New Metrics Predicted to be Introduced in Revised

NAAC SSR

The anticipated revision of the NAAC Self-Study Report

(SSR) is poised to include a comprehensive set of new
metrics that aim to enhance the quality and scope of
higher education in India. These metrics are designed to
evaluate various aspects of institutional performance, from
curriculum design to community impact, ensuring a holistic
assessment of educational excellence. Here’s a detailed
exploration of the proposed new metrics:
New Metrics Predicted to be Introduced

Curriculum Metrics:

1. Curriculum Alignment to Program and Course

Outcomes (PO/PSOs and COs): This metric
evaluates how well the curriculum aligns with the
intended program and course outcomes, ensuring
that educational objectives are clearly defined and
met.

2. Curriculum Flexibility: Includes mechanisms like

Multiple Entry and Multiple Exit (MEME), Activity-
Based Curriculum (ABC), electives, dual degrees,
twinning programs, mother tongue instruction, and
 credit transfers. This metric assesses the
adaptability of the curriculum to meet diverse
student needs and emerging industry trends.

3. Percentage of Skill-Oriented Courses Aligned

with National Skills Qualifications Framework
(NSQF) & Skill Focus: This measures the extent
to which courses are designed to equip students
with industry-relevant skills, aligning with national
standards.

4. Percentage of Online Courses through

SWAYAM: Assesses the institution's integration of
online learning resources, particularly those offered
through SWAYAM, into their curriculum.

5. Indian Knowledge System

Incorporation: Evaluates the inclusion of
traditional Indian knowledge and educational
philosophies within the curriculum, promoting
cultural heritage and indigenous learning methods.

Faculty Metrics:

1. Faculty Recruitment Processes;

Transparency: This metric checks the fairness,
transparency, and effectiveness of the faculty
recruitment processes.

2. Compliance with Pay and Allowances as per

UGC/AICTE Norms: Ensures that faculty
compensation adheres to regulatory standards.

3. Faculty Diversity, Faculty Cadre, Percentage

of Faculty Working Continuously for Last 3
Years: Measures diversity in faculty recruitment,
the stability of faculty positions, and retention
rates, which reflect the institutional commitment to
maintaining a robust academic staff.
Infrastructure and Resources:

1. Learning Management System; Augmented

Reality/Virtual Reality; Virtual Labs: Assesses
the use of advanced technological tools and virtual
resources in enhancing the learning experience.

2. Research Resources – Plagiarism Check;

Software for Statistical, Simulation,
etc.: Evaluates the availability and usage of
essential research tools that uphold academic
integrity and foster high-quality research outputs.

3. Divyangjan – Assistive Technology

Facilities: Measures the adequacy of facilities
provided for differently-abled students, ensuring
inclusivity and accessibility.

Financial Health and Management:

1. Financial Sustainability & Growth; Corpus;

Decentralized Budgeting: Looks at financial
health indicators like growth trends, sustainability
practices, and the effectiveness of financial
governance.

2. Risk Management Strategies: Assesses the

institution's strategies for identifying, managing,
and mitigating financial risks.

Pedagogical Innovations and Student Engagement:

1. New Pedagogical Techniques – Kinesthetic

Learning, Game-Based Learning: Evaluates the
incorporation of innovative teaching methods that
cater to different learning styles.

2. Continuous Evaluation: Includes diverse

assessment methods such as MCQs, portfolios,
 case studies, and open books, to gauge continuous
learning progress.

3. Technical/Domain Clubs; Activities; Chapters

of Professional Bodies: Measures the
engagement of students in extracurricular and co-
curricular activities that complement their
academic growth.

4. Hackathons; Student Participation in

Technical and Cultural Clubs: Assesses the
active involvement of students in hackathons and
various clubs, which are indicative of a vibrant
campus life.

5. Mental Health, Meditation, etc.: Evaluates the

support systems in place for mental health and
overall well-being of students.

Community Impact and Outreach:

1. Impact of Institution on Communities; Clean

Village; Disease-Free Village; Empowered
Women Communities; Adaptation of Villages
under Unnat Bharat Abhiyan (UBA): This metric
assesses the social impact and outreach efforts of
the institution in adopting and improving local
communities.

Governance and Administrative Effectiveness:

1. Institutional Development Plans; Strategies &

Interventions: Measures the clarity, strategic
planning, and effectiveness of institutional
development initiatives.

