top of page

By:

Bhaskar Nath Biswal

13 May 2026 at 3:00:30 pm

The New PG Playbook

Last month, the University Grants Commission (UGC) issued a landmark circular that promises to transform the postgraduate education landscape in India. By allowing Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) already approved for two-year Open and Distance Learning (ODL) and Online postgraduate (PG) programmes to offer a one-year version in the same discipline, the UGC operationalized a major vision outlined in the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. For students holding a four-year bachelor’s...

The New PG Playbook

Last month, the University Grants Commission (UGC) issued a landmark circular that promises to transform the postgraduate education landscape in India. By allowing Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) already approved for two-year Open and Distance Learning (ODL) and Online postgraduate (PG) programmes to offer a one-year version in the same discipline, the UGC operationalized a major vision outlined in the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. For students holding a four-year bachelor’s degree with Honours, this creates a direct, accelerated one-year route to a master’s degree via online or distance modes. While framed around flexibility and student choice, this reform prompts a deeper question: how should 21st-century India balance depth, speed and access in higher education? Structural Safeguards This shift originates in NEP 2020’s framework of flexible entry and exit points, seamless credit mobility and international academic alignment. The policy established that a four-year undergraduate degree with research or Honours should be considered equivalent to the traditional three-year degree plus additional coursework for pursuing advanced studies. The UGC’s directive gives structural backing to this equivalence within the ODL and online sectors. Crucially, this is not an open permission. Institutions may only offer the one-year postgraduate option if they already maintain an approved two-year programme in that subject. Furthermore, the curriculum, credit system, assessment rigor and instructional material must strictly adhere to UGC guidelines and institutional approvals. Admission remains restricted to four-year Honours graduates, while professional degrees like the MBA or MCA must continue meeting their respective regulatory criteria. Thus, the framework acts as a targeted parallel track rather than a dilution of academic standards. The advantages of this policy shift are considerable, particularly in a developing economy where time and financial constraints often determine educational outcomes. First, reducing postgraduate duration directly lowers tuition costs and living expenses. For a working professional or student balancing household budgets, entering the job market or qualifying for doctoral research a year earlier makes a meaningful impact on career trajectories. Second, it brings Indian qualifications closer to global norms. One-year master’s degrees are standard across Europe, the United States, Australia and parts of Asia, and this change eliminates credit transfer hurdles for Indian graduates seeking global academic or employment opportunities. Third, it harnesses online and distance learning formats to expand opportunities across underserved regions where physical postgraduate seats are scarce and migration costs are prohibitive. Finally, it provides a tangible reward for students who opted for four-year multidisciplinary undergraduate degrees, reinforcing the incentive to pursue specialized academic depth early on. Operational Risks However, translating policy into practice introduces operational challenges. The primary concern revolves around quality assurance. Compressing a postgraduate curriculum into a single year, even with equivalent credit requirements demands intensive academic focus from both educators and learners. In distance and online learning, where independent study dominates, there is a distinct danger of turning advanced degrees into mere module-checking exercises. To prevent this, institutions must invest in rich digital resources, active mentorship and secure evaluation systems. A second obstacle involves public perception and institutional acceptance. Traditional employers, particularly within state agencies and conservative industries, long equate a two-year master's with comprehensive capability. Academic circles may similarly question whether a twelve-month framework provides sufficient time for specialized research and practical skill acquisition. While the UGC circular limits entry to four-year Honours graduates, communicating this distinction to recruiters and international universities requires active, transparent outreach to ensure the degree is viewed as accelerated rather than shortened. Finally, professional degrees governed by specialized bodies like the AICTE must carefully align internship and accreditation requirements so that graduates face no disadvantage during recruitment drives. Addressing these challenges requires building a supportive institutional ecosystem around the new model. Universities should publish detailed credit frameworks demonstrating how the accelerated curriculum corresponds to two-year standards, incorporating capstone projects or research modules to maintain analytical depth. Quality assurance bodies like NAAC and the UGC should make evaluation criteria for online programmes transparent, helping candidates make informed decisions. Simultaneously, recruitment regulations across public and private sectors must explicitly recognize a one-year postgraduate degree following a four-year undergraduate degree as fully equivalent to traditional qualifications. The UGC’s circular represents a vital step toward modernizing Indian postgraduate education. Executed with institutional discipline and rigorous oversight, it offers a powerful mechanism for social mobility, financial relief, and global integration. On the other hand, its superficial implementation may reduce high-level education to paper credentials. (The writer is a former college Principal and Founder of Supporting Shoulders, an Odisha-based non-profit Trust. Views personal.)

Why is Mamata Seeing Ghost of Bangladesh?

