The former Vice-Chancellor of Delhi University, Dr. Deepak Pental, has worded and structured his article ‘Our musty ivory tower’ (I.E. 16 September, 2010) to draw the following three conclusions: 1) In 1970s began the decline of DU; and the mindset of teachers ‘cocooned’ in 1970s is impeding the upward leap planned by the university establishment; 2) teachers association and some teacher activists oppose any and all constructive reforms in academic structures and syllabi; 3) semester system is the panacea for removing all the ailments of our undergraduate and postgraduate system of university education.
None of these three conclusions are based on objective facts; the author has not revealed his dialectical reasoning for arriving at these conclusions. And Pental does not explain an obvious contradiction in his article when he asserts that “DU is the top Indian University in a recent survey of Asian Universities”. The survey result contradicts his conclusions.
That Pental is blaming 1970s for the present ills of our university system betrays the symptoms that have colonized the collective mind of the present day educational establishment. 1970s was the period of collegiate expansion in DU, shifting of B.Sc. (Hons) courses to colleges, establishing and strengthening of democratic institutions in decision making, and inclusion and expansion of elected teachers representatives in the Statutory authorities like the DU Executive Council and the Academic Council. Mid’90s saw the emergence of the concepts of globalization, marketization and commercialization of higher education. It become fashionable, what was earlier blasphemous, to assert that the state should gradually withdraw from funding higher education. One very acclaimed Union Minister even placed higher education in the basket of non-merit goods. Foreign Universities Bill, Hospitals and Other Institutions Bill (to curb democratic space in university systems), Accreditation and Assessment Bill (to implement differentiated funding formulae according to ‘stars’ rating of the institutions) become the priority areas for state legislation. One should thank the culture of democracy imbibed in the 70s for halting the devastating march of commercial and market interests to capture our higher education systems. One should remember that even with state funding only 11% of eligible age group (17 to 25 years) receive higher education. Does Pental grudge even this small percentage reaching the portals of colleges? Or does he want students to rush towards private and foreign universities?
Pental is trying to cover his own multiple failures by accusing teachers and teachers’ association for all attempts to reform structures and revise and update syllabi. Most courses in sciences, humanities and social sciences had been revised often after every 6 to 7 years with the full involvement of university departments and college teachers without any problem. B.Sc. (Hons) courses in Physics and Chemistry, for example, have changed 6 times since 1970 including restructuring to make each of them an integrated course. Never any teacher association or ‘activist’ opposed these changes. It is only when the previous Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Deepak Nayyar, began the process of changing structures without involving teachers that the opposition by general teachers, not only by ‘self anointed activists’, also began. Under Deepak Nayyar structures of B.Sc. Programs were amended, without consulting and involving teachers through what were styled as ‘empowered committees’, with disastrous consequences. All the apprehensions articulated by teacher were proven true to haunt the B.Sc. Programs which have become immensely unpopular.
The manner in which Dr. Deepak Pental sought to introduce semester system and semester-based syllabi in sciences is too bizarre for words. It is becoming increasingly clear now that he was a man in a tearing hurry; not for implementing any reform but in proving to the political establishment that he is capable of forcibly implementing the government policy without discussion, without debate and without analyzing its feasibility and desirability. The expressed provisions of the University Act, Statutes and Ordinances and past healthy practices were violated. The powers and dignity of Statutory Authorities (the DU Court, the Executive Council, the Academic Council, the Faculties, etc), and also that of the Hon’ble President of India (Visitor), were subverted. Syllabi and structures were finalized by a handpicked group of anonymous people meeting at secret places and taking decisions on the directions of the Vice-Chancellor. No wonder the teaching community is feeling revolted. There are no takers for the VC’s logic for ignoring the due and established process of law in decision making. Opposition is not to any genuine reform but to the obliteration of democratic space in decision making.
Teachers are not per se opposed to any system, semester or annual. Semester system is working effectively in smaller institutions like JNU, IITs, IIMs, PG Departments in DU. In all these the students strength is limited, admission is central and through admission tests, and there is greater autonomy to teachers in academic matters. Whether or not the semester system would work effectively in a University like Delhi with over 1.8 lakh formal stream students, distributed over almost 70 colleges and about 60 departments, with decentralized admission that continues till September / October, with no autonomy to teachers is certainly a matter worthy of debate. The university system which cannot cope with one examination per year will crumble under the pressure of two examinations.
This needs to be asserted that the above mentioned apprehensions do not stand in the way of implementing reforms, periodic revision and up-gradation of syllabi, introduction of interdisciplinarity, ensuring mobility, continuous learning, modernizing the examination and evaluation system, etc. All these laudable objectives can be achieved by taking students and teachers on board and building a consensus through the due and laid down process. However it is wrong to assert that these objectives can be achieved only in the semester system and not in the annual one. The structures and syllabi finalized by DU for the 1st year semester based science courses miserably fail to meet any of the stated objectives. In fact by imposing a fixed 4X6 structure interdisciplinarity, innovative choices and mobility is impeded rather than encouraged.
Universities are places which should celebrate universalities of ideas. Unfortunately Dr. Deepak Pental had viewed DU as a corporate with himself as its CEO, with university officers as senior managers, and deans and heads as executive managers. The corporate culture that empowers the CEO to take all decisions and various rung of managers to implement them is bound to fail monumentally in a university system. It is fortunate that our Delhi University has some remaining vestige of the culture of 70s which is resisting the corporatization of our esteemed university. It is the corporate culture of the VC which was responsible for selling radioactive gamma irradiator as scrap. Will the CEO take all the responsibility for the academic disaster consequent upon this sale?
Hon’ble Dr. Deepak Pental should realize that by trying to CEOise the office of the Vice-Chancellor he has made DU mustier than what it was when he joined his office.
September 23, 2010
INDER KAPAHY
(Dept. of Physics, K.M. College, DU)
Former Elected Member:
DU Executive Council & Academic Council
Mobile No: 9810037679
e-mail: imkkmc@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment