The problems of higher education are well-known to all. There is a lack of necessary infrastructure and an environment conducive to quality research. The country’s partisan and violent politics have harmed every institution, with higher education institutions suffering the most. There are two philosophical debates we face. However, I do not have the answers to them. First, does creating employment opportunities or providing jobs falls within the scope of higher education? An important aspect of higher education is Vocational Education and Training (VET), which is directly related to employment and job creation. Beyond that, the purpose of higher education lies in the development of humanity. Whether higher education is responsible for directly addressing the job market or its demands, I do not know. I have simply presented the debate.

Another issue is the narrow division created between public and private universities. If the goal of higher education is to truly shape students into human beings, there should be no distinction between public and private institutions. Public and private are simply specialized forms of management. In this case, the difference may only lie in the management structure. However, there is no reason for a fundamental distinction between public and private in the core objectives and methods of higher education.

It is necessary to address the regulations of higher education institutions. The issue of infrastructural limitations has been raised in discussions. Relying solely on the government, these infrastructural limitations can never be overcome. Despite the sincerity of the government and the University Grants Commission (UGC), it will never be possible for either of them to ensure sufficient resources for higher education. Managing resources for higher education must involve the society. The main way to manage resources in higher education is through public-private partnerships or academic practicing collaborations. Relying on the government to manage resources in higher education is difficult. The more dependence there is on the government for resource management, the more opportunities for malpractice will emerge in educational institutions due to political favoritism and maneuvering.

The current state of higher education in the country is generally known to everyone, but no one knows it precisely. This is because, although various problems exist in higher education, there are no accurate statistics available. For example, if you want to know the rate of highly educated unemployed individuals, only three or four statistics will be mentioned. Additionally, there are noticeable variations in such statistics. One statistic states that 2.2 million graduates are produced every year, of which 160,000 find employment, including internships counted as jobs. The current state of higher education in the country should be known to all. To understand the current status of these issues, a white paper is urgently needed. To investigate and identify the root causes of these problems and take necessary actions, accurate statistics are definitely required.

The country’s higher education system needs a commission. Currently, the UGC (University Grants Commission) is involved in various tasks related to higher education. It is no longer just a granting commission. If we look at it on a larger scale, it could serve as a commission. However, there are some ambiguities regarding the UGC. For example, the relationship between the UGC and the Ministry needs to be clarified first. If the UGC regulates, should it also facilitate? If the UGC is to facilitate in higher education, it should be given priority. Since the country currently has a suitable government structure, changes in the UGC should be initiated at this point. Some reform initiatives can be taken. A national institution is needed for the overall coordination and facilitation of matters such as education methodology, research, resource management, market-oriented syllabi, and establishing communication between universities and the corporate world. This institution can either be newly created or the UGC can be restructured. Creating a new institution would take time, so if the UGC can be restructured, it will mark the beginning of change. It is crucial to decide in advance the relationship between the Ministry and the UGC.

We need to consider whether there is a need for new universities, apart from specialized institutions, at this moment. The increasing number of institutions is making it difficult to maintain the quality of higher education. Some institutions are performing very well, while others are falling behind. Good institutions can emerge in higher education, but attention must also be paid to ensuring that the quality of any institution does not decline drastically. The number of institutions currently available for higher education has already exceeded the limit. Immediate steps need to be taken to improve the standards of the universities that are lagging behind. Additionally, some institutions can be developed as centers of excellence. This must be done gradually. A proper plan must be developed and implemented in this regard.

Something can be said about global rankings. Every institution still has good researchers, but the problem is that we are not fully utilizing them for rankings. At the same time, we are very weak in public relations (PR). Our websites are not updated. Even the little work we do, we are unable to showcase it on the global stage. As a result, we are falling behind in global rankings.

There are also global challenges. What ‘criteria’ are you using to define global standards? The country's public and private universities have brought about a change in the authoritarian system. This has only been possible because of the universities. Isn't this a significant contribution to society and the state? Even in poverty, aren't the country's universities doing important work? They are. These hold national and social significance for us. However, they are not considered as important in the Western ranking system. There is also a difference in priorities here. I am not trying to make excuses about rankings. We do need rankings, but even if they do not fully reflect mainstream standards, the issues that are important to our society should also be included. This is because we cannot completely disregard our socioeconomic and political realities. If we consider QS rankings, the aspect of sustainable development was not initially considered, but it was later added. When ranking universities in countries like Bangladesh and Vietnam, their socioeconomic context must be taken into account. Can we not highlight the extraordinary achievements of Bangladeshi students in leadership in 2024 in global rankings?

Dr. Niaz Ahmed Khan: Professor and Vice Chancellor, University of Dhaka

[Remarks as a panelist at the 1st Bangladesh Higher Education Conclave 2024 organized by Bonik Barta on the topic “Global Standards in Higher Education: What is to be done in Bangladesh”]