Employers across sectors point out that even top scorers lack problem-solving ability, creativity, communication, and professional competence.
This paradox of high marks but low skills has become the defining crisis of Indian higher education.
The system continues to reward rote learning and memorisation over understanding and application.
Examination patterns test the ability to recall rather than to think critically or use knowledge in new contexts.
As a result, students learn to reproduce rather than question or create. Classrooms remain teacher-centric, where notes and slides replace exploration and discussion.
The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 recognises this issue and calls for a shift towards outcome-based and multidisciplinary learning.
But change must occur within classrooms — in teachers’ attitudes, the structure of assessments, and the freedom students have to experiment and fail.
There are models that show transformation is possible. The Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru, involves undergraduates in research from the first year.
The Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) integrates fieldwork into every programme, ensuring theory meets practice.
Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham’s “Live-in-Labs” sends students to rural communities to design sustainable solutions.
Beyond India, Aalborg University in Denmark uses Problem-Based Learning, and the University of Waterloo in Canada combines academics with paid industry placements. Both bridge the classroom and the workplace, producing graduates ready to think and adapt.
In my Data Structures class, I have introduced open-book exercises, quizzes, and projects, which have helped students learn rather than memorise code for exams.
To produce globally competent graduates, Indian universities must redesign their systems around learning-by-doing. Internships, field projects, research, and interdisciplinary courses should become essential.
Assessment must move from memory-based exams to performance-based evaluations like presentations, portfolios, and group projects.
Equally crucial is the teacher’s role. Faculty members need continuous professional development to become facilitators of learning.
Universities should invest in training teachers in pedagogy, mentoring, and technology-enabled instruction.
Industry-academia collaboration should be strengthened through joint projects, guest lectures, and internships to align education with workplace realities.
This would help students see the relevance of what they learn.
Reform also requires a shift in mindset. Parents and students often equate success with marks rather than competence. Unless the focus moves from “How many marks did you get?” to “What did you learn and how can you use it?”, the crisis will continue.
Education must return to its true purpose to form thinking, caring, and capable human beings.
The future of India’s youth must rest on genuine learning — the ability to question, collaborate, and create.
The examples of IISc, TISS, and Amrita show that transformation is possible.
If universities reimagine education as doing, discovering, and contributing, they can bridge the gap between marks and mastery, moving from high marks to high competence.