EDUNEWS & VIEWS
“One Nation, One Subscription” is a welcome step, in light of publishers’ apathy
Some top journals can be incredibly difficult to access, without paying for subscriptions, that are exorbitant to say the least. Indian scientists know this better than anybody.

On 25th November, the Indian government announced a central scheme to enable public research and education institutions to access scholarly work free of charge. The “One Nation, One Subscription” was earmarked with an initial sum of Rs. 6,000 crores, to cover subscription costs for the next three years. The PIB press release states that over 6,300 government education and research institutions in India will gain access, to the over 13,000 e-journals owned by some 30 international publishers.
Reactions have been positive so far, with many welcoming the move. On X, Dibyendu Nandi, a space physicist at IISER Kolkata, termed the scheme “a step forward in the right direction.” Some top journals can be incredibly difficult to access, without paying for subscriptions, that are exorbitant to say the least. Google Scholar could often the go-to, though rarely do most relevant content be accessible for free. In these cases, research institutions pay for open access to publishing journals.
But this isn’t the norm. Academicians – in the sciences, social sciences and humanities – are kept out of reach, thanks to paywalls that keep scholarships wanting for more liberty. Nonetheless, there are other challenges still remaining, which awaits state intervention to scientists’ call for a more inclusive budget.
Publishing industry’s murky underbelly
India’s arguably the only country with such a relaxed subscription service in place. Usually, departments at universities across the world are hard-pressed to offer students and scholars subscriptions (if at all they do in other places) to journals of a relevant discipline. This means having to pay to view research that occurs in other disciplines, preventing open access to work in interdisciplinary fields. Research ends up in silos by design, which inhibits any substantial progress.
For-profit journals like Springer Nature, and their likes, have excessive fees in place to access their content. Admittedly, not everybody demands for this, definitely not subscription journals. But then subscription journals aren’t lucrative. Nature charges $200 for a single annual subscription, which amounts to nearly Rs. 17,000 in Indian currency (in today’s rate). Meanwhile, open access journals don’t demand authors to pay for publication, but require institutions to pay for them.
But this includes the cream of journals. Scientists in developing countries like India has to pay a lot more to simply have access to the same piece of research. In this light, the government’s decision to waver this fee could ease burden scientists have from participating in research that’s unpopularly symbolic of corporate interference. It’s not like scientists aren’t plagued by other problems that the government isn’t answerable to. Research institutions, even the prominent ones are underfunded for their research programs, have their woes go unheeded for. However, there’s an elephant in the room that’s gone unmentioned in any government communiques.

Credit: Wikimedia
Publishing costs, databases and research in the developing world
There’s a cost accrued to publish papers that institutions have to pay for. Journals don’t publish for free, of course, and there’s cost incurred from conducting peer-reviews, proof-reading work, making illustrations and even doing a press release. It may be worth mentioning to state that an unpaid reviewer could add as much quality and dedication as any other. But scientific publishing has been under close scrutiny over the years, especially with the rise of predatory journals being caught for publishing content without any editorial review.
This isn’t the condition in every journal, but it’s as though the price tag on the journal, say Nature, which is a hybrid journal, makes them more immune from having peer-reviewers or even corporate higher-ups who’d incentivize an exclusive culture that still doesn’t have every quality paper in reach.
Academics have different ways to reach out to their peers, but then institutions pay for this too. In fact, The Hindu, says that some Rs. 30 – 50 crore rupees so far, to access online databases such as SCORPUS and Web of Science, to receive analytics and insights to track citations – building a corpus of related research work. Basically, simply mining papers costs money.
These exorbitant costs cut both ways aside from wanting to simply read papers, in that it diminishes incentives for researchers who’d be doing high-quality research but not have it published in a journal with a higher reach. Corporatization has added to this list of endless concerns on why science in developing countries don’t fare as well compared to their wealthier counterparts. The prices are seen exorbitant for most of the world – conducting research that bears unfair public bias as that being unimportant, and having researchers put away from carrying out ambitious efforts – for which they find no funders, or those who have the zeal to fund any ambitious projects in the first place.
Suffice it to say, scientists in the West do acknowledge this has been a problem, both in terms of having to access themselves personally, since research institutions only provide access for a few select journals, at the cost of viewing research done elsewhere across the globe. So far, dissent has been ineffective, and without options, scientists everywhere choose to publish in other less-known journals, to avoid having to pay off one’s pocket. In this light, the government’s incentives are the right step against limitless greed.
Wanting to be heard
By all means, the government’s action shouldn’t merely come as a savior complex. Indian science needs state support. There are woes in Indian research, that aren’t necessarily contributed purely from talent deficit, as much as it’s from a lack of public finances being used to justify research. The Anusadhan National Research Foundation, which would receive Rs. 50,000 crores in funds, maybe a viable answer, but the elephant in the room is where and how these funds will be distributed and utilized. but there’s a lot more to be addressed.
Scientists, are people, and they’re vulnerable in light of conditions that are too stressful to handle otherwise, and seems a majority of stakeholders in India’s academia has been left out from enter as decision makers in discussions on matters that will affect them, and shape the ecosystem going forward.
Today, academia’s known to suffer from a “publishes or perish” crisis that isn’t making life easy for quality scholarship to thrive for long. And scientists need to be heard, not passively, but as active decision makers. If there’s a message to take away from recent discourse on scientific research in India, it’s that scientists and their institutions are desperate to be heard.
EDUNEWS & VIEWS
Global Highschool Rankings 2025: UK and US Dominate, China Rises
Among the standout institutions, Westminster School maintained its dominance with over 40% of graduates entering Oxbridge

