.
Most importantly, it calls for a cultural shift: a revaluation of education as a means to build an enlightened, egalitarian, and mutually sustaining society. This vision must resist the seduction of glitzy advertisements and hollow rankings, and instead affirm the transformative power of education to shape not only careers but also communities.
At a time when education is being sold on bus banners and TV slots, we must ask: are we investing in a future built on shared values and knowledge or merely purchasing tickets to personal advancement?
The writer is an assistant professor with the Department of Professional Studies, Christ University, Bengaluru.