Indian higher education institutions traditionally offer three-year undergraduate degrees, except for professional courses such as engineering and medicine, and two-year master degrees. Subsequent to the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 that advocated the liberal arts model of undergraduate studies, four-year degree programs have quick-started in India. As per the University Grants Commission (UGC), the apex regulatory body, nearly 200 universities have now introduced four-year degree programs. This article examines the policy push for a four-year degree. It analyzes assumptions and rationales behind the proposed policy choice and the larger implications of such reforms on the Indian higher education landscape.

Indian universities have long modeled themselves on European models of higher education, but there is now a new model driving reform across the country – the North American model of liberal arts education. The liberal arts model aims to provide breadth and depth of knowledge by exposing students to various disciplines, thereby equipping them to develop critical thinking and liberal attitudes. In addition, in North America, an undergraduate degree is four years in duration.  While the United States has witnessed a decline in enrollment in four-year degree programs in recent years, there is a revival of liberal arts colleges in Europe (at least in the northern part), and that revival is now discernible in Indian higher education as well.

Four-Year Undergraduate Program in India

The idea received public attention for the first time in India in 2013 when the University of Delhi, a central university fully funded by the ministry of education, introduced the four-year undergraduate program (FYUP). FYUP has multiple entry-exit options with qualifications such as certificates, diplomas, and degrees, and it allows students to choose major and minor subjects. The reform was accused of being a form of  “Americanization” of higher education and was strongly opposed by students’ and teachers’ unions. Student protests and faculty opposition caught significant media attention and caused political reverberations. As directed by the UGC, the FYUP was rolled back in 2014.

The issue reappeared when the Draft National Education Policy (DNEP) was released in 2019, proposing the implementation of four-year degree programs. Interestingly, the committee that prepared DNEP was appointed by the same government that scrapped the FYUP from the University of Delhi. DNEP emphasized the critical need to reorient undergraduate education in line with the liberal arts model. The introduction of four-year bachelor of liberal arts or bachelor of liberal education degrees was expected to provide exposure to a broader spectrum of disciplines and competencies than a narrow specialization, a reorientation seen as essential for future workers in a changing labor market landscape. However, the introduction of such a scheme was left entirely to individual institutions.

Holistic and Multidisciplinary Education as New Avatar

The NEP which was released in 2020 introduced the idea of “holistic and multidisciplinary education” in place of liberal arts. Although the conceptual underpinning of “holistic education” remains elusive, NEP claims that “holistic and multidisciplinary education” draws on the foundation of the ancient Indian education system that once fostered “knowledge of many arts.” The new Curriculum and Credit Framework for Undergraduate Programs, released in 2022, is central to UGC’s student-centric reforms following NEP 2020.

Enhanced flexibility and multidisciplinarity are the central features of the new scheme. Students can leave with a certificate after one year, a diploma after two years, a degree after three years, and a research degree after four years. To be eligible for one of these credentials, students must take additional skill-based courses for extra credits in the first and second year. To that end, the Academic Bank of Credits (a database with all credits earned by individual students throughout their learning journey) was integrated into the new system. The Academic Bank of Credits allows students to acquire credits by completing courses offered by other providers, including Study Webs of Active Learning for Young Aspiring Minds—a MOOC platform owned by the ministry of education.

Push Factors and Implications

Many believe that the four-year degree would facilitate student mobility and strengthen internationalization efforts. Larger support for such a move is based on the assumption that the change would meet the changing labor market requirements. The active leadership role of UGC partly explains the fast implementation of the four-year degree. Interestingly, Kerala, a provincial state that once vehemently opposed NEP, is one of the first states to implement the four-year scheme.

Since the private sector accounts for more than 64 percent of enrollment in colleges, an additional year of study could be a source for colleges to generate revenue. Unsurprisingly, the private sector does not in any way resist the change.

However, in a system that is divided vertically and horizontally in terms of quality and prestige, the scheme may further exacerbate inequalities. According to one critique, the flexibility and choice that the scheme upholds could lead to the acquisition of “degree within degree,” resulting in credential devaluation. The notion of flexibility also puts the onus of poor employment outcomes on students, which has serious implications, as many new entrants will be from deprived socioeconomic groups and belong to first-generation higher education learner populations.

Internal and external factors determine quality in terms of employment outcomes. Internal factors include the quality of graduates, teachers, and teaching/learning infrastructure and facilities. External factors include the overall health of the economy and the dynamics of the labor market. More is to be learned from national systems that continue with the three-year degree system.

Last but not the least, in general, Indian institutions lack the adequate infrastructure and qualified teachers to guide student research activities in the fourth year of the degree. None of the top 100 colleges out of the 45,000 colleges counted in the National Institutional Ranking Framework have teachers with adequate research potential. Rampant teacher vacancies and overreliance on contract teachers add to the problem. A large share of small-size colleges poses severe challenges in offering adequate educational choices. The scenario may compel students to choose online courses, constraining the demand for recruiting teachers in understaffed colleges.

Conclusion

Emphasis on the critical need for quantitative expansion makes NEP 2020 stand out from past national policies on education. The question is to what extent such reforms would address foundational issues of equity, quality, and relevance in the wake of higher education development in local and global contexts.

Many of the reforms proposed in the policy have been part of the debates for quite a long time, though there has not yet been any general agreement on the diagnosis and solution. The four-year degree, however, is comparatively new to the Indian education and policy community. The introduction of a four-year degree is supply-driven rather than demand-driven. It also demonstrates how policy problems are discursively produced and shape discussions related to the implementation of a given policy solution.

There appears to be a widespread belief that the four-year degree is a panacea for all the problems that the higher education sector faces. Of course, inquiry-based learning and broad-based education are essential for current and future generations. Liberal arts, as a pedagogical approach, has much to offer. Change in the duration of the study program is not a necessary condition to incorporate the liberal arts model. The imperative is to begin with the foundational problems rather than following a “garbage can model” of decision-making that searches for problems to fit with proposed solutions.

Malish C.M is assistant professor at the Ashank Desai Centre for Policy Studies at the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India. E-mail: [email protected].