2. Digital India Policy Guidelines; e-Governance;

Use of Samarth e-governance; National
Academic Depository (NAD)/Academic Bank of
Credits (ABC) Implementation: Assesses the
 adoption and integration of national digital
initiatives and e-governance tools in the
administrative processes.

3. Effective Leadership; Effective Delegation of

Powers; Health & Life Insurance; Campus In-
House Crèche, Staff Quarters etc.: Evaluates
the quality of leadership and administrative policies
that contribute to a supportive work environment.

Chapter 3: Detailed Explanation of Areas, Criteria,

and Metrics of New NAAC Reforms

The speculative structure of the new NAAC reforms is

predicated upon three pivotal areas: Input, Process, and
Output. Each area is further delineated into distinct criteria
and metrics, anticipated to serve as the bedrock of the
accreditation process.

Metrics Predicted to be Introduced

The National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC)

is expected to introduce a structured framework
comprising 10 foundational metrics, which are strategically
spread across three key areas: Input, Process, and Output.
This comprehensive approach aims to provide a holistic
evaluation of higher education institutions (HEIs), ensuring
that all aspects of institutional functioning are assessed to
foster improvement and excellence in education.
These 10 metrics are designed to encompass the core
elements that contribute to the quality and effectiveness of
educational delivery and institutional performance. By
categorizing these metrics into Input, Process, and Output,
NAAC seeks to create a balanced appraisal system that not
only examines the resources and capabilities of institutions
but also how these resources are utilized and the outcomes
they achieve.
Input Metrics focus on the fundamental resources and
conditions necessary for education. These include the
qualifications and diversity of faculty, curriculum relevance
and flexibility, infrastructure adequacy, and financial
health. These metrics assess whether institutions have the
necessary groundwork in place to support high-quality
education.
Process Metrics evaluate the active application of inputs
in the educational delivery system. This involves looking at
teaching methodologies, faculty-student interactions,
research initiatives, and administrative processes. The
emphasis is on how effectively the institutions manage and
implement their resources to achieve their educational
goals.
Output Metrics measure the results of educational
processes, highlighting the tangible outcomes that
institutions produce. These metrics evaluate academic
achievements, research impact, student employability, and
broader societal contributions. The focus is on the end
results of the educational activities and how well
institutions are preparing students for professional success
and responsible citizenship.
By introducing these metrics, NAAC aims to encourage
institutions to adopt a continuous improvement mindset,
where all aspects of institutional activities—from resource
allocation to educational outcomes—are optimized for
quality and excellence. This systematic approach ensures
that institutions are not only assessed on their potential or
capabilities but are also held accountable for the actual
benefits they deliver to students and society.
There will also be specialization based metric introduced.

I. Input

The "Input" phase of the accreditation process forms the

cornerstone of an institution's educational offerings. It
encapsulates all the fundamental resources, structures,
and conditions that an institution invests in and establishes
to support its educational objectives.
This phase is critical because it sets the stage for all
subsequent educational activities and outcomes. Inputs are
essentially the building blocks of education, comprising the
essential elements required to facilitate teaching and
learning. They include the curriculum, faculty,
infrastructure, and financial resources, among others. The
quality and adequacy of these inputs directly influence the
effectiveness of the teaching and learning processes, and
by extension, the overall educational outcomes.
By assessing inputs, accreditation bodies like NAAC aim to
ensure that institutions have a robust and conducive
environment for education. This includes having a well-
structured and relevant curriculum, qualified and
competent faculty, sufficient and appropriate
infrastructure, and adequate financial resources to support
their mission and vision.
Ultimately, the "Input" phase is about ensuring that
institutions are well-prepared and equipped to deliver
quality education, setting a solid foundation for academic
excellence and institutional growth.
Metric 1: Curriculum Design:

 Outcome-Based Curriculum: HEIs will need to

demonstrate how their curriculum maps to both
academic and professional outcomes.

 Stakeholder Participation: This metric

emphasizes the inclusion of various stakeholders in
curriculum design.

 Curriculum Flexibility: It is expected that

curricula should be adaptable, with options for
students to pursue diverse learning paths.
  Practical and Industry Focus: The curriculum
must integrate practical components that align
with industry standards.

 Online and Blended Learning: The shift to

digital platforms and blended learning modalities
will be assessed.