In a global assessment of elite high schools, the HSBC Hurun Education Global High Schools 2025 report has named Westminster School in London as the world’s best high school for the third consecutive year. The annual ranking, now in its third edition, evaluates the top 180 independent schools across 11 countries based on university placements, co-curricular development, and institutional reputation.
The list reflects a shifting but still concentrated landscape of educational excellence. The United States and the United Kingdom together accounted for 85% of the world’s top highschools, with the US leading at 45% and the UK at 40%. However, China emerged as a strong contender, ranking third with 16 schools—up from 13 last year.
“The number of Chinese students studying abroad fell last year, but there are still nearly one million,” said Rupert Hoogewerf, Chairman and Chief Researcher of Hurun Education. “Interestingly, with 16 top-ranked highschools, Chinese families are finding viable options closer to home—avoiding time zone issues and maintaining cultural continuity.”
Among the standout institutions, Westminster School maintained its dominance with over 40% of graduates entering Oxbridge. St Paul’s School rose to second place, while The Dalton School in New York dropped to third. Notably, Winchester College returned to the top 10 and was named the world’s best boarding school, surpassing even Eton College and Phillips Andover.
“These rankings offer forward-looking insights for families planning their children’s international education,” said Kai Zhang, Head of International Wealth and Premier Banking, HSBC Asia, in a media statement. “Destinations like Hong Kong and Singapore are becoming increasingly attractive for their proximity and cultural alignment with Asian families.”
The report also revealed evolving trends in school environments and demographics:
>> 70% of the schools are co-educational, with a growing shift among historically boys-only UK schools admitting girls.
>> 51% offer boarding options, while half remain day schools.
>> The average school size was 1,050 students, with 140 graduating each year.
>> The average age of these schools is 204 years, with some—like King’s School, Canterbury—tracing roots back over a millennium.
Meanwhile, India’s Dhirubhai Ambani International School in Mumbai ranked 5th among schools outside the US and UK, continuing its position as a global outlier in quality private education from the subcontinent.
Despite steep tuition fees—averaging $63,000 annually for boarding schools—demand for places remains high. However, the UK’s recent addition of VAT on private school fees has prompted concerns, with schools like Winchester now costing over $80,000 per year.
Another key theme this year is the integration of creative thinking and AI literacy in education. “There is a real push toward STEAM, adding ‘Arts’ to STEM. Schools are under pressure to future-proof education and prepare students to thrive in the 2050s,” Hoogewerf added.
With data drawn from university destinations, co-curricular achievements, and alumni impact, the HSBC Hurun rankings offer more than a leaderboard—they reflect the evolving priorities and challenges in elite education worldwide.
EDUNEWS & VIEWS
Ambani Donates $18 Million to the Institute of Chemical Technology
Mukesh Ambani, who had chosen to study at ICT over IIT Bombay credited his professor with shaping his professional journey and inspiring the principles that led to Reliance’s growth

