The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) is set to implement negative marking for retracted research papers, citations of tainted studies, and other forms of poor-quality academic practices, officials confirmed. This move marks a significant shift in the methodology of India’s premier institutional ranking system, aiming to enhance the credibility and accountability of research output.

The announcement follows the release of the tenth edition of the NIRF rankings by Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. Since its inception, the NIRF had not included any penalties for research malpractice in its evaluation process.

Anil Sahashrabudhe, chairperson of the National Board of Accreditation (NBA), which oversees the NIRF, stated that penalties would soon be formally integrated into the ranking methodology. “For the first time, penalties are being formally stitched into the ranking methodology to act against research malpractice and misrepresentation of data. The negative marking system will soon be declared, and draft norms are being readied,” he told PTI.

The NIRF ranks over 8,700 institutions based on five broad parameters: teaching and learning, graduation outcomes, research, outreach, and perception. It serves as a key reference for students, recruiters, and policymakers nationwide.

Addressing Credibility Concerns

The move comes amid growing concerns over the credibility of research from several institutions, with reports of a significant number of research papers being retracted within just two to three years of publication. Officials highlighted that, without penalties, institutions with high retraction rates could still maintain or even improve their rankings.

A source involved in the process noted, “Unless we give negative marks, people will not correct it.”

Unlike global ranking systems such as QS and Times Higher Education, and until now, the NIRF itself, retractions were not factored into research performance evaluations. This omission had allowed questionable practices to go unchecked.

Legal Challenges and Future Accountability

Earlier this year, a public interest litigation (PIL) was filed in the Madras High Court challenging the transparency and verification mechanisms of the NIRF rankings. The petition argued that rankings were based solely on data submitted by institutions without independent verification or auditing.

The High Court initially issued an interim stay on the release of the rankings but later lifted it after the government assured that a scientific methodology developed by experts was being followed.

With the upcoming introduction of negative marking for research malpractices, the NIRF aims to strengthen its credibility and ensure greater accountability, enhancing trust in one of India’s most widely referenced ranking frameworks.