 Curriculum Revision: Regular updating of the

curriculum to keep pace with evolving academic
and industry trends.

 Indian Knowledge System: Integration of India’s

rich knowledge traditions into the modern
educational context.

Metric 2: Faculty Resources:

 Recruitment: Processes ensuring the hiring of

competent faculty will be critical.

 Pay and Allowances: The compensation of

faculty members must meet regulatory norms.

 Faculty Diversity: Diversity amongst faculty is

expected to enhance the learning environment.

 Faculty Development: Continuous professional

development opportunities for faculty will be
essential.

 Faculty Retention: Ability of institutions to retain

their faculty reflects the institutional environment
and policies.

 Faculty-Student Ratio: A metric indicative of the

accessibility of faculty to students.

Metric 3: Infrastructure:
  Physical Infrastructure: Adequate physical
facilities that foster a conducive learning
environment.

 Learning Resources: The availability of resources

necessary for effective learning.

 IT Infrastructure: The presence and quality of

information technology resources.

 Research Resources: Accessibility of resources to

promote research within the institution.

 Divyangjan Friendly Facilities: Ensuring

accessibility for students with disabilities.

 Innovation Resources: Resources provided for

fostering innovation and creativity.

Metric 4: Financial Resources and Management:

 Capital Income: An institution’s financial health

and investment capabilities.

 Revenue Income: Stability and diversity of the

institution's revenue streams.

 Capital Expenditure: The financial strategy

regarding capital investments.

 Revenue Expenditure: How revenue is utilized

for operational and developmental purposes.

 Sustainability and Growth: Long-term financial

planning for sustainability and growth.

 Financial Controls and Risk

Management: Systems in place to manage
financial risks and ensure accountability.
II. Process

The "Process" phase of the accreditation framework

focuses on how the foundational inputs are actively utilized
and managed to facilitate educational delivery and achieve
institutional goals. This phase examines the effectiveness
and efficiency of the educational and administrative
processes that transform inputs into desired outcomes.

In essence, the Process phase is about the dynamic

activities and operations within an institution. It scrutinizes
how curriculum design is implemented in the classroom,
how faculty engage with students, how administration
supports both academic and non-academic functions, and
how these elements collectively contribute to a conducive
learning environment.
Metric 5: Learning and Teaching:

 Pedagogical Approaches: Innovative teaching

methodologies and their effectiveness.

 Internships, Field Projects: Practical learning

opportunities provided to students.

 Assessment: The robustness and fairness of the

evaluation methods.
  Academic Grievances Redressal: Mechanisms in
place to address academic concerns.

 Catering to Diversity: The institution’s approach

to supporting diverse student needs.

 Learning Management System: Utilization of

digital platforms for learning management.

 Industry-Academia Linkage: Collaborative

efforts between academia and industry for mutual
benefit.

Metric 6: Extended Curricular Engagements:

 Technical/ Domain-Related
Clubs: Opportunities for students to engage in
technical and domain-specific activities.

 Hackathon and Ideation Workshops: Platforms

provided for innovative thinking and problem-
solving.

 Cultural Clubs Activities and

Festivals: Encouraging cultural expression and
celebration.

 Mental Health Clubs and Activities: Support for

student mental health and wellbeing.

 Sports Clubs/Teams and Activities: Promotion

of physical health and sportsmanship.

 Community Related Activities: The institution’s

engagement with the wider community, such as
the Unnat Bharat Abhiyan (UBA).

Metric 7: Governance and Administration:

  Statutory Compliance: Adherence to legal and
regulatory requirements.

 Institutional Development Plan: Strategic

planning for institutional growth and development.

 e-Governance: Adoption of digital tools for

governance.

 Student and Employee Welfare: Systems to

support the welfare of the institution’s community.

 Grievance Handling Mechanism: Efficient

resolution of complaints and issues.

 Quality Assurance System: Internal mechanisms

to ensure and enhance quality.

 Effective Leadership: The effectiveness of

institutional leadership.

 Inter-University Collaboration: The extent and

nature of collaborations with other universities.

