NEP considers quality higher education to be one of the pre-requisites of 21st century to develop good, thoughtful, well-rounded, and creative individuals, where, it is acknowledged that the purpose of quality higher education is more than mere creation of greater opportunities for individual employment. Enhancement of quality in higher education bank upon a number of parameters including ‘ranking’ and ‘accreditation’ of the Higher Education Institutions to ensure that standards in delivery of education is uniformly maintained throughout the country.

Accreditation

In Higher Education, accreditation is carried out by an autonomous body namely, National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) that assesses and accredits HEIs in the country on a list of parameters to ensure that HEIs are offering quality higher education.

NEP 2020 recommended that in the long run accreditation will be a binary process in lines with existing global practice. Based on the recommendations of Dr. Radhakrishnan Committee report on ‘transformative reforms for strengthening Assessment and Accreditation of HEIs in India, and its acceptance National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC)will undertake accreditation reforms in two phases: Binary Accreditation and Maturity-Based Graded Levels. NAAC has proposed engaging with the Higher Education Departments and Councils of various states to consult with them about the planned reforms in accreditation, thereby, enabling the majority of institutions to participate in the new accreditation process.

Binary Accreditation framework is drawn from 10 attributes classified based on Input, Process and Outcome dimensions essential for achieving quality assurance in higher education. The important change in the proposed framework is to focus on “Outcome and its Impact” on the contribution of higher education towards socio-economic development of the nation. The framework is suitably configured to accommodate the requirements of Universities, Autonomous colleges and affiliated colleges. In addition, the framework captures the uniqueness of institutions that have impacted the specific stakeholders group. The Framework incorporates the situation of rural and remote location institutions, which may be located in Aspirational Districts across the country.

Currently, around 475 Universities and 10,108 HEIs across the country are accredited. Given the fact that the current percentage of colleges accreditation is relatively low, it is proposed to launch several hand holding initiatives to reach out and support institutions to come forward for participation in the accreditation process. In addition, the institutions located in rural and remote locations are likely to receive mentoring support from NAAC in order to ensure no institution is left behind in the new and transformative quality movement. The new framework symbolizes “Ease of doing business and Confidence in system” and enables self-directed motivation towards accreditation without any fear or inhibitions.

The proposed framework is expected to take less cycle time, less accreditation fee and most importantly avoids physical peer team visits to the institutions as part of assessment. Also, the data validation which is largely quantitative, will be carried out by peer institutions to ensure objectivity and correctness of assessment. The proposed framework of 10 Attributes includes 59 metrics for universities, 56 for autonomous colleges, and 46 for affiliated colleges. NAAC had also prepared various discipline-specific manuals suitable for disciplines such as Law, Health Sciences, and Management, etc. to accommodate the specific requirements of these disciplines.

Ranking

India takes pride in its large higher education network, encompassing 1,168 Universities/University-level Institutions, 45,473 Colleges, and 12,002 Stand Alone Institutions offering a wide array of programs in nearly every discipline. Despite this vast network, only a select few institutions find representation in global QS and THE rankings, leaving the majority unacknowledged.

It is crucial to gain a comprehensive understanding of the current state of higher education in India and to establish a standardized assessment tool for measuring educational quality under set parameters, thus promoting excellence, accountability, and competitiveness within the higher education sector. In response to this need, the Government of India introduced the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) in 2015, aimed at evaluating the performance of higher education institutions across the country. The ultimate goal is to imbue the Indian higher education landscape with quality and clarity, ultimately paving the way for the development of world-class educational institutions, fostering a culture of performance, and preparing Indian institutions for inclusion in global rankings.

The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) evaluates Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) based on five broad parameters: Teaching, Learning and Resources (TLR), Research and Professional Practices (RP), Graduation Outcomes (GO), Outreach and Inclusivity (OI), and Perception. Each parameter includes specific sub-heads to comprehensively assess HEIs. NIRF ranks HEIs across 13 categories, including recent additions such as Agriculture and Allied sector and innovation category. Since its inception, NIRF has seen significant growth in HEI participation, increasing from 3,563 in 2016 to 5,543 in 2023, indicating growing engagement and interest in the ranking framework.

At the 1stNational Conference of the Chief Secretaries in June 2022, one of the decisions was to study the methodology for ranking of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) and ranking parameters. It was decided that an appropriate roadmap will be drawn to improve the ranking of Indian HEIs at both the national and global levels. Additionally, in the 7th Governing Council meeting of NITI Aayog, it was emphasized that NIRF should be made mandatory for all universities. This highlights NIRF's pivotal role in elevating the performance and quality of academic and research activities in HEIs, ultimately enhancing their representation in international ranking.

