Why the insistence on a 15:1 student-teacher ratio could be counterproductive

The Hindu

2 days ago

The Indian higher education sector is at a critical juncture. As universities and colleges strive for better national and global rankings, the focus on metrics such as faculty strength, research output, and student-teacher ratio has intensified. One that has drawn attention is the insistence on a 15:1 student-teacher ratio as a benchmark for quality. While this may appear to be a well-intentioned move aimed at improving education standards, it is, in fact, a counterproductive policy that could erode the quality of both teaching and research in Indian institutions.
India does not produce enough Ph.D. graduates who meet global research and teaching standards. The number of Ph.D. holders graduating each year is limited and only a fraction possesses the research rigour, teaching aptitude, and academic depth necessary to contribute meaningfully to higher education. According to the All-India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) 2022, less than 40,000 PhDs are awarded annually across all disciplines but the quality of these degrees varies widely due to disparities in faculty expertise, funding availability, and research infrastructure across institutions. Many are produced by institutions where research culture is weak, leading to degrees that may not necessarily indicate deep academic expertise. If universities are compelled to maintain a 15:1 student-teacher ratio without a sufficient pool of well-trained Ph.D. holders, they may end up hiring suboptimal candidates, many of whom might lack strong research capabilities or effective teaching skills. Globally, top universities do not adhere rigidly to a 15:1 student-teacher ratio. Many leading institutions in the U.S. and Europe operate effectively with ratios between 25:1 and 30:1, depending on the field of study.
A smaller class size does not automatically translate to better learning outcomes. For instance, student engagement in many Science and Engineering disciplines depends not just on faculty headcount but on infrastructure, lab access, mentorship quality, and research opportunities. A well-structured programme with 30 students per teacher can be equally effective, provided faculty members are well-qualified, and teaching methods are interactive. The pedagogical approach, faculty training, and institutional support make a difference.
Institutions scrambling to meet the 15:1 ratio without an adequate supply of high-quality PhDs will inevitably lower their hiring standards. Candidates with questionable academic backgrounds from less known or non-research-intensive institutions will get hired. Faculty members with weak research profiles and limited classroom experience will be given teaching responsibilities. Universities will focus on quantity over quality, leading to the dilution of academic standards. In the long run, this will only degrade India's higher education ecosystem rather than improve it.
Moreover, an influx of low-quality PhDs will directly impact students. Faculty members who are unprepared, uninspiring, and underqualified will struggle to engage students in meaningful learning. Weak conceptual clarity among teachers will lead to poor classroom delivery. Superficial research guidance will hinder innovation and original thinking among students. Just as poor faculty recruitment affects teaching, it also harms research quality. A faculty member with a poor research record is unlikely to contribute meaningfully to India's research ecosystem.
Shift in focus
Instead of artificially forcing universities to recruit more faculty members, India's higher education policy should focus on the following priorities.
Encourage rigorous Ph.D. programmes: Emphasise original research, teacher training, and publication ethics rather than simply increasing the number of degree holders.
Faculty development: Invest in training faculty members in effective pedagogy, student engagement, and research skills.
Increase research funding: The government must increase research grants, provide better stipends for Ph.D. students, and ensure that universities have the financial capacity to attract top talent.
Flexible student-teacher ratio: Allow institutions to maintain a 25:1 or 30:1 ratio based on the field of study, research focus, and student needs.
In conclusion, the insistence on a 15:1 student-teacher ratio will not improve education quality. Instead, it will lower the standard of teaching and research in India. Our focus should not be on hiring more faculty members just to meet an arbitrary metric but on ensuring that faculty members — regardless of their number — are truly qualified, passionate, and effective educators and researchers.
Views are personal
The writer is the Director of Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology and Dean of LM Thapar School of Management and Thapar School of Liberal Arts and Sciences.