III. Output

The "Output" phase in the accreditation framework is

where the results of the educational processes are
evaluated to assess their effectiveness and impact. This
phase looks at the tangible outcomes and achievements of
an institution as a direct consequence of the inputs and
processes implemented. It serves as a critical measure of
the institution's success in fulfilling its educational mission
and objectives.
Outputs are essentially the measurable results that emerge
from the educational activities undertaken by the
institution. These include academic achievements,
research output, the employability of graduates, and their
contributions to society, among other metrics. This phase
helps determine whether the educational provisions and
processes are aligned effectively to produce the intended
educational and societal benefits.
Metric 8: Student Outcomes:

 Placement/Employment: Success in securing

employment or placement in higher studies.

 Academic Progression: Opportunities for and

instances of further academic advancement.

 Self-Employment/Entrepreneurship: Support
for and outcomes of entrepreneurial initiatives.

 Competitive Exams: Preparation and

performance in competitive examinations.

 Awards/Prizes/Recognitions: Acknowledgement
of student achievements.
  Enrolment Ratio: The institution's ability to
attract students.

 Graduation Rate: The rate at which students

complete their studies.

 Student/Alumni Learning
Experience: Feedback on the educational
experience provided by the institution.

Metric 9: Research and Innovation Outcomes:

 External Research Grants: Ability to secure

funding for research.

 Research Publications: Scholarly output and its

impact.

 Research Quality: The calibre of research

undertaken.

 PhDs Awarded: The institution's contributions to

academic research through doctoral degrees.

 Research Fellowships: Opportunities for research

through fellowships.

 IPRs Produced: Intellectual property generated

by the institution.

 Research Collaboration: Joint research initiatives

and partnerships.

 Number of Student Start-ups: Incubation and

support for student-led entrepreneurial ventures.

Metric 10: Sustainability (Green Initiatives):

 Community Activities: Contributions to the social

and community welfare.
  Waste and Water Management: Sustainable
practices in managing waste and water resources.

 Progressing towards Net Zero: Steps taken

towards reducing the carbon footprint.

 Green Audits and Initiatives: Environmental

impact assessments and eco-friendly initiatives.

 Collaborations with
Industry/NGOs: Partnerships that contribute to
sustainability goals.

Chapter 4: How the Assessment Will Happen

The envisioned NAAC assessment framework portends a

paradigm shift from a predominantly quantitative to a more
qualitative and holistic evaluation of HEIs. The assessment
will be an intricate process, with a focus on the
multifaceted dimensions of education provision. Here’s a
closer look at how the assessment under the proposed
model is likely to unfold:
Holistic Appraisal Mechanism:
The overarching theme of the new assessment model is
holistic in nature, with the aim to encapsulate an
institution's entire educational ecosystem. The process will
evaluate not just the academic inputs, but also how these
inputs are utilized in the educational processes and the
consequent outcomes. This holistic approach ensures that
the assessment is reflective of the actual educational value
delivered by the institution.
Benchmarking Against Best Practices:
Each of the specified criteria will be benchmarked against
established best practices and international standards. This
involves aligning the assessment with the expectations and
norms that are prevalent in globally recognized HEIs. By
doing so, NAAC aims to elevate Indian institutions to
international levels of excellence, ensuring that they are
competitive on a global stage.
Granular Evaluation:
The assessment will delve into the granular aspects of each
criterion within the three primary areas (Input, Process, and
Output). This granular view will allow assessors to identify
specific strengths and areas for improvement within the
institutions, facilitating a more targeted approach to
enhancing educational quality.
Emphasis on Outcomes and Impact:
The Output area will receive a substantial focus, with a
shift towards evaluating the tangible impact of the
institution's educational activities. Metrics such as
placement rates, research contributions, and community
engagement will be pivotal in understanding the real-world
effectiveness of the institution's programs.
Incorporation of Technology and Analytics:
Technology is expected to play a key role in the new
assessment process, with analytics providing insights into
the performance and progress of HEIs.
Feedback and Continuous Improvement:
Feedback mechanisms will be integral to the assessment
process, providing HEIs with clear insights into their
performance across various metrics. This is designed to
foster a culture of continuous improvement, with
institutions expected to use the feedback to make ongoing
enhancements to their offerings and operations.
Transparent and Accountable Processes:
The assessment methodology will emphasize transparency
and accountability, with institutions likely required to
provide evidence and documentation to support their self-
reported data. This may also be complemented by peer
reviews and stakeholder surveys to ensure a
comprehensive assessment.
The envisaged NAAC assessment model is poised to
become a rigorous yet nuanced system that not only
measures the quality of education but also encourages a
continuous quest for excellence. For HEIs, this necessitates
a proactive and introspective approach to meeting and
surpassing the high standards set forth by this new model.

