By Muhammad Tahir
University of Kashmir’s (KU) performance in the 2024 National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) shows concerning trends that merit serious attention from policymakers and educational administrators. Over the past five years, KU has struggled to maintain its competitive edge despite substantial financial resources.
While KU secured the 14th position in the newly introduced ‘Top 50 State Public Universities’ category in NIRF 2024, there is more to this achievement than meets the eye. The university has slipped 11 positions in the Overall Ranking and 12 spots in the Top 100 University category compared to the previous year. This decline is particularly worrying for an institution with a 76-year legacy and substantial financial resources.
| KU’s NIRF Ranking over the Last Five Years (2020-2024) | ||
| Year | Overall Ranking | Top 100 University Ranking |
| 2020 | 78 | 48 |
| 2021 | 76 | 48 |
| 2022 | 84 | 53 |
| 2023 | 58 | 33 |
| 2024 | 69 | 45 |
| -11 | -12 | |
Mixed Performance
KU’s teaching metrics show modest progress, with a 0.5-point overall gain in Teaching, Learning & Resources (TLR). Two factors drove this improvement: Faculty-Student Ratio rose by 0.78 points, while Faculty Quality and Experience increased by 0.14 points. These gains likely reflect recent recruitment efforts, which expanded the teaching staff from 552 to 644 between 2021 and 2024.
Despite these positive developments, KU lost ground in other areas: Financial Resources and Utilization (FRU) sub-parameter.
KU’s Resource Efficiency Challenge
Perhaps the most striking finding is what might be termed the “efficiency gap” in KU’s resource utilization. With an annual FRU of approximately ₹375 crore, KU outspends several better-performing institutions. Yet, this financial advantage has not resulted in proportional improvements in key performance metrics.
While KU’s operational expenditure increased by 21.80% over three years (from ₹276 crores to ₹337 crores), its academic expenditure saw only a modest 6.80% rise (from ₹35 crores to ₹37 crores). This disparity raises questions about the institution’s spending priorities and efficiency in resource allocation.
The NIRF measures FRU using two main factors:
- Academic expenditure (ACE): Average yearly capital spending per student.
- Operational expenditure (OPE): Average yearly recurring costs per student
These calculations exclude hostel maintenance and related services.
Over the last three years (2020-2023), KU’s spending per student has grown by 23% to ₹3.85 lakh. While day-to-day operational costs per student jumped by nearly 23% to ₹3.46 lakh, academic investments saw a modest 9.31% rise to ₹39,000 per student. But here is the catch: despite spending more overall, KU’s FRU score actually dropped by 1.89 points this year. This drop may reflect reduced spending across several key areas.
| Percentage Increase in KU’s FRU (OPE+ACE) over the past 3 years | |||
| Year | FRU | OPE | ACE |
| 2020-21 | 3122478996 | 2767439508 | 355039488 |
| 2021-22 | 3263259942 | 2981543835 | 371716107 |
| 2022-23 | 3749820022 | 3370639248 | 379180774 |
| +20% | +21.80% | +6.80% | |
The numbers become even more concerning when looking at academic spending. As student enrolment grew from 9,380 to 9,730 between 2021 to 2023, academic expenditure per student unexpectedly fell from ₹39,628 to ₹38,970 – a 1.66% decline. This raises important questions about resource allocation: shouldn’t adding 350 more students lead to increased academic investment, not less?
The Research Conundrum
KU’s Research and Professional Practice (RPP) score increased by 4.32 points year-over-year. However, this improvement is primarily due to the new Sustainable Developments Goals (SDG) sub-parameter, which inflated the score to 31.25 points. When considering only the original four sub-parameters, KU’s performance actually declined by 0.09 points to 26.84, indicating that the overall increase does not reflect genuine improvement in core research practices.
Despite a 1.2-point increase in Publication score, KU’s Quality of Publication score dropped by 0.93 points. Given NIRF’s strong emphasis on RPP scores and its reliance on Scopus and Web of Science databases, KU should incentivize its faculty to publish in these indexed journals rather than predatory ones. A 2021 study found that about two-thirds of KU’s social sciences publications appeared in predatory journals, which do not contribute to RPP scores. The focus should shift from quantity to quality in research output.
KU scored just 0.50 points in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) for 2024. While this, perhaps, reflects a patent from Dr. Shabir Ahmad Parah and his team from the Department of Electronics and Instrumentation Technology, recent patents for water tank cleaning technology and smart room heater is expected to improve KU’s IPR score in the next NIRF ranking, as these fall outside the current three-year assessment period (2020-2022).