A tangible outcome of NIRF improving the performance and quality of Academic, Research in the HEIs is the increased presence of Indian HEIs in the QS Ranking, with the number of institutions in the top 500 climbing from 7 in 2015 to 11 in 2025. Additionally, the total number of Indian HEIs in the QS ranking surged from 9 in 2014 to 46 in 2025, signifying India's growing recognition and presence in international rankings.

A roundtable meeting was organized in the month of April, 2024 by the National Board of Accreditation (NBA). The meeting included Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) featured in the QS ranking along with top performing institutes in NIRF. The purpose of the meeting was to facilitate the exchange of best practices in order to enhance the international standings of the HEIs through adoption and implementation.

The research output of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) plays a significant role in achieving a high ranking, as it accounts for 30% of the evaluation criteria. A strong research output also gives Indian HEIs an advantage in being featured in the QS rankings. However, HEIs face challenges in maintaining their research output, which is crucial for improving the quality of the institute and enhancing its global reputation.

Further individual States have developed their own state-level assessments to evaluate Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) on their performance and provide data-driven insights for areas of improvement. Gujarat launched GSIRF in 2019, while Kerala launched KSIRF in 2023. The state-level assessments help State HEIs in assessing and rating themselves based on benchmarked metrics of local and global relevance, thereby providing insights, and identifying areas for improvement to feature better in NIRF and global rankings.

In order to enhance the assessment of Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) and elevate the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) to a global standard, the plan is to expand NIRF with target of 50% Universities and 20% of the Colleges participate in the NIRF / Subject wise rankings by 2029. In addition, it is also targeted to have at least 10 Indian HEIs in top 200 in international rankings. Accordingly, action plan is aimed to expand NIRF to all Indian institutes and subject rankings and transforming NIRF into a framework for global ranking. Quality reforms in data collection at HEIs will also be implemented, including the introduction of 3rd party validation of NIRF data.

Topics to be brainstormed:

• Importance of HEI’s research output in enhancing their standings in national and global rankings.
• Improving the quality of data submitted by HEIs through robust data collection system and data validation which helps in increasing the effectiveness of ranking.
• Pathway for top institutes featured in NIRF to participate in global rankings to ensure 10 Indian HEIs are in top 100 in global rankings by 2047.
• Increasing the acceptability and positioning of NIRF as the ranking of the global south.
• Transforming the NIRF ranking framework at par with leading global rankings to enhance the Indian HEIs standings in global ranking.
• Capacity building of HEIs on ranking parameters, strategies to improve and awareness to clear regional imbalance and fear of performance.
• Need for an inclusive system and conducive categorizations to ensure an equitable participation of several diverse institutions.
• Shifting towards One Nation One data policy to have a common platform for sharing information which reduces the HEIs' efforts of uploading similar data to various sources and increases the authenticity of the data.
• With respect to accreditation, recent reforms in two phases: Binary Accreditation and Maturity-Based Graded Levels.
• Reasons for Low participation of HEIs in NAAC accreditation.
• Proposed accreditation framework focusing on “Outcome and its Impact” on the contribution of higher education towards socio-economic development of the nation.
• Robust collection of data Institute and University level using suitable ERP system so that last minute rush to fill the data and missing out any important achievements is avoided.

Expected Outcomes

• Strategic way forward to increase the participation of higher education institutions in the NIRF, Accreditation and other global ranking.
• Exchange of best practices to enhance the national and international standings of HEIs.
• Revised NIRF framework aligned with global ranking framework to enhance the quality of HEIs to meet global standards.
• Strategies to enhance the performance of various parameters within the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) for different categories of HEIs.
• Implementation framework of One Nation One data policy to have a common platform for sharing information.

Roadmap for the Institutes

• Capacity building programs to be conducted to support and sensitize institutions on culture of rankings and accreditation, benefits of accreditation and NIRF assessment, application process, regional imbalance, and fear of performance.
• Mentoring of HEIs with an international/national ranking expert to amplify research output and have maximum impact on ranking standings.
• Top ranked institutions to handhold other HEIs through hub-and-spokes model to increase their chances of featuring in national and global rankings.
• Training of NIRF nodal persons in HEIs on data collection and filling of appropriate data to reduce the data discrepancies.
• Encouraging top institutes featured in NIRF to participate in global rankings as they have certain ranking parameters outputs already in place.
• States/UTs may come up with own state-level assessments to evaluate Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) on their performance and provide data-driven insights for areas of improvement to feature better in NIRF and global rankings.
• Universities and colleges in States and UTs should focus on improving the quality of education being imparted through the attainment of NAAC and NBA accreditation and guiding smaller institutes in the same.
• Study of the methodology for ranking of HEIs and based on the ranking parameters, appropriate roadmap be drawn to improve ranking of Indian HEIs subject wise and university wise both nationally and globally.
• Universities and colleges in the States and UTs need to be mandated to participate in the NIRF every year.
• HEIs should move towards applying for autonomy and should focus on establishing an effective governance board.