UGC allows admission twice a year, garners mixed reactions

When University Grants Commission (UGC) Chairperson M Jagadesh Kumar recently announced that higher education institutions (HEIs) could start admitting students biannually in regular mode from the 2024-25 academic year, it sparked extensive debates within the education sector.

At present, universities and colleges admit students annually in July-August in regular mode. Therefore, all HEIs in India follow an academic session that begins in July-August and ends in May-June. However, in 2023, the UGC allowed students to take admission in open and distance learning (ODL) and online modes biannually in January and July during an academic year. According to Kumar, this decision enabled nearly half a million students to join their degree programs without waiting for a full academic year.

“After the UGC permitted two cycle admissions in a year for ODL and online modes, as per the information provided by the HEIs on the UGC portal, a total of 19,73,056 students were enrolled in July 2022, and an additional 4,28,854 students joined in January 2023 in ODL and online programmes,” said Kumar.

While some educationists have welcomed this biannual admission policy, others believe that the infrastructure and teaching faculty of the Indian education system are not equipped to handle admissions twice a year.

According to Dr Ashok Mittal, Chancellor, LPU, the recent policy by the UGC opens up exciting opportunities for students seeking to explore different fields or switch institutions without wasting valuable time. He highlighted how this move will allow students to be more flexible, make informed decisions about their education, and seamlessly transition to another program or institution after just six months. He further emphasized the benefits for institutions, noting that the policy maximises their enrollment capacity and efficiently utilises resources throughout the year. “By catering to students with diverse schedules and preferences, institutes can attract a broader range of applicants, further solidifying their reputation as student-centric institutions dedicated to fostering individual growth and success,” he said.

The UGC chief, in his announcement, mentioned that offering biannual admissions is not mandatory for all institutions. However, he also highlighted how biannual admissions can substantially increase the “Gross Enrolment Ratio and make India a Global Study Destination as envisioned in National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.”

“If Indian universities can offer admission twice a year, it will benefit many students, such as those who missed admission in the July/August session due to a delay in the announcement of board results, health issues, or personal reasons. With biannual admissions in place, industries can also conduct their campus recruitment twice a year, improving employment opportunities for graduates,” Kumar said.

Dr HB Raghavendra, Vice Chancellor, CMR University Bengaluru, also echoed similar thoughts. He mentioned that embracing the global policy of admitting students twice a year is a “good move” to enhance the Gross Enrollment Ratio (GER). However, he also said that the complexity of state and central education policies could impact the success of this initiative. “This is a step towards bringing education to everyone and making it flexible to address social needs and opportunities,” he said.

Meanwhile, the UGC emphasised that for HEIs to adopt a biannual mode of admissions, they need to address administrative intricacies, plan effectively to maximise the use of available resources, and establish seamless support systems to ensure smooth transitions for students admitted at different times of the year.

Dr Deevanshu Shrivastava, Associate Dean and Associate Professor School of Law, G D Goenka University highlighted that the policy of biannual admissions will be particularly beneficial for students from rural areas or those facing financial constraints. He also said that universities can utilise this system to accommodate students pursuing vocational courses or those looking to switch programs mid-stream. According to him, universities in India have the potential to significantly increase the GER, thereby bringing more students into higher education. Another crucial aspect will be aligning with global standards and practices. Dr Shrivastava also mentioned how the policy will also pose administrative and academic challenges. “Designing the curriculum and delivering programmes to suit the new framework, along with addressing infrastructural constraints, resource management, and technological challenges are not easy tasks to resolve. The success of this policy will depend on the autonomy granted to universities. Institutions with robust infrastructure and administrative capabilities are better positioned to adapt to this change. Conversely, smaller universities might struggle to manage the logistical complexities,” he said.

In fact, the UGC chairperson also emphasised that HEIs can maximise the benefits of biannual admissions only when they adequately prepare faculty members, staff, and students for the transition. However, Prof Ramanuj Ganguly raised concerns about the practicality of the proposal. He questioned how colleges or universities would manage to run two first semesters and two second semesters simultaneously. He also raised concerns about the allocation of classes and faculty members under such a system.

“This is for mainstream regular courses that colleges and universities are running. If this were for open school, adult education, or lifelong learning institutions, such measures could be accepted or experimented with. However, for regular courses, you can’t experiment because it’s impractical. If you make provisions, most students would enroll on time and complete their courses within the regular schedule. However, there might be a handful who join in the second half of the year, and it’s not feasible to run two parallel courses simultaneously for them, especially when they are the same courses,” he said.

The renowned educationist based in Kolkata also criticised the UGC for what he perceives as a neglectful attitude towards state-aided educational institutions. “Even NAAC-accredited institutions struggle to secure funds from the UGC. The commission behaves more like a step-parent to state-aided institutions, demanding respect as a parent while imposing various rules and regulations without fulfilling its own responsibilities. If the UGC funded second-term courses, it could facilitate additional buildings and teachers. Otherwise, it’s not a student-friendly proposal,” he said.

Prof Ganguly further commented on the impact of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. “Institutions are already adjusting to new educational approaches, and this impractical approach would only add to the chaos. One should take higher education seriously,” he said.