Understanding the Perception Gap between the Faculty and Students on the Nature of students and faculty of Delhi University

India's higher education system is the world's third largest in terms of students, next to China and the United States. In future, India will be one of the largest education hubs. India's Higher Education sector has witnessed a tremendous increase in the number of Universities/University level Institutions & Colleges since independence. The ‗Right to Education Act‘ which stipulates compulsory and free education to all children within the age groups of 6-14 years, has brought about a revolution in the education system of the country with statistics revealing a staggering enrolment in schools over the last four years. The involvement of private sector in higher education has seen drastic changes in the field. Today over 60% of higher education institutions in India are promoted by the private sector. This has accelerated establishment of institutes which have originated over the last decade making India home to the largest number of Higher Education institutions in the world, with student enrolments at the second highest.The number of Universities has increased 34 times from 20 in 1950 to 677 in 2014. Despite these numbers, international education rating agencies have not placed many of these institutions within the best of the world ranking. Also, India has failed to produce world class universities. Today, Knowledge is power. The more knowledge one has, the more empowered one is. However, India continues to face stern challenges. Despite growing investment in education, 25 per cent of its population is still illiterate; only 15 per cent of Indian students reach high school, and just 7 per cent graduate.1

As higher education systems grow and diversify, society is increasingly concerned about the quality of programmes, public assessments and international rankings of higher education institutions. However these comparisons tend to overemphasise research, using research performance as a yardstick of institutional value. If these processes fail to address the quality of teaching, it is in part because measuring teaching quality is challenging India has been always been a land of scholars and learners. In ancient times also, India was regarded all over the world for its universities like Taxila, Nalanda, Vikramshila and its scholars. By independence India had 20 universities, 500 colleges enrolling about 2,30,000 students.

of young people aged between 18 to 23 years to be around 150 million. The sheer size of the market offers huge opportunities for development of the higher education sector in India. India now boasts of having more than 33,000 colleges and 659 universities, which has been quite a remarkable growth during the last six decades. The year 2012 witnessed 21.4 million enrollments, which makes India the 3rd largest educational system in the world. Unfortunately, the educational infrastructure of India is inadequate to handle such huge volumes. In spite all the government spending in the educational sector, it is just too insufficient to meet the growing requirements. Therefore, higher Education sector has now been identified as one of the promising areas for private and foreign investments. It offers immense investment opportunities in both non-regulated and regulated segments. Indian higher education system is growing very fast irrespective of various challenges but there is no reason that these Challenges cannot be overcome. With the help of new-age learning tools, it is easy for country like India to overcome these problems and bring a paradigm shift in the country‘s higher education sector. With such a vibrant country with huge population properly educated, the possibilities are endless. If knowledge is imparted using advanced digital teaching and learning tools, and society is made aware of where we are currently lagging behind, our country can easily emerge as one of the most developed nations in the world.2 There are opportunities for strategic engagement and capacity building in higher education leadership and management at the state level. There are opportunities for India to collaboration at national and international level on areas of systemic reform, including quality assurance, international credit recognition, and unified national qualifications framework. Equality of educational opportunity in higher education is considered essential because higher education is a powerful tool for reducing or eliminating income and wealth disparities. The idea of equalizing educational opportunities also lies in the fact that ―the ability to profit by higher education is spread among all classes of people. There are great reserves of untapped ability in the society; if offered the chance they can rise to the top. A great deal of talent of the highest level is, in fact, lost by an in egalitarian system of education‖. The need to enhance the employability of graduates is presenting entry points for collaboration in enterprise education and entrepreneurship, links with industry, research skills and the wide range of transferable skills, including English. The emerging interest in Indian higher education institutions in the vocational skills market provides areas for potential engagement with international partners. There is a need to build stronger relationships and increase mutual understanding in higher education by increasing support and participation in platforms (conferences,

Before we debate about issues and challenges related to higher education we need to understand primary education is more important than higher education. India‘s number one challenge is poverty, we have to lift millions of people out of poverty and we can‘t do it unless we focus on primary education. Primary education starts from Class 1st when child is 5 years old. Primary education does not only mean a classroom, books and a teacher (that is bare minimum) but nutrition, clothes and creating an environment where a child can learn new things every day, an environment that can help in bringing out best within a child.4 Infrastructure like chair, table, books, stationery, a classroom and teachers is bare minimum that any government could provide. They need to do more than that like teaching children how they can imagine and bring out their inner talent that they can use later in their life. If we have to bring people out of poverty then we need social mobility and social mobility can‘t be achieved unless we focus on primary education and health.

