China is sending a powerful message to the world of higher education: degrees cannot remain frozen while technology, industries and labour markets are changing rapidly. China has accelerated the restructuring of university disciplines and degree programs, withdrawing or suspending programs with weak demand while introducing new programs linked to artificial intelligence, robotics, semiconductors, biotechnology, digital technologies and other emerging fields. According to China’s Ministry of Education, during the 14th Five-Year Plan period, Chinese universities added about 10,200 undergraduate program locations while 12,200 were withdrawn or suspended. The 2026 undergraduate catalogue also introduced programs such as embodied intelligence and brain-computer science and technology.
This is not simply an education policy. It is an economic strategy. China increasingly appears to be asking a fundamental question: What kind of education does the economy need tomorrow? India must ask the same question today. India has expanded higher education enormously over the past few decades. Universities and colleges have multiplied, enrolment has increased and millions of young people now enter higher education every year. Yet the expansion of institutions and degrees has not always been matched by expansion in employability, innovation, entrepreneurship and high-quality employment.
The problem is not that India has too many degrees in every field. The real problem is that some academic programs continue without sufficiently examining whether their curriculum, teaching methods, infrastructure and employment outcomes remain relevant. A degree should not exist simply because it has existed for decades. Higher education must continuously evolve with society and the economy. Artificial intelligence is transforming banking, manufacturing, healthcare, education, agriculture, logistics, finance and almost every other sector. Robotics is changing production. Renewable energy is creating new industries. Semiconductor manufacturing is becoming strategically important. Data science, cyber security, biotechnology, fintech and advanced manufacturing are generating new employment opportunities. Yet in many institutions, students continue to study outdated curricula with limited exposure to practical applications, industry projects, modern laboratories or real-world problem-solving. This creates a dangerous gap between education and employment. The lesson for India is clear: higher education cannot be governed only by tradition; it must be guided by relevance. India’s National Education Policy 2020 provides a framework for multidisciplinary education, flexibility, skills and innovation. But policy documents alone cannot transform classrooms. Implementation must become faster, measurable and outcome-oriented.
India should establish a systematic review of every degree and diploma program. Every three to five years, universities and regulators should examine student demand, employment rates, industry requirements, curriculum relevance, faculty strength, research output, infrastructure and entrepreneurship outcomes. Programs with consistently weak demand or poor outcomes should not automatically continue forever. They should be redesigned, merged, transformed or, where necessary, phased out.
At the same time, India must not make the mistake of believing that every traditional discipline is obsolete. Humanities, social sciences, economics, history, philosophy, languages and basic sciences remain essential. The issue is not old versus new. The issue is relevant versus irrelevant. A modern economist, for example, needs an understanding of data analytics and artificial intelligence. A historian can benefit from digital archives and computational methods. A commerce graduate needs knowledge of fintech, digital banking and cyber security. A humanities student needs communication, critical thinking and digital literacy. The future belongs to integration, not isolation.
“Most importantly, India must stop measuring educational success merely by the number of colleges, universities, degrees and graduates produced. Quantity is not quality. A degree is not automatically a skill. A certificate is not automatically employability. China’s recent reforms deserve serious attention because its Ministry of Education has explicitly linked academic restructuring with national strategic priorities, labour-market demand and emerging technologies. In 2025, China reported 1,428 undergraduate programs officially cancelled and another 2,220 suspended, while 1,839 new programs were approved. The new programs included areas connected with carbon neutrality, marine science and technology, intelligent molecular engineering, medical-device engineering, spatial information and artificial-intelligence applications.”
Another major reform must involve industry. Universities cannot design curricula inside academic rooms without sufficient consultation with employers and professionals. Industry representatives should participate in curriculum committees, internships should become meaningful rather than merely formal, and students should work on live projects and real business problems.
Faculty development is equally important. Teachers are the foundation of higher education. If faculty members are not continuously exposed to new technologies, research methods and industrial developments, they cannot adequately prepare students for the future. India must therefore invest in faculty training, research infrastructure, laboratories, innovation centers and industry-academia partnerships.
Research also needs a new direction. Universities should move beyond a narrow “publish or perish” culture. Publications remain important, but research should also generate patents, prototypes, startups, policy solutions, technologies and social impact. The question should not be simply: How many papers did we publish?
The bigger questions should be: What problem did we solve? What did we create? What did we innovate? What changed because of our research? Rural and semi-urban colleges deserve special attention. Many such institutions face declining enrolment because students increasingly seek programs that promise better career opportunities. Instead of allowing these colleges to become irrelevant, governments and universities should help them develop regional specializations in agriculture technology, rural entrepreneurship, renewable energy, healthcare, logistics, digital commerce and other locally relevant areas.
India also needs stronger career guidance. Students and parents should have access to reliable information about employment trends before choosing a degree. The era of selecting a course simply because relatives or neighbors recommend it must end. Most importantly, India must stop measuring educational success merely by the number of colleges, universities, degrees and graduates produced. Quantity is not quality. A degree is not automatically a skill. A certificate is not automatically employability. The real measure of higher education should be whether it develops knowledgeable, skilled, ethical, innovative and employable citizens.
China’s experience should therefore not be viewed merely as a story about closing degrees. It is a story about continuously asking whether education is serving the future. India has enormous demographic strength. But a young population becomes an economic advantage only when young people possess relevant knowledge and skills. Otherwise, demographic potential can turn into unemployment, frustration and wasted talent.
India does not need to blindly copy China’s education system. It needs to develop its own bold and transparent mechanism for reviewing academic programs and responding quickly to technological and economic change. The time has come to move from degree expansion to degree relevance, from examination to skills, from classrooms to real-world learning, from publication numbers to research impact, and from academic tradition to innovation. China is adjusting its higher education system to prepare for tomorrow. India must open its eyes today. The future will not wait for outdated curricula to catch up. The time to reform Indian higher education is now.
(The author is Principal, Guru Gobind Singh College of Management and Technology, Gidderbaha, Punjab. The views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the author and aren’t necessarily in accord with the views of “Kashmir Horizon”)
[email protected]
