The India Rankings 2025, based on the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF), continue to reflect the dominance of older public institutions with a strong academic legacy. Since its start in 2016, NIRF has grown from evaluating 3,565 institutions across four categories to 14,163 institutions spanning 17 diverse higher education sectors. Despite this growth, the ranking system faces challenges that affect its reliability and impact on India’s education landscape.
Ranking Parameters and Their Limitations
NIRF uses five key parameters – teaching, learning and resources (30%), research and professional practice (30%), graduation outcomes (20%), outreach and inclusivity (OI) (10%), and peer perception (10%). Peer perception is controversial as it relies on subjective feedback from experts and employers. This can favour reputed institutions and disadvantage suburban or state-run colleges. Since it weighs 10%, it can distort overall rankings and calls for urgent review.
Concerns Over Data and Metrics
NIRF depends heavily on bibliometric data and self-reported inputs from institutions. This raises questions on data accuracy and transparency. The outreach and inclusivity parameter focuses mainly on regional and gender diversity but neglects economic, social and disability factors, despite their importance. Only a few institutions score high on OI, revealing limited access for marginalised groups. Affirmative action in faculty recruitment for OBC, SC, and ST categories is also underrepresented.
Equity and Inclusivity Challenges
Access to higher education remains uneven, especially for disadvantaged communities. The OI parameter must expand to measure adherence to reservation policies in faculty hiring. Central institutions lag in filling reserved category vacancies, undermining India’s goal of an egalitarian education system. Addressing these gaps is essential for social justice and national progress.
Need for Institutional Accountability and Mentorship
NIRF should be more than an annual ranking exercise. It must drive reforms to tackle regional imbalances, faculty shortages with doctoral qualifications, and low research output—over 58% of management institutions report no research publications. Legacy institutions should mentor emerging ones to raise standards. Strict action is needed against institutions submitting false data to maintain credibility.
Future Directions for NIRF
For NIRF to be effective, it must improve transparency, expand inclusivity metrics, and reduce subjectivity in peer perception. Rankings should encourage quality improvement and equity rather than merely branding institutions. Without these changes, the framework risks becoming a superficial rating system with limited impact on India’s higher education ecosystem.
Questions for UPSC:
- Critically analyse the role of ranking frameworks like the National Institutional Ranking Framework in shaping higher education policies in India.
- Explain the importance of outreach and inclusivity in higher education and how reservation policies impact social equity in India.
- What are the challenges faced by public institutions in maintaining research standards? How can mentorship from legacy institutions help overcome these?
- With suitable examples, comment on the reliability of self-declared data in educational assessments and the measures needed to ensure accountability.
