Skip to main content
UploadLanguage (EN)Support
BusinessMobileSocial MediaMarketingTechnologyArt & PhotosCareerDesignEducationPresentations & Public SpeakingGovernment & NonprofitHealthcareInternetLawLeadership & ManagementAutomotiveEngineeringSoftwareRecruiting & HRRetailSalesServicesScienceSmall Business & EntrepreneurshipFoodEnvironmentEconomy & FinanceData & AnalyticsInvestor RelationsSportsSpiritualNews & PoliticsTravelSelf ImprovementReal EstateEntertainment & HumorHealth & MedicineDevices & HardwareLifestyle
Kirti Matliwala, profile picture
Uploaded byKirti Matliwala
17,499 views

Rusa

The document discusses the Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA), a centrally sponsored scheme in India to transform higher education. It aims to improve access, equity and quality of higher education through reforms implemented at the state level. Key goals include increasing gross enrollment ratio to 32% by 2022 and ensuring state universities and colleges are dynamic, demand-driven, and responsive to economic and technological changes through academic, administrative and governance reforms. The scheme focuses on performance-based funding, mandatory accreditation, expanding institutional capacity, ensuring regional balance and inclusion, strengthening research and innovation. It establishes state higher education councils for planning, monitoring and capacity building.

Education◦
Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha AbhiyanRashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan RUSARUSA Transformation of Higher EducationTransformation of Higher Education
Concerns in Higher EducationConcerns in Higher Education • Access, Equity, Quality and Funding • State Universities: Poor Reforms in areas like: – Academic and Affiliation – Governance – Autonomy • Role of StateRole of State in Higher Education • Funding not linked with performance • Lack of MonitoringMonitoring and Evaluation of Schemes of Higher Education • PlanningPlanning by State Governments and Institutions • Poor AccountabilityAccountability of Institutions and States • No partnership of stakeholdersstakeholders
Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) • It was launched in March, 2009 • the objective to enhance access to secondary education and to improve its quality. The implementation of the scheme started from 2009-10. It is envisaged to achieve an enrolment rate of 75% from 52.26% in 2005- 06 at secondary stage of implementation of the scheme by providing a secondary school within a reasonable distance of any habitation.
• The other objectives include improving quality of education imparted at secondary level through making all secondary schools conform to prescribed norms, removing gender, socio-economic and disability barriers, providing universal access to secondary level education by 2017, i.e., by the end of 12th Five Year Plan and achieving universal retention by 2020.
• Important Physical Facilities Provided Under The Scheme Are: • (i) Additional class rooms, (ii) Laboratories, (iii) Libraries, (iv) Art and crafts room, (v) Toilet blocks, (vi) Drinking water provisions and (vii) Residential Hostels for Teachers in remote areas.
• Important Quality Interventions Provided Under The Scheme Are: • (i) appointment of additional teachers to reduce PTR to 30:1, (ii) focus on Science, Math and English education, (iii) In-service training of teachers, (iv) science laboratories, (v) ICT enabled education, (vi) curriculum reforms; and (vii) teaching learning reforms.
• Important Equity Interventions Provided In The Scheme Are: • (i) special focus in micro planning (ii) preference to Ashram schools for upgradation (iii) preference to areas with concentration of SC/ST/Minority for opening of schools (iv) special enrolment drive for the weaker section (v) more female teachers in schools; and (vi) separate toilet blocks for girls.
• Implementation Mechanism Of The Scheme • The scheme is being implemented by the State government societies established for implementation of the scheme. The central share is released to the implementing agency directly. The applicable State share is also released to the implementing agency by the respective State Governments.
Triggers for RUSATriggers for RUSA • Success of SSASSA and RMSARMSA • Existing poor conditionpoor condition of State Higher Education Institutions • Limitations of UGCUGC • Need to make state equal partnerequal partner in planning and monitoring • Urgent need for stakeholderstakeholder partnership in process of transformation of higher education
What is RUSAWhat is RUSA • A Centrally Sponsored Scheme • A Strategic Intervention in Higher Education • Tool – reforms at State Level – greater accountability and autonomy of state universities and collegescolleges • Performance linked Funding – Funding on the basis of Plans,Plans, achievements and outcomes • Key Result Areas – Access, Equity and Excellence • Role of States – Funding and Accountability – Planning and Monitoring • State Higher Education Councils – Planning, Execution, Evaluation, Monitoring and Capacity BuildingCapacity Building • Emphasis on Planning – Institutional Development Plans – State Higher Education Plan • Duration: XII and XIII PlanXII and XIII Plan • RUSA Implementation Structure
What is RUSA (2)What is RUSA (2) • Flow of Funds: – From MHRDMHRD to Institutions through State Budget • Funding to States: – Based on critical appraisalcritical appraisal of State Higher Education Plans • Funding: – Norm Based Funding – Future Grants would be outcome based • Commitment –a Precondition for RUSA Eligibility – Academic, Administrative and Governance ReformsAcademic, Administrative and Governance Reforms • Centre State Funding Ratio: – 90:1090:10 or 65:3565:35 or 50:5050:50
