“Technology Is Present, But Not Yet Part of Everyday Learning”
Share
At a time when higher education in India is being reshaped by policy shifts, technology and changing student expectations, the gap between intent and reality remains visible on campuses. Budget announcements speak of future-ready learning, AI integration and global positioning, but the transition on the ground is still uneven.
In this conversation, Koneru Lakshman Havish, Vice-President, KL Deemed to be University, lays out a clear view from inside the system. He speaks about where institutions are making real progress, where they are falling behind, and what it will take to bridge the gap between classrooms and the job market. From the limits of tech adoption to the challenge of making students truly employable, his responses reflect a sector in transition, still finding its balance between ambition and execution.
Budget 2026 talks about future-ready learning and tech integration. On the ground, how much of this is actually visible inside classrooms today?
The intent is strong, and we are seeing early signs of transformation, but the reality is uneven. A segment of institutions has adopted smart classrooms, LMS platforms, and blended learning models quite effectively.
However, for a large number of campuses, integration is still at a foundational stage. Technology is present, but not always embedded into pedagogy. The real shift will happen when faculty are continuously trained to use technology meaningfully, not just as a delivery tool but as a way to enhance critical thinking, collaboration, and problem-solving within everyday classroom experiences.
Everyone is talking about AI, data and cyber skills. But can every university realistically bring this into non-technical courses, or is this still limited to a few campuses?
It is no longer optional; AI and data literacy must become foundational across disciplines. While currently concentrated in progressive campuses, the shift is inevitable and scalable. The key lies in contextual integration rather than deep technical immersion.
For instance, AI in business analytics, data in social sciences, or cybersecurity awareness in law and humanities. The challenge is not capability, but curriculum redesign and faculty readiness. With the right modular approach and industry support, even non-technical programs can embed these competencies without overwhelming students or institutions.
India wants to position itself as a global education hub. What will it take beyond policy announcements to attract international students and faculty?
Policy is only the starting point. To truly attract global talent, institutions must deliver globally benchmarked experiences, academic rigor, research opportunities, multicultural environments, and seamless administrative processes. International students look for outcomes: employability, global exposure, and safety. Faculty, on the other hand, seek academic freedom, funding, and collaboration ecosystems.
India has a strong value proposition in affordability and diversity, but must invest in branding, global partnerships, and infrastructure that matches international expectations. Consistency in quality across institutions will ultimately define credibility on the global stage.
There is a lot of focus on employability. But are universities truly preparing students for jobs, or are companies still doing most of the training after hiring?
We are in a transition phase. Universities are increasingly embedding internships, live projects, and skill-based certifications into their programs. However, industry still plays a significant role in final-stage training, especially in fast-evolving sectors. The ideal model is shared responsibility.
Academia must focus on building strong fundamentals, adaptability, and problem-solving ability, while industry refines role-specific skills. The gap is narrowing, but it requires tighter alignment, continuous curriculum updates, and deeper engagement from industry partners to ensure graduates are not just employable, but immediately productive.
From your experience, what are the biggest gaps you still see between what students learn and what the job market expects?
The most significant gap is not knowledge, but application. Students often have theoretical understanding but struggle with real-world problem-solving, communication, and interdisciplinary thinking. In today’s age, employers value agility, collaboration, and digital fluency as much as domain expertise.
Another gap is exposure, many students lack hands-on experience with tools, environments, and industry scenarios. Bridging this requires experiential learning to become central, not supplementary. Institutions must move from content delivery to capability building, ensuring students can translate knowledge into impact from day one.
Students today are changing fast in terms of expectations and career choices. What shifts are you seeing in how they approach education and jobs?
Today’s students are far more outcome-driven and exploratory. They are less interested in linear career paths and more inclined toward flexibility, entrepreneurship, and interdisciplinary roles. There is also a clear shift toward purpose, students want careers that align with personal values and societal impact.
They are digitally native, expect personalized learning, and are willing to question traditional models. This generation is not just seeking degrees; they are seeking experiences, networks, and opportunities that accelerate growth. Institutions must adapt by offering flexible pathways and more student-centric learning environments.
Many institutions talk about industry partnerships. In reality, how deep are these collaborations and do they really impact student outcomes?
While partnerships are widely discussed, their depth varies significantly. In many cases, they remain transactional, guest lectures or short-term engagements. However, the most impactful collaborations are those embedded into the academic structure, such as co-designed curricula, joint research, internships, and mentorship programs. When industry is involved consistently, student outcomes improve dramatically in terms of readiness and confidence. The focus now must shift from quantity to quality, fewer partnerships, but deeper and outcome-driven ones that create measurable value for students.
Tier 2 and Tier 3 institutions often struggle with infrastructure and faculty. How will they keep up with this push for tech-first education?
The challenge is real, but not impossible. Technology itself can be the equalizer. Cloud-based platforms shared digital infrastructure, and remote expert access can bridge many gaps. The bigger focus should be on faculty upskilling and institutional leadership.
Even with limited resources, institutions can adopt hybrid models, leverage open educational resources, and collaborate with industry and edtech platforms. Progress may not be uniform, but targeted investments and smart adoption strategies can enable these institutions to remain competitive and relevant in a tech-driven education landscape.
A lot of policies sound strong on paper. Where do you think implementation could fall short in the next few years?
The primary risk lies in execution consistency. Policies often assume uniform readiness across institutions, which is not the case. Gaps in faculty training, funding allocation, and governance can slow down implementation.
Additionally, resistance to change within academic systems can dilute the intended impact. Monitoring and accountability mechanisms will be critical. Implementation must be supported by continuous feedback loops, capacity building, and realistic timelines. Without these, even the most well-designed policies may struggle to translate into meaningful outcomes at scale.
Looking ahead, what will a “future-ready” university in India actually look like five to ten years from now?
A future-ready university will be flexible, interdisciplinary, and deeply connected to industry and society. Learning will be personalized, blending physical and digital experiences seamlessly. Degrees may become more modular, allowing students to design their own pathways. Research and innovation will be integrated into undergraduate education. Faculty will act more as mentors than lecturers.
Most importantly, the institution will focus on lifelong learning, not just four-year programs. Success will be measured not by placements alone, but by the ability of graduates to adapt, innovate, and lead in a rapidly changing world.
editorial.edukida@gmail.com