Chapter 5: Levels Defined by NAAC

The proposed NAAC reforms envisage a Maturity-Based

Graded Accreditation (MBGA) system that stratifies
institutions into five distinct levels of accreditation. This
progressive framework is designed to benchmark
institutions against a continuum of developmental stages,
from nascent capabilities to global excellence. Each level,
with its distinct characteristics and expectations, serves as
both a recognition of current standing and a roadmap to
future enhancement.

Level 1: Emerging Institutions

Institutions at this level are typically in the nascent stages
of development. They meet the minimum mandatory
requirements for functioning but are still working towards
establishing robust processes and systems. These HEIs
have taken initial steps towards quality education but
require significant improvement to meet higher
benchmarks. The emphasis for these institutions is on
laying a solid foundation and fostering a culture that values
quality and strives for continuous improvement.
Level 2: Developing Institutions
These institutions have established basic quality assurance
processes and are in compliance with standard educational
norms. They have made strides in infrastructure, faculty
development, and curriculum design. However, they still
have room to grow in terms of research output, industry
linkages, and global engagement. Institutions at this level
are encouraged to focus on enhancing their processes and
outcomes, aiming for a broader impact on students and
society.

Level 3: Established Institutions

Level 3 institutions are recognized for their consistent
performance and established quality assurance
mechanisms. They exhibit effectiveness in governance,
academic delivery, and student support systems. These
HEIs have a visible presence in research and are beginning
to show potential for innovation. The goal for these
institutions is to build on their strengths, foster a research-
centric culture, and expand their reputation nationally.
Level 4: Advanced Institutions
Advanced institutions are distinguished by their significant
contributions to research and innovation. They
demonstrate a high level of academic excellence, impactful
community engagement, and a strong industry interface.
These HEIs have begun to make their mark on the
international stage and are recognized for their leadership
in specific areas of education. Institutions at this level are
expected to maintain their trajectory, deepen their global
collaborations, and enhance their innovative capacities.
Level 5: Institutions of Global Excellence
The zenith of the MBGA system is Level 5, where
institutions are at the pinnacle of educational excellence.
These HEIs not only comply with the highest standards of
quality but are also trailblazers in innovation, leadership,
and scholarly pursuits. They exhibit an international
reputation for excellence, attracting top-tier faculty and
students from around the world. These institutions are
characterized by their transformative impact on education,
research, and societal advancement.
The NAAC's MBGA system offers a structured pathway for
HEIs to evolve and achieve excellence at various levels.
The clarity and progression embedded within this system
are aimed at motivating institutions to continually ascend
the ladder of quality, ultimately reaching the esteemed
level of global excellence that Level 5 represents. This
structure also aligns with the goal of the NEP 2020, which
is to catapult Indian HEIs to a global platform where they
can compete and collaborate with the best in the world.

Chapter 6: Implication on Higher Education

Institutes (HEI)