State of Higher education in India is in between good and bad. we mean in a nutshell to say neither it is good nor it is that bad. So in this paragraph we shall talk about number of universities, colleges, number of teachers & professors and students enrolled. In the year 2014 India has over 670 universities, at least 38,000 colleges, 817000 professors and teachers and over 28000,000 students enrolled. There is growth in numbers of colleges, universities, students and teachers year after year. Different students apply for different courses. Like there are over 14,000,0000 students applied for graduates courses all over the country. For post graduate there are over 20490000 students enrolled. For research around 1370000 and for diploma over 1710000 students enrolled in the year 2014 Now we should also look at the budget issue. How much government of India is allocating for education. In the year 2014 the government of India spent over Rs 65,000 Crore. This amount is 17% more than the last in 2013.The department of Higher education has allocated Over Rs 16,000 crore which is 20% hike from last year. Similarly government has allocated Rs 24,00 Crore for IITs, Rs 1300 for NIT‘s, and Rs 350 Crore to IIM‘s this year.5

Structure of higher education: Management of the Indian education faces challenges of over centralization, bureaucratic structures and absence of responsibility, straightforwardness, and polished

Contingent on the degrees of control and the examples of the executives; educational organizations in India can be isolated into four classifications: government establishments, where subsidizing and the executives is the obligation of the administration, government helped or award getting foundations, which are financed by the legislature and overseen by private ventures, private establishments that are perceived by the administration yet don't get awards from the administration and totally private establishments that are neither supported nor

• To decide the Perception Gap between the faculty and students on the nature of students and faculty of Delhi University

• To decide the Perception Gap between the faculty and graduated class on the nature of students and faculty of Delhi University

The design of this examination is clarified with the itemized instrumentation measure where the operationalization of variables is portrayed. The different validities required for research work and the reliability of the investigation are clarified. The validities incorporate the outside legitimacy which focuses on the generalization of tests, develop legitimacy which validates the measurement model that it measures what it plans to measure, face and content legitimacy to guarantee that the instrument covers all the variables which could comprehensively measure the proposed idea. Reliability of the investigation clarifies the dependability of the estimating instrument. Past these, the design characterizes the idea of the research, the sampling outline, the populace base from which tests are derived, the sampling procedure, method of choosing the examples, the data assortment protocol which mentions about the method of gathering the topped off questionnaires lastly characterizes the independent, dependent and control variables utilized in the investigation. This piece of the research gets the urgent center, as it gives the skeletal structure to the entire research work.

• Instrumentation (Validation of Quality Criteria)

• Operationalisation of the Quality Variables

• Method of Measurement

• Pilot Study

The composition of the example size that incorporates 200 faculty, 487 students, and 160 graduated class.

* As p value is > 0.05, T value is insignificant The relationship coefficient is determined (r = 0.717 and p = 0.07) and it is found that there is no relationship between the perceptions of the two stakeholders, namely faculty and students. The faculty ranked the significance of the measures in the request for Employment Competence, Communication Skills, Academic Preparedness, Academic Performance, Learning Skills and Generic Skills. Meanwhile, students set the significance of their nature measures in the request for Employment Competence, Communication Skills, Generic Skills, Academic Preparedness, Academic Performance and Learning Skills. Fig 1: Perception gap between faculty and students on criteria for nature of students of Delhi University

The perceptions of faculty and students on the rules for the nature of faculty are determined and arranged in Table 2. The relationship coefficient is determined (r = 0.87 and p = 0.318) and it is found that there is no relationship between the perceptions of the two stakeholders, namely faculty and students.

* As p value is > 0.05, T value is insignificant Both the stakeholders evaluated the significance of the models for the nature of faculty in a similar one another. There is no significant perceptual partition among faculty and students on the factor of Interpersonal Skills (D = 1.3%, p > 0.05).Both the stakeholders have similar perceptions with the significance rating of 77.77 % and 79.07 % separately. Fig 2: Perception gap between faculty and students on criteria for nature of faculty of Delhi University

Table 3 shows the perceptions of faculty and graduated class on the significance of the rules for the nature of students. The relationship coefficient is determined (r = 0.493 and p = 0.214) and it is found that there is no relationship between the perceptions of the two stakeholders, namely faculty and graduated class. The faculty ranked the significance of the rules in the order of work competence, communication skills, academic preparedness, and academic performance, learning skills, generic skills and social responsibility. Meanwhile, graduated class situated the significance of their nature rules in the order of work competence, communication skills ,learning skills, academic performance, generic skills, social responsibility and academic preparedness.

* As p value is > 0.05, T value is insignificant The nature factor "Employment Competence" is on top in the perception of both the stakeholders with distinction in their perceptions on the loading of significance. The perception estimation of faculty is more noteworthy than that of the graduated class by 4.87 %. Henceforth, it is derived that there is a significant gap in the perceptions of stakeholders on the factor called employment competence (t = 2.874 and p < 0.01). Perception gap between the stakeholders on the factor named academic preparedness is found to be wide (D = 10.4347 %, t = 6.032 and p < 0.01) and pictorially delineated in Figure 3. Academic preparedness is assumed more important by the faculty than the graduated class.