Mukesh Ambani, the country’s richest man, had announced a mammoth donation of $18 million to his alma mater, Mumbai’s Institute of Chemical Technology (ICT), on June 6.
Ambani, who is chairman and managing director at Reliance Industries, had been in attendance at a book launch event for Divine Scientist, a biography on Prof. Man Mohan Sharma, Ambani’s ex-teacher and cherished mentor.
Addressing a packed audience at ICT, Ambani said he was invested in ICT’s long-term growth and success in all fronts; advancing research, education, and ideals that Prof. Singh stood for, that is knowledge, sustainability, and nation-building. Sharma, who is professor in chemical engineering at ICT, had been the first engineer from India to be elected as a fellow of the Britain’s prestigious Royal Society.
“This is my Guru Dakshina (offering) [to Prof. Sharma],” Ambani said. Prof. Sharma has had a considerable influence upon him in shaping his professional journey, as well as principles, that led to Reliance’s growth.
In an anecdote he shared with the public, he said, “Prof. Sharma told me, ‘Mukesh, you have to do something big for ICT.’ I replied, ‘Sir, just tell me what to do.’ And he said, ‘Announce $18 million to ICT unconditionally.’ I’m very, very pleased to do that today.”
In the 1970s, Ambani was student at ICT, then known as the University Department of Chemical Technology (or UDCT). He had chosen ICT over an admissions offer at the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay.
EDUNEWS & VIEWS
Harvard Pledges $250 Million for Research After Federal Funding Slash
The administration has defended the funding freeze as part of a broader campaign to address what it characterizes as pervasive anti-Semitism on campuses and to roll back diversity programs

Harvard University has announced a $250 million investment to sustain vital research programs in the face of steep federal funding cuts imposed by the Trump administration.
The move follows a sweeping $2.6 billion reduction in government grants to the Ivy League institution, citing alleged discriminatory practices and refusal to comply with federal oversight mandates. The cuts, which Harvard is actively challenging in court, have already suspended or canceled dozens of projects—some of which were considered critical to public health and technological innovation.
University President Alan Garber and Provost John Manning issued a joint statement on Wednesday, emphasizing the urgent need to protect research initiatives. “While we cannot fully offset the financial blow from halted federal support, we are committed to backing essential research during this transitional period,” they said. The university is also working with faculty to secure alternative funding channels.
Harvard has strongly criticized the federal measures, calling the termination of grants “unlawful” and accusing the administration of interfering with academic independence. The university contends that the loss of funding not only halts groundbreaking work but also threatens years of scientific progress.
At the heart of the dispute is a broader political clash over university governance. Harvard, whose endowment reached $53.2 billion in 2024, has become a focal point of the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape higher education policy. The White House has demanded greater control over admissions, hiring, and the political climate on campus—demands Harvard has resisted.
The administration has defended the funding freeze as part of a broader campaign to address what it characterizes as pervasive anti-Semitism on campuses and to roll back diversity programs. Critics argue these moves are part of a larger effort to suppress progressive academic culture and penalize dissent over U.S. foreign policy, especially in light of recent student protests against the war in Gaza.
In recent weeks, federal authorities have also taken steps to revoke visas of international students involved in these demonstrations, accusing them of ties to militant organizations—allegations civil rights groups and university leaders have strongly disputed.
With tensions between the federal government and top academic institutions mounting, Harvard’s legal challenge could set a precedent for how universities navigate political interference while safeguarding research, free speech, and academic autonomy.
-
Society4 months ago
Starliner crew challenge rhetoric, says they were never “stranded”
-
Space & Physics3 months ago
Could dark energy be a trick played by time?
-
Earth4 months ago
How IIT Kanpur is Paving the Way for a Solar-Powered Future in India’s Energy Transition
-
Space & Physics3 months ago
Sunita Williams aged less in space due to time dilation
-
Learning & Teaching4 months ago
Canine Cognitive Abilities: Memory, Intelligence, and Human Interaction
-
Earth2 months ago
122 Forests, 3.2 Million Trees: How One Man Built the World’s Largest Miyawaki Forest
-
Women In Science3 months ago
Neena Gupta: Shaping the Future of Algebraic Geometry
-
Society5 months ago
Sustainable Farming: The Microgreens Model from Kerala, South India