The forecasted NAAC reforms have profound implications

for the higher education sector in India, marking a pivotal
transition from traditional accreditation to a more growth-
centric approach. Here's a comprehensive look at the
potential effects on HEIs:
Shift to Developmental Accreditation:
The crux of the new NAAC system lies in its developmental
rather than purely evaluative focus. HEIs are prompted to
view accreditation not as a regulatory hurdle but as a
catalyst for institutional advancement. This shift
encourages a forward-thinking mindset, where continuous
improvement and innovation become ingrained in the
institutional culture.
Elevated Standards of Excellence:
The reforms raise the bar for what constitutes excellence in
higher education. HEIs must now aim to not only meet but
to exceed the established criteria. This pursuit of
excellence is expected to drive systemic changes, from
revamping curricula to adopting state-of-the-art
pedagogical strategies.
Focus on Outcome-Based Education:
With a pronounced emphasis on outcomes, institutions
must realign their educational delivery to ensure that the
learning translates into tangible results—be it in the form
of employability, research output, or community impact.
This requires HEIs to scrutinize and enhance their academic
programs, career services, and industry linkages.
Greater Accountability and Transparency:
The new framework will likely demand a higher degree of
accountability and transparency from HEIs. Institutions
must be prepared to provide verifiable evidence of their
claims, be it through improved data management systems
or through more robust internal auditing processes.
Enhanced Student-Centric Approaches:
The reforms imply a stronger focus on the student
experience and learning outcomes. HEIs will need to adopt
a student-centric approach, ensuring that the students'
education leads to personal growth, skill development, and
readiness for the complexities of the modern workforce.
Integration of Technology in Education:
Technology is expected to play a significant role in the new
accreditation process, both as a criterion and as a tool for
assessment. HEIs will need to integrate advanced
educational technologies to enhance learning and to track
and report on educational outcomes effectively.
Global Benchmarking:
The introduction of levels indicating institutional maturity
with an eye on global excellence suggests that Indian HEIs
will be benchmarked against their international
counterparts. This opens up opportunities for international
collaborations, research partnerships, and a higher
standard of education that can attract a global student
population.
Resource Allocation and Management:
Fulfilling the criteria laid out in the new system will likely
require HEIs to reallocate resources and possibly seek
additional funding. This may include investments in
infrastructure, faculty development, and student services,
as well as in systems that support sustainability and social
responsibility initiatives.
Adaptation to a Dynamic Educational Environment:
The reforms will compel HEIs to be agile and responsive to
an ever-evolving educational environment. Institutions
must be prepared to adapt their strategies rapidly in
response to feedback from the accreditation process and
changes in the educational landscape.
The proposed NAAC reforms stand to redefine the
landscape of higher education in India, driving a culture of
continuous growth and setting new standards for
educational quality. By adopting a developmental approach
to accreditation, the NAAC is poised to stimulate a
renaissance in higher education that prioritizes quality,
innovation, and global competitiveness. For HEIs, the path
ahead is clear: evolve, excel, and emerge as leaders in
education not just in India, but on the world stage.

Chapter 7: Actions to be Taken by Higher Education

As the landscape of higher education shifts with the

upcoming NAAC reforms, HEIs need to adopt a proactive
and strategic approach to align with the new requirements.
Here’s a comprehensive action plan that institutions can
follow to ensure compliance and excellence:
1. Curriculum Redevelopment:

 Outcome-based Design: Revise the curriculum to

ensure that it aligns with outcome-based
educational goals, focusing on skill development
and employability.

 Flexibility and Inclusivity: Integrate options for

dual degrees, online courses, and lifelong learning
pathways to cater to a diverse student population.

 Continuous Review: Establish a regular

curriculum review process involving stakeholders
such as industry experts, alumni, and students to
ensure relevance and responsiveness to market
demands.

2. Infrastructure Enhancements:

 Modernization of Facilities: Upgrade physical

and digital infrastructure to support advanced
teaching methodologies and research.
  Accessibility Improvements: Ensure that all
facilities are accessible to differently-abled
individuals, complying with global standards for
inclusivity.

 Sustainability Initiatives: Invest in green

technologies and sustainable practices to reduce
the carbon footprint and promote environmental
stewardship.

3. Faculty Development Programs:

 Professional Growth: Implement continuous

professional development (CPD) programs to keep
faculty updated with the latest teaching tools and
subject knowledge.

 Research Support: Provide grants and

sabbaticals to encourage faculty to engage in
meaningful research that enhances the institution's
academic profile.

 Mentorship and Leadership Training: Develop

mentorship programs to cultivate leadership skills
among faculty members, preparing them for future
administrative roles.

4. Reinvigoration of Research Culture:

 Funding and Resources: Allocate more resources

to research activities, including state-of-the-art labs
and access to international journals and
collaborations.

 Interdisciplinary Projects: Encourage

interdisciplinary and collaborative research projects
that address societal challenges, aligning with
global research trends.
  Commercialization Support: Establish
incubation centres to facilitate the
commercialization of research, fostering innovation
and entrepreneurship.

5. Enhanced Student Services:

 Career Services: Expand and enhance career

services to provide students with internship
opportunities, job placements, and career
counselling.

 Student Well-being: Introduce comprehensive

support systems for mental health, including
counselling services and wellness programs.

 Extracurricular Activities: Promote a balanced

approach to student development through support
for sports, arts, and cultural activities.

6. Governance and Compliance:

 Transparent Systems: Implement transparent

systems for governance and accountability,
including clear policies and procedures that are
accessible to all stakeholders.

 Quality Assurance: Establish robust internal

quality assurance mechanisms to continuously
monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of
educational processes.

