New Delhi: The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) is set to introduce negative marking for certain parameters, including retracted research papers and citations of flawed studies, officials have confirmed.

The tenth edition of the NIRF was announced by Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. Since its launch, the framework has never applied negative weightage.

Anil Sahashrabudhe, chairman of the National Board of Accreditation (NBA), which oversees the NIRF, said the framework will now penalise institutions for research paper retractions.

“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 said.

The NIRF assesses institutions across five key parameters: teaching and learning, graduation outcomes, research, outreach, and perception. With more than 8,700 institutions participating in the 2024 cycle, the rankings have become a widely cited reference for students, recruiters, and policymakers.

In recent years, many institutes have seen a significant number of research papers retracted over two to three years, raising questions about their credibility. “Unless we apply negative marks, institutions will have little incentive to correct these issues,” Sahashrabudhe added.

While global rankings such as QS, Times Higher Education, and NIRF have not factored in retractions, some institutes have continued to rise in rankings despite high levels of flawed research outputs.

The issue was also highlighted in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed in the Madras High Court in April, which questioned the transparency of ranking systems like the NIRF. The PIL noted that NIRF rankings were “calculated merely on data provided by educational institutes on their websites, without any verification or auditing.”

The court initially issued an interim stay on the rankings, which was later lifted after the Centre assured that a “scientific method” prescribed by an expert body was being followed for publishing the NIRF list.

PTI inputs