As a faculty member at a public sector university for more than two decades, I find it increasingly difficult to receive such news with indifference. These rankings are not mere numbers on a chart; they are symptomatic of a more serious institutional decline. They speak volumes about the erosion of quality, imagination and purpose within our higher education system.
The problem, however, is not simply that our universities have failed to climb the global ladder of prestige. The real tragedy lies in our collective refusal to ask why this continues to be the case. The answer is not elusive. It is visible in our classrooms, administrative corridors and research labs. It is heard in the silence that surrounds uncomfortable questions. It is evident in the indifference toward innovation, critical thinking and merit-based academic culture.
We continue to operate in an environment where reforms are cosmetic and vision is short-term. Our curricula lag behind contemporary global standards, our research output is minimal and often disconnected from societal needs, and our institutional governance remains riddled with bureaucratic inertia and politicisation. Faculty development, international collaboration and performance-based evaluation systems remain underdeveloped or absent. Despite repeated policy promises, implementation remains elusive.
This is not a commentary on the abilities of our students or the commitment of all faculty members. On the contrary, I have witnessed extraordinary potential in both. What we lack is the ecosystem that nurtures and channels that potential. Instead of rewarding originality, we have created systems that promote compliance. Faculty is often discouraged from interdisciplinary exploration because it “doesn’t fit the format”. Promotion criteria still favour quantity over quality. Student unions remain banned in practice, depriving young people of the space to debate, organise and lead.
We are raising a generation that is intellectually cautious — not due to a lack of ideas, but because questioning and dissent are increasingly unwelcome on our campuses. As I argued in one of my op-eds in these columns titled, “Campuses without questions” (July 17, 2025) fear, bureaucracy and shrinking academic freedom are stifling inquiry. I’ve seen promising research dismissed as “too sensitive”, young faculty disillusioned early, and students afraid to ask questions for fear of being labeled disruptive. This climate breeds silence, not scholarship; it rewards compliance, not creativity. If left unchallenged, it will hollow out the very purpose of higher education.
Universities are not factories for degree distribution; they are engines of national imagination and ethical leadership. Their purpose is not merely to produce employable graduates but to shape inquisitive, responsible citizens who are equipped to think deeply, speak thoughtfully and act courageously. When our institutions begin to fear these very qualities, it is not only the university that suffers but the entire nation bears the consequences.
Global rankings, for all their limitations, offer us a mirror. They show us how much we have neglected research, inquiry and creativity. They measure how well (or poorly) we have positioned ourselves in a rapidly evolving global knowledge economy.
It is time we moved past defensive rhetoric. The question is no longer whether rankings matter, but whether we do. If we wish to reclaim a respectable place in the world of ideas, we must commit to structural transformation. That means investment in faculty, autonomy in governance, seriousness in research, and the revival of intellectual freedom on our campuses. Until then, our absence from the global stage will remain a reflection of choices made and opportunities lost.