Updated: Oct 21, 2024

Why is Mamata Seeing Ghost of Bangladesh?

Mamata is seeing a ghost of Bangladesh behind the massive outrage and waves of protest over rape and murder of the trainee doctor. And the reasons are many.

It’s been over a fortnight. Yet with each passing day the voice of protest is getting louder and stronger. From the streets of Kolkata it’s pouring into roads of hinterland. The cry for justice for a rape victim has consolidated into a wail of demands to set a lot of wrongdoings right. Here in lies the fear and trepidation. Wasn’t the issue that brought the youth of Bangladesh out on the thoroughfares a simple, innocent one of quota reform?

The chief minister of Bengal, known for understanding the pulse of people better than many, was quick to read the signages floating in the political horizon.

The most obvious reason for her to be tensed is that both the regime change in Bangladesh and the mass protest in Bengal, were student-driven to begin with. The two incidents---end of 15 year old Sheikh Hasina government and turbulence in West Bengal, over the heinous crime, falling back to back, the first on August 5th and the latter from August 9th onwards, give natural scope for comparisons. More so, because in both the cases the movement strayed beyond an affected constituency to include aggrieved people at large, cutting across socio-economic demography. If the quota reform protest started by students in Bangladesh became a mass uprising against an autocratic regime, the campaign demanding justice for the rape victim and overall safety and security of women in Mamata Banerjee’s Bengal soon snowballed into a movement of no-confidence against the government. Slogans--”Mamata must resign” also got floated in social media much in line with the call for ouster of Sheikh Hasina. In fact “Resignation of Hasina” became the single point agenda into which all other fringe demands coalesced.

Incidentally, even before people started drawing parallels, that there could be a thread of commonality in the way the upheaval in Bangladesh and Bengal played out, Mamata was quick to point out that the Opposition were trying to pull off a Bangladesh by politicizing the tragic incident: “A coordinated approach has been executed by the BJP and the CPIM with support from the Centre to defame Bengal and exploit the situation....They want to make a Bangladesh here. They are taking cues from student unrest in Bangladesh and are attempting to capture similarly. I have no longing for the chair. I came here to serve people.”

Not only Mamata, her political lieutenants are consistently equating the turmoil in Bengal with the mayhem in Bangladesh. Cabinet minister for North Bengal development Udayan Guha threatened to take stern action against those, who would be trying to exploit the situation by emulating a Bangladesh like movement. “ Even after the hospital was vandalised, the police did not open fire on anyone. The police will not allow a Bangladesh type situation. We will not allow Bengal to turn into Bangladesh, Guha thundered.

Is the government’s fear unfounded?

Apart from the similarities on ground zero, as to how and where the future course of events are heading to, there are ample reasons for Bengal to mull on-- as to what led to a Bangladesh like boiling point. To begin with, it’ll be appropriate to talk of Bangladesh and the prevailing situation, that made the students’ protest become big in magnitude. The students were out on the streets because of a high reservation in public jobs. Unemployment and stagnant job market in private sector coupled with a high rate of inflation drove the educated youth to rebel against the government.

But soon the students found enormous number of sympathisers, who were equally at the receiving end. According to Bangladesh citizens, the last two terms of the Sheikh Hasina government were a mockery of democracy. Even elections would be compromised. As Hasina grew from strength to strength, she politicized institutions. The rank and file of police owed allegiance to the ruling dispensation. Extortion, harrassment and raids by police and people in power became rampant. An atmosphere of fear and repression reigned and people got restless to overthrow the government.

Politicization of institutions has been happening in Mamata government too. Allegations are quite strong that police in Bengal functions at the beck and call of political bosses. The lapses and alleged loopholes on the part of police in handling the rape and murder of the young doctor have yet again revealed a sense of confused or misplaced loyalty.

But above everything else both Hasina and Mamata governments allegedly seem to have twined in accepting corruption as a way of life. In Bangladesh jobs of primary and secondary teachers got sold at premium, Rs 10-12 lakh in the Hasina regime. Even police had to pay up for prized postings and transfers. In Bengal busting of the teacher’s recruitment scam has revealed how unsuccessful and ineligible candidates got government jobs in schools in exchange of bribes.

Similarities are multiple and inescapable. Mamata has good reasons to be apprehensive. It’s not only she, who can see and connect the dots. People, out on the streets, clamoring for justice, can see a providential pattern somewhere in the unfolding of future events in these two places-- Bangladesh and Bengal. True, they share more than 2,217 odd km of border. They share the same umbilical cord, other than language, culture, ethos, icons. Even emotions are the same. So she cannot take any risk.

(The writer is a senior jounalist based in Kolkata. Views personal)

Comments

bottom of page