Sibal, Montek differ on foreign education bill - The Times of India

Considered reformists in theManmohan Singh government, HRD minister Kapil Sibal and Planning Commission deputy chairperson Montek Singh Ahluwalia are not on the same side when it comes to Foreign Education Providers Billand a slew of other educational legislations being planned by the HRD ministry.

Ahluwalia's criticism has come out in the latest WikiLeaks disclosures. After a lot of initial enthusiasm, the HRD ministry is going slow on Foreign Education Providers Bill as a fresh round of discussion has begun.

A cable from the US embassy in Delhi shows Ahluwalia expressing reservations about the Bill to William Burns, US under secretary of state for political affairs. "Hazarding that he was perhaps talking out of turn, Ahluwalia asserted that he was not very happy with the Foreign University Bill and did not think that legislative changes were needed (Note: The draft Bill would allow foreign campuses in India. End note.) To move forward, Ahluwalia suggested that a new bilateral forum identify 8-9 different educational collaboration models and then determine where the US and Indian interest was strongest," the cable dated June 6, 2009 says. The cable was released on August 26.

Ahluwalia also told Burns that his impression about Sibal is that he "wanted to rewrite the bilateral agenda of education to focus on three areas: expansion, inclusion and excellence". "The deputy chairman said that expansion and inclusion were already being implemented, but that raising the quality of education was going to be the 'tough part'. At least part of the solution lie in promoting Indian universities, which offer a global experience through some use of visiting faculty, joint programmes, or "twinning". (Note: Ahluwalia has earlier described this to American officials as a relationship between an Indian and American university where students from either institution spend one year at each university)

In the same cable, Ahluwalia while advocating a "separate bilateral forum on education" told Burns that he "had been in contact with US faculty of Indian origin, who are interested in pursuing new types of collaboration with Indian universities".

But, Ahluwalia cautioned, there is a lack of clarity about what would be best for the US and Indian universities among a "multiplicity of models". He also suggested that to "move forward, a new bilateral forum identify 8-9 different educational collaboration models and then determine where US and Indian interest was strongest. His impression was that American universities do not want to set up entire campuses, but rather facilities where they could take 30-40 students for a semester."

The cable quotes Burns observing that some US universities in recent years have set up in different countries, but Ahluwalia replied that such models would not work in India because they are funded by the host country, which would be perceived in India as preferential to the foreign university. Ahluwalia categorically stated that the "Dubai model" would not work.