 Stakeholder Engagement: Regularly engage

with all stakeholders, including students, faculty,
and the community, to ensure that the institution
remains responsive to their needs and aspirations.

7. Strategic Planning and Risk Management:

  Long-term Vision: Develop a long-term strategic
plan that aligns with the anticipated standards of
NAAC and addresses future educational challenges.

 Risk Assessment: Conduct thorough risk

assessments to identify potential challenges in
meeting accreditation standards and devise
strategies to mitigate these risks.

By taking these actions, HEIs can not only prepare for the
upcoming NAAC reforms but also enhance their overall
quality and competitiveness. This proactive approach will
not only satisfy accreditation requirements but also
position the institutions as leaders in the evolving
landscape of global higher education.

Chapter 8: Predicted Timelines of New NAAC

Reforms Launch

Understanding the implementation timeline is critical for

HEIs to plan and execute their strategic response to the
NAAC reforms. Here is an outline of the key phases based
on the anticipated schedule:
Initial Announcement Phase:
The formal announcement regarding the specifics of the
reforms is expected to be made by NAAC well ahead of the
golden window period. This will give HEIs adequate time to
understand the new requirements and begin preparing for
the transition.
Golden Window for Transition:
The period from the last week of May to mid-June has been
earmarked as a critical phase. During this time, HEIs will
have the opportunity to submit their Data Quality Audit
(DQA)/Institutional Information for Quality Assessment
(IIQA). Institutions will need to decide whether to opt for
evaluation under the current framework or the proposed
binary system. This golden window is pivotal for institutions
as it represents the last chance to be assessed under the
outgoing system.
Pause on Submissions:
Starting from mid-June, there will be a suspension of
DQA(IIQA) submissions, which is expected to last two to
three months. This pause is likely to be utilized by NAAC to
finalize and set up the necessary processes for the
implementation of the new assessment model.
Implementation of New Accreditation System:
The implementation of the new accreditation system, with
the Prequalifier based Level 1 to Level 5 Accreditation, is
projected to commence from December 2024 to January
2025. The staggered roll-out will allow for a gradual
transition to the new system.
Assessment Commencement under New System:
Once the new system is in place, HEIs will begin to be
evaluated according to the new criteria. The first round of
assessments under the new system will likely be closely
monitored and may involve a learning curve for both NAAC
and the HEIs.
Continuous Evaluation and Feedback Loop:
Following the initial assessments, NAAC will likely establish
a continuous evaluation process, allowing for adjustments
and feedback to ensure that the system is functioning
effectively and as intended.
Integration with Other Frameworks:
Concurrently, other educational quality frameworks, such
as NIRF and NBA will adjust their own criteria and timelines
to align with the new NAAC standards. This is expected to
unfold over the subsequent months following the NAAC’s
lead.
The predicted timeline for the NAAC reforms offers a clear
trajectory for HEIs to align their internal review processes
and strategic planning with the upcoming changes. The
success of this transition will largely depend on how
effectively institutions anticipate and adapt to the evolving
accreditation landscape.
Chapter 9: Our Analysis of the Reforms