RUSA: GoalsRUSA: Goals • Target GER: 32%32% by the end of XIII PlanXIII Plan • State Universities and College – Quality Improvement – Capacity Enhancement • State Universities and College to become: – Dynamic – Demand Driven – Quality Conscious – Efficient and Forward Looking – Responsive to rapid economic and technological developments
RUSA: Goals (2)RUSA: Goals (2) • Mandatory AccreditationAccreditation • Reforms in State Higher Education System through – Institutional Structure for • Planning and Monitoring at State Level • Autonomy of State Universities/Institutions • Improvements in Governance • Academic and Examination Reforms in State Institutions • Availability of Quality Teachers and Faculty Development • Enabling Environment for Research and Innovation • Expansion of Institutional Base: – Creation of additional capacity of existing institutions – Establishing new institutions • Regional Balance in AccessAccess in Higher Education • Inclusive Higher Education – Women, Minorities, Differently enabled, SC/ST and EBCWomen, Minorities, Differently enabled, SC/ST and EBC
RUSA: SCOPERUSA: SCOPE • All StateState Universities and Colleges • 12b12b and 2(F)2(F) Compliant • Non-12B and Non-2 (f) • Approx: 306 Universities and 8500 colleges306 Universities and 8500 colleges • Funding for: • Improvement in Policy, Academic and Management Practices • Public Funded Institutions: – Eligible for all components • Private Aided Institutions: – Eligible for some component • Funds for Infrastructure and Quality Improvement • Capacity Building of the States to – Plan, Implement and Monitor initiatives for higher education sector • Planning by Institutions and by States: – Institutional Development Plan – State Higher Education Plan
Why RUSA • Key Objectives: – To improve accessaccess, equityequity and qualityquality in higher education – Through Planned Development at State Level • Planning at State level for: – Creating newnew institutions – Expanding and upgradingupgrading existing ones – StrengtheningStrengthening self reliant institutions
RUSA ApproachRUSA Approach • Funding: Performance based funding, Incentivizing well performing institutions, decision making through clearly defined norms • State Higher Education Plan • State Higher Education Council: • Flow of Funds: – Based on Outcomes and Achievements – Physical Outputs and Intended Outcomes • Non negotiable pre-requisites: – A priority commitmentscommitments to reforms process by state – Academic, Administrative and Governance Reforms – Creation of State Higher Education CouncilCouncil – Filling up Faculty PositionsPositions • Emphasis on Monitoring and Evaluation
RUSA: ApproachRUSA: Approach
RUSA: Strategic FocusRUSA: Strategic Focus • Spatial and Regional Planning and Mapping • Program and Discipline Planning • Mandatory Accreditation and Quality Improvement • Reforms: Governance and Academic • Infrastructure • Review of the AffiliatingAffiliating System • Transparent and Norm-based FundingFunding • OutcomeOutcome based re-imbursement • Faculty PlanningPlanning • EquityEquity Intervention • FocusFocus on Research and Innovation
RUSA: ComponentsRUSA: Components New Universities Equity Initiatives Upgradation of Autonomous Colleges to Universities Faculty Recruitment Support Conversion of Colleges to Cluster Universities Faculty Improvements Infrastructure Grants to Universities Research Universities New Model Colleges (General) Vocationalization of Higher Education Upgradation of Existing Colleges to Model Colleges Leadership Development of Academic Administrators New Colleges (Professional) Institutional Restructuring and Reforms Infrastructure Grants to Colleges Capacity Building, Preparation, Data Collection and Planning Research, Innovation and Quality Improvement Management Information System
Guiding PrinciplesGuiding Principles • PerformancePerformance based outlays and Outcome based reimbursement • Incentivizing and Dis-incentivizing • ApoliticalApolitical Decision Making • DisclosureDisclosure Based Governance • AutonomyAutonomy to Institutions and States • EquityEquity Based Development • Quality and Research FocusFocus
Areas of CautionAreas of Caution • Many other states are doing much better • Not all Universities/Colleges will be covered • Commitments linked Grants • IDP should be student centric • There should be a good deal of dialogue amongst faculty, non teaching staff and students • IDP by 1414thth DecemberDecember. Those who delay will be left out
Institutional StructureInstitutional Structure National Level RUSA Mission Authority Project Approval Board Special Purpose Vehicle ( for Technical Support Group and Project Directorate) State Level State Higher Education CouncilState Higher Education Council State Project DirectorateState Project Directorate Technical Support GroupTechnical Support Group Institutional Level Governing Body Project Monitoring Unit
Tentative Goals for GujaratTentative Goals for Gujarat Goal How to Monitor Better Regularity % Attendance Better Infrastructure Quality NET, NAAC Better Outcomes % Employed,, Research Citation Index, CBCS, Credit Transfer Advanced and Up-to-date Syllabus % of Syllabus updated in last 5 years Automated Processes Academic and Non Academic Staff Ratio Better Outreach GER, Gender Ratio, GER among SC&ST Better Teaching Quality Monitoring