Project Funding and Consultancy
KU’s Footprint of Projects and Professional Practice (FPPP) score dropped 0.37 points this year, reflecting sharp declines in both funding and consultancy. Research funding at KU has plummeted by 68% – from ₹40.91 crore for 82 projects in FY 2020-21 to ₹13.25 crore for 84 projects in FY 2022-23. Consultancy projects have seen an even steeper decline of 79%.
These figures suggest a significant weakening of the university’s research ecosystem. This decline has broader implications since funded research, which help generate new empirical data, often leads to high-quality publications in prestigious journals. To improve its Research and Professional Practice score, KU must actively pursue diverse funding sources beyond ICSSR to retain intellectual property rights and data usage and focus on converting research projects into impactful publications.
The Employment Challenge
The placement figures paint a troubling picture at KU. With less than 15% of its students securing jobs through campus recruitment, KU lags far behind its peer institutions. Anna University, Panjab University, University of Kerala, and Jadavpur University all boast placement rates above 40% – nearly triple KU’s performance. This falls drastically short of UGC’s 2018 ‘Quality Mandate’ target of 50% placement. What makes this even more concerning is that KU ranks second highest in faculty-student ratio among these institutions (excluding PhD scholars), and third highest when including doctoral students. Despite this advantage in teaching resources, the university’s placement outcomes remain disappointingly low.
Anna University, operating on about half of KU’s FRU (₹23,000 per student), achieves a 60% placement rate for postgraduates. Even more impressive is Jadavpur University, which manages 68% placement despite spending just ₹20,000 per student – less than half of KU’s investment.
| Comparison of KU’s Graduate Outcome with Competitors | |||
| University Name | PG (2-year program) Students Graduated | Placement | Selected for Higher Education |
| University of Kashmir | 2729 | 426 (15%) | 318 (11%) |
| Anna University | 886 | 532 (60%) | 36 (4%) |
| Panjab University | 2105 | 925 (43%) | 582 (62%) |
| Kerala University | 1914 | 881 (46%) | 843 (44%) |
| Jadavpur University | 1448 | 999 (68%) | 449 (31%) |
Despite higher spending per student, KU’s placement record raises serious questions about how effectively these resources are being used to prepare students for the job market. In a region already grappling with 18% unemployment – more than double the all-India average of 8% – KU’s placement struggles are particularly concerning. While the valley’s limited private sector poses challenges, this alone does not explain the full picture. Other universities in moderately industrialized states, like Odisha, have managed to secure jobs for over 80% of their postgraduates. KU’s low placement rates may be contributing to J&K’s growing educated unemployment crisis. For a premier institution in the region, this calls for an urgent rethinking of how academic programs align with employment opportunities.
KU’s Image Problem
KU reputation among employers and academics remains a major concern. Scoring just 30.53 out of 100 in perception ratings, KU lags far behind its peers – Panjab University (69.13) and Jadavpur University (86.62). This score, based on feedback from a large category of employers, professionals and academic peers, represents a critical area for improvement if KU aims to climb the rankings.
To improve its Perception score KU needs to strategically focusing on key areas. To enhance visibility among employers, KU can strengthen collaboration with industry through partnerships with leading private organizations. Introducing ‘Industry PhD program’ can help aligning doctoral research with industry needs. This will allow KU attract partnerships with companies, offering students valuable industry exposure and improving their job prospects. Regular and deeper interactions with employers and recruiters, regular feedback sessions, and tailored training programs for students can help in aligning KU’s curriculum with industry needs, thereby improving employer and peer perception of KU. Effective communication and branding, including a strong online presence and media engagement, are crucial to positively influence perception of KU among the stakeholders.
The Private Sector Challenge
Lovely Professional University (LPU), established just 18 years ago, has shown remarkable progress in NIRF rankings, jumping from 78th position in 2020 to 27th in 2024. Similarly, SRM Institute of Science & Technology has climbed from 35th to 12th place. Meanwhile, KU’s advancement has been minimal, improving by only three positions over five years before its recent decline.
Money does not seem to be the issue. KU’s ₹375 crore budget actually exceeds LPU’s ₹367 crore. The message is clear: it is not about how much you spend, but how effectively you use those resources.
As competition within the higher education sector intensifies, KU must not only improve its absolute performance but also keep pace with the rapid advancements of newer, more agile institutions. This requires innovative approaches to education delivery, research output, and stakeholder engagement to reverse the current negative trend in rankings.
Falling Short of Legacy
Despite impressive credentials – 644 experienced faculty members, 1,160 full-time PhD students, and over 540 PhD graduates in three years – Kashmir University’s research standing falls short of expectations. The university’s absence from NIRF’s ‘Top 50 Research Institutions’ list stands in stark contrast to peer institutions like Panjab University, Jadavpur University, and Anna University.