Fig 3: Perception gap between faculty and graduated class on the criteria for nature of students of Delhi University

The perceptions of faculty and graduated class on the models for the nature of faculty are determined and arranged in Table 4. The relationship coefficient is determined (r = 0.723 and p = 0.27) and it is found that there is no relationship between the perceptions of faculty and graduated class, the two stakeholders. The faculty appraised the significance of the models for the nature of faculty in the order of Academic Competence, Interpersonal Skills, Team Bonding Skills and Presentation Skills. Academic competence is ranked first and presentation skills last by the faculty among the four elements on the nature of faculty.

* As p value is > 0.05, T value is insignificant Notwithstanding, the graduated class evaluated in the order of Presentation Skills, Interpersonal Skills, Team Bonding Skills and Academic Competence. There is an immense distinction between the perceptions of faculty and graduated class on the rule for the nature of faculty. Presentation skills are evaluated as the most important factor by graduated class while a similar factor is appraised as the least important factor. Fig 4: Perception Gap between Graduated Class and Faculty on Criteria for Nature of Faculty of Delhi University

on the importance of the criteria for the nature of students are illustrated in Table 5.

* As p value is > 0.05, T value is insignificant The relationship coefficient is determined and organized utilizing the connection measure (r = 0.386 and p = 0.392) and it is found that there is no relationship between the perceptions of graduated class and students, the two key stakeholders. The graduated class ranked the significance of the models in the order of employment competence, communication skills, learning skills, intelligence, academic performance, generic skills and academic preparedness. Meanwhile, students appraised the significance of their nature standards in the order of employment competence, communication skills, Both the stakeholders ranked "Employment Competence" as the most important nature factor. In any case, the perception estimation of the graduated class is more noteworthy than that of the students by 6.95 %. Henceforth, it is certain that there is a significant gap in the perceptions of stakeholders on the factor named employment competence (t = 4.836 and p < 0.01). Students have more prominent worry for the employment competence than the graduated class. It is additionally found that there is no significant perception gap between the stakeholders on the components called communication skills and equivalent significance is given to the factor by the stakeholders. Fig 5: Perception gap between graduated class and students on criteria for nature of students of Delhi University

The perceptions of graduated class and faculty on the models for the nature of faculty are determined and organized in Table 6.The relationship coefficient is determined utilizing the connection measure (r = 0.228 and p = 0.771) and it is found that there is no relationship between the perceptions of the two stakeholders, the graduated class and the students.

The graduated class evaluated the significance of the measures for the nature of faculty in the order of Presentation Skills, Interpersonal Skills, Academic Competence and Social Responsibility. Presentation aptitude is ranked first and social responsibility last by the graduated class among the four variables of the nature of faculty.

There is a high significant perceptual gap between the graduated class and the students on the factor of academic competence (D = 15.79 %, t = 11.723 and p < 0.01) as appeared in Figure 6.Perception estimation of students on the academic competence is more noteworthy the perception of the graduated class. This wide gap between the graduated class and the students on factors, namely presentation skills and Fig 6: Perception Gap between Graduated Class and Students on Criteria for Nature of Faculty of Delhi University

The perceptions of students on the nature of higher education, the perceptions of a significant partner namely students, should be examined. Despite the fact that industry is another significant partner who requests nature outputs from the higher education entryways, their perceptions are not adequately joined in the nature assessment programs. Up to this point, just the perception of academic pioneers assumed the significant job in encircling the standards for nature assessment of various agencies. Consequently, the perceptions of stakeholder‘s students, faculty, graduated class are to be explored and their perceptual contrasts on the standards for nature of education should be investigated.

1. Patil, A. S.: The internationalization of engineering education in India: a case of Maharashtra State. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, Vol.2, No.2, (2003). pp. 245-250. 2. Raghunath A. Mashelkar: India's R&D: Reaching for the Top. Science Vol. 307, No. 5714 (4 March 2005), pp. 1415-1417 3. Singh, JD. Higher Education in India – Issues, Challenges and Suggestions. (2011). 4. Carl Dahlman & Anuja Utz: India and the Knowledge Economy: Leveraging Strengths and Opportunities (World Bank Report No. 31267-IN). Washington, DC: World Bank, 2005 6. Kumar, Anuj & Ambrish, Higher Education: Growth, Challenges And Opportunities, International Journal of Arts, Humanities and Management Studies, Volume 01, No.2, Feb 2015. 7. Sahil Sharma, Purnendu Sharma ―Indian Higher Education System: Challenges and Suggestions‖ (2015). Working Paper No. 179, 2015. 8. British Council, Understanding India- The Future of Higher Education and Opportunities for International Cooperation, 2014. 9. Thanky, Higher Education in India Access, Equity, Quality, EAN World CongressScholar, Global Access to Postsecondary education, 2016. 10. Varghese and Tilak, Indian Higher Education System: Challenges And Suggestions, Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, Vol. 3, No. 4, 2017, pp. 3-4.

Research Scholar, Dept of education, OPJS University