The NAAC reforms represent a strategic realignment with

global educational trends, emphasizing quality,
accountability, and outcome-based approaches. Our
analysis dives deep into the transformative implications for
HEIs at various stages of development, the challenges they
must navigate, and the opportunities that await them.
Implications for Established Universities:
For venerable institutions with a legacy of excellence, the
reforms are both an opportunity and a call to action. The
metrics around research and innovation outcomes, along
with sustainability initiatives, provide these universities a
platform to showcase their longstanding commitment to
scholarly excellence and societal impact. However, the
challenge lies in aligning their well-established processes
with the new criteria without disrupting their academic
ecosystem. Maintaining a balance between traditional
pedagogical methods and the newly mandated innovative
approaches will be critical.
Challenges for Emerging Colleges:
The emphasis on outcome-based education presents a
unique challenge for emerging colleges that may still be
establishing their identity and infrastructure. These
institutions will have to invest strategically in developing
curricula that are industry-relevant and outcome-oriented
from the ground up. The demand for a robust IT
infrastructure and e-governance systems may also require
significant resource allocation. However, these challenges
come with the silver lining of setting a modern educational
foundation that is future-proof and aligned with
international standards.
Opportunities Across the Board:
All institutions have the opportunity to leverage these
reforms to catalyse internal development and growth. The
reform's focus on flexibility, diversity, and inclusivity
encourages HEIs to broaden their horizons, fostering a
more dynamic learning environment that can attract a
diverse student body. Moreover, the shift towards process
and output metrics could stimulate a more applied and
practical focus in teaching and learning, enhancing the
employability of graduates.
Impact on Faculty and Administration:
Faculty will be urged to adapt to new pedagogical
techniques, which will necessitate continuous professional
development. Administrations will be tasked with devising
and managing new systems for evaluation, governance,
and quality assurance, ensuring transparency and
accountability. The reforms could galvanize faculty and
administration to work cohesively towards a common goal
of institutional advancement.
Student-Centric Outcomes:
Students stand to benefit from a more holistic education
model that not only imparts knowledge but also ensures
their well-being and prepares them for the global job
market. The inclusion of metrics such as mental health
initiatives and the emphasis on community engagement
prepare students to be well-rounded individuals ready to
take on societal challenges.
The anticipated NAAC reforms could serve as a watershed
moment in Indian higher education, ushering in an era of
enhanced quality and global competitiveness. While the
road to compliance with the new standards may be
arduous for some, the journey promises to lead to a higher
plateau of educational excellence. Institutions that
embrace these changes and view them as catalysts for
innovation and growth will be well-positioned to thrive in
the academic landscape of the future.

Chapter 10: Impact on NIRF and NBA

The anticipated NAAC reforms are poised to set in motion a

cascade of changes within the larger ambit of educational
quality assurance in India. Given that the National
Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) and the National
Board of Accreditation (NBA) are pivotal to this ecosystem,
the influence of the NAAC's new direction will be
substantial and far-reaching.
Harmonization of Standards:
The NAAC's shift towards a binary accreditation system and
the introduction of Maturity-Based Graded Accreditation
(MBGA) is likely to prompt NIRF and NBA to revisit and
recalibrate their own evaluation criteria. This could lead to
an integrated approach where the metrics of quality,
innovation, and sustainability become common
denominators across these accreditation and ranking
frameworks. Such harmonization will enable institutions to
adopt a more streamlined process for quality assurance
compliance, reducing redundancy and creating a unified
vision for excellence.
Elevation of Quality Benchmarks:
With NAAC setting the bar higher in various domains,
especially in terms of research output and societal impact,
NIRF rankings—which already factor in research, teaching,
and resources—might see more stringent and refined
indicators. This evolution in benchmarks will nudge
institutions to elevate their performance not just in national
but also in international arenas.
Data-Driven Decision Making:
The emphasis on outcomes and analytics in the NAAC's
new model will likely inspire NIRF and NBA to integrate
more data-driven methodologies in their assessment
processes. Such a shift could improve the objectivity and
precision of rankings and accreditations, aiding
stakeholders in making more informed decisions.
Incentivization of Holistic Development:
NAAC's proposed metrics encompass a broad spectrum of
institutional functions, from pedagogy to welfare and
governance. NIRF and NBA are expected to align with this
holistic approach, potentially introducing new metrics or
enhancing existing ones to incentivize comprehensive
institutional development. This could lead to a more
balanced and multi-faceted educational environment that
values all aspects of student development, including
mental health and ethical grounding.
Enhanced Transparency and Accountability:
The expected reduction in fees and the possible removal of
on-site visits from NAAC's process may drive a need for
increased transparency and self-reporting within HEIs. Both
NIRF and NBA may adopt similar approaches to ensure that
institutions maintain accountability in their self-evaluation
and reporting, possibly leveraging technology to audit and
verify claims remotely.
The NAAC reforms are set to initiate a domino effect that
could redefine quality assurance in Indian higher
education. By impacting related frameworks like NIRF and
NBA, these reforms can catalyse a significant leap forward,
bringing Indian HEIs onto a competitive global stage where
educational excellence is not just claimed but clearly
demonstrated and recognized.

Chapter 11: Conclusion: A Roadmap to Excellence in

the Era of NAAC Reforms

As we stand on the brink of significant changes in the

accreditation landscape, the proposed NAAC reforms
present both a challenge and an opportunity for Higher
Education Institutions (HEIs) in India. Our exploration into
the potential structure and implications of these reforms
has underscored the need for a holistic, proactive approach
to quality assurance and institutional development.