This underperformance extends to specific departments. The 50-year-old Law Department fails to crack the ‘Top 30 in Law’, while the 33-year-old School of Business remains outside the Top 100 in Management, lagging behind even relatively new business school at LPU.
The research quality at KU’s Law Department and School of Business raises serious concerns. A telling example: The Business School’s publication list on its website consists entirely of works from Notion Press, a self-publishing company. Similarly, three out of four books listed on the Law Department’s website are self-published through the same platform. This reliance on vanity publishing, rather than peer-reviewed academic outlets, not only hurts KU’s NIRF rankings but also damages the academic reputation of these departments. It raises serious questions about research standards and academic rigor at these flagship departments.
Top 50 in Research Institutions
| Year | Kashmir University | Panjab University | Anna University | Jadavpur University |
| 2021 | Nil | 28 | 32 | 17 |
| 2022 | Nil | 29 | 21 | 13 |
| 2023 | Nil | 33 | 13 | 19 |
| 2024 | Nil | 35 | 17 | 21 |
The Way Forward
Strong rankings boost prestige and appeal, while poor performance risks decreased interest, reduced funding (in some cases), and a weakened reputation. This makes the university’s competitiveness and growth contingent on its ranking. Therefore, KU must adopt a strategic approach to improve its rankings and fulfil its potential.
First and foremost, KU must develop a ‘comprehensive strategic document’ to guide the university toward academic excellence. It is not merely about increasing spending, but about making targeted investments in priority areas, identifying where immediate interventions are needed, and ensuring that these investments yield optimal outcomes.
Without strategic planning, efficient resource utilization, and a culture of academic excellence, even well-funded institutions risk falling behind in the increasingly competitive higher education landscape. KU stands at a critical crossroads. As newer institutions demonstrate remarkable agility in climbing the NIRF rankings, KU must move beyond merely increasing expenditure to implementing strategic reforms. The success of private institutions offers valuable lessons in adaptation and innovation.
The performance of private institutions in the NIRF rankings raises some questions. What strategies are these newer institutions employing to achieve such significant improvements? How can provincial universities like KU adapt to the competitive tertiary education landscape? What other factors, apart from financial resources, are contributing to these ranking disparities? For KU, although located in a specific regional and political context, these trends signal an urgent need for strategic planning. The university must identify areas where it lags behind its competitors within SPU category and accordingly frame and implement targeted initiatives to improve its performance across key NIRF parameters.
To this end, the following recommendations are crucial:
- KU must ensure that its financial investments lead to tangible improvements in key ranking parameters, particularly in areas that directly impact academic and research excellence.
- It must invest in modern facilities to drive innovation and increase the potential for patents.
- It must incentivise high-impact research and address insufficient research output. One way to do it is to establish awards for outstanding research contributions.
- It can recruit a large pool of postdoctoral research fellows on short-term but well-paid contracts. Postdoctoral fellows are often eager and highly productive researchers. With their expertise, they can help attract research grants and funding, as well as mentor junior scholars. This can create a thriving research culture within the institute.
- It must develop a well-thought out strategic plan to enhance the university’s perception among employers and academic peers. It can initiate targeted and long-term programs to improve the university’s reputation within academic and professional circles.
- It should develop deeper ties with industry for internships, placements, and collaborative projects to create more job opportunities for its graduates. Introducing Industry PhDs can improve graduate outcomes by providing relevant skills and valuable industry connections to enhance employability.
The path forward requires more than incremental changes. KU must transform its approach to education delivery, research output, and stakeholder engagement. In today’s competitive academic landscape, maintaining the status quo is not an option. The university needs decisive action to reverse its ranking decline and ensure sustained progress in academic excellence. This strategic overhaul is challenging but essential for KU to reclaim its position as a leading institution of higher learning.
Views expressed in the article are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the editorial stance of Kashmir Observer
- Dr Muhammad Tahir is a Pune-based Kashmiri academic and analyst. His work has appeared in leading academic, think-tank and media publications
Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now
Be Part of Quality Journalism |
Quality journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce and despite all the hardships we still do it. Our reporters and editors are working overtime in Kashmir and beyond to cover what you care about, break big stories, and expose injustices that can change lives. Today more people are reading Kashmir Observer than ever, but only a handful are paying while advertising revenues are falling fast. |
| ACT NOW |
| MONTHLY | Rs 100 |  |
| YEARLY | Rs 1000 | |
| LIFETIME | Rs 10000 | |
