Indian university commission 1902

The Indian Universities Commission was a body appointed in 1902 on the instructions of Lord Curzon which was intended to make recommendations for reforms in University education in India.[1] Appointed following a conference on education at Simla in September 1901, the Commission was led by Law member Thomas Raleigh and included among its members Syed Hussain Belgrami and Justice Gooroodas Banerjee. The recommendations of the commission included regulations for reformation of University Senates in Indian Universities, greater representation of affiliated colleges in the senates, and stricter monitoring of affiliated instituitions by the universities. It also made recommendations for reform of school education, curricular reforms at Universities, recommendations on education and examinations, research, as well as student welfare and state scholarships.[2] The recommendations were however controversial at the time. There was a growing nationalist sentiment in British India, and a number of colleges and institutions of higher education had risen in metropolitan suburbs which were linked to the major universities of Calcutta, Bombay and Madras. These set their own curriculum, and the recommendations of the commission were seen as measures to derecognise and regulate indigenous institutions which fell into disfavour of the Raj.[3] Despite strong and sustained opposition from Indian populace, the recommendations were enacted by Curzon as Indian Universities Act 1904.

3. Indian university commission -1902
•Causes of appointment-
In accordance with his education policy
enunciated at Simla Conference, Lord Curzon
appointed ‘Indian University Commission’ in
1902.
The main cause for the appointment of this
Commission

4. Terms of reference
Indian university commission was to investigate
the following:
1.Future prospects and the conditions of the
university in India established by the British
government.
2.To suggest ways and means for the organization
and working of Indian Universities.
3.To lay down the ways by which the standards of
Higher Education may go up at earliest.

5. MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS
More new
universities should
be established, and
the prevailing
universities should
be reorganized.
1

6. The system of senate and
syndicate of universities
should be reorganized that
the senate should have the
members between 50 and
100. The term of a
particular senate should be
5 years while the number
of syndicate members
should be between 9 and
15
2

7. Proper
representation of
college teachers
and university
professors should
be ensured in the
university senate.
3

8. Affiliated colleges
should be strictly
supervised by the
Universities.
4

9. Proper
amendments
should be made in
the curriculum and
the examination
system of the
Universities.
5

10. Proper equipment
of libraries and
laboratories
should be
maintained.
6

11. The universities
should be teaching
universities.
7

12. Properly selected and
constituted governing
bodies should be
there for colleges.
8

13. Deserved and
meritorious students
should be awarded
scholarships.
9

14. A minimum rate of
fee for college
students was also
recommended by
the commission.
10

15. 11
Hostels should be
built for the
students

16. 12
The standard of
the Matric
examination
should be high and
while abolishing
the inter-
examination, the
curriculum of B.A.
should be of 3
years.

17. After Effect of
the
Commission
Report
As
As a result, Lord
Curzon accepted the
recommendations and
a new act called Indian
University act was
passed in 1904,which
is known as Indian
University Act of 1904.

18. Positive Impact Negative
More Centralization
of the power
The strict affiliation
rules made most of
the private agencies
withdraw from the
educational field
Limiting the number
syndicate and
senate members
facilitated more govt.
grip on Universities.
Indian national
leaders condemned
that it was for
destroying the
national movements
for freedom for India.

19. Positive Impact Negative
Strict rules for affiliation
and systematic inspection
helped in the
improvement of quality.
The syndicates were given
statutory status and
teachers provided proper
representation