The NDTF requests you to vote and elect Dr. MANOJ KHANNA (BALLOT NUMBER 2) to DUTA PRESIDENTSHIP. Dr. Manoj Khanna, a young and dynamic teacher leader has both the enthusiasm and idealism of the youth and the required experience of teacher representation in academic council and DUTA executive. He has assured us all that, if elected to president ship, he will run DUTA through consensus, articulating and pursuing the interest of all sections of the teaching community. The charter of demands unanimously adopted by the general body of DUTA will be seriously pursued. His emphasis will be on results and not on mere rhetoric. Equal attention will be paid to improve the teaching / learning/ research processes through providing required infrastructure.
Young teachers: New entrants to permanent positions, temporary and ad hoc teachers constitute the future both of university system and of the DUTA. It is imperative that DUTA leadership should be more sensitive about the future. During the next few months as ordinances and regulations on appointments and promotion processes have to be finalized. MANOJ KHANNA as president will ensure that DUTAⳠefforts are result oriented (to the advantage of teachers) and not merely rhetorical. The challenges posed by the API/PBAS system have to be resolved through logical and practical steps.
The AAD leadership of DUTA is trying to hoodwink teachers through SMSes, mails, and spreading rumors and propaganda of ahievement such as advanced increments to ad-hoc teachers without any proper notification by the UGC/ University Executive Council resolution. PLEASE DO NOT FALL PREY TO THIS! It is important to note that the university executive council passed a similar resolution 1991 which was later withdrawn. The university has rejected cases of teachers eligible for promotion before 30th June, 2010 for readership, (eg. Rajiv Aggarwal, Department of Mathematics, Sri Aurobindo College), contrary to the ahievementclaim of AAD.
There is a point to ponder, the VC and his team is colluding with the incumbent DUTA leadership. If this leadership is re-elected how will it fight the university establishment? It cannot fight the political executive in any case. Also, history has established that DTF- Left leadership believes only in politics of appointments in university departments and colleges. Most of the time against the collective interest of the teachers they have compromised with the teacherⳠcause. Their stance on semester issue in the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court in collaboration with JAB brought an utter failure to the DUTA despite a cohesive struggle.
We request you to elect the result-oriented team of NDTF:
Ballot No 2 Dr. Manoj Khanna
Dept. of Electronics-Bhaskaracharya College of Applied Science
(M) 9868348934, 9013490320
For
DUTA PRESIDENTSHIP
&
Ballot No 5 Dr. Bijender Kumar
(M) 9312403164 Dept. of Hindi-Bhim Rao Ambedkar College
Ballot No 11 Dr. Pramod C. Sharma
(M) 9810079079 Dept. of Physical Education-Kirori Mal College
Ballot No 18 Mr. Surendra Kumar
(M) 9811359362 Dept. of Commerce-PGDAV College
For DUTA EXECUTIVE
Showing posts with label I M Kapahy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label I M Kapahy. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
NDTF Stands For A United Struggle
State of the University
When teachers vote on 25th August, 2011 for electing the DUTA leadership for the next two years, it will be desirable that they ponder over the state of our Delhi University, and its colleges, today. There is an utter unmitigated chaos prevailing at all levels of administration, all democratic norms of lawful decision making are being ignored without any resistance, academic norms are being violated in the name of hurried implementation of the semester system, the university statute book (its statutes ordinances and regulations) have lost all meaning and the decisions are being dictated from above, students and teachers are confused on the contents of the illogically assembled semester based courses of study (in certain cases there are multiple drafts of the syllabus circulating will no one to
clarify as to which one is the correct draft), 54% OBC expansion has taken place without appropriate addition to the infrastructure resulting into space crunch in the classrooms and laboratories, admission norms-dictated from the ministerial and university authorities are darkening the future of thousands of deserving students, even though the new pay package is effective form 01-01-06 the administration has failed to frame ordinances relating to promotions and placements, there is an anomalies galore prevailing on the issues of
‘pay, placement and promotion’, the points gathering system under the quantified PBAS & API regime is making all young teachers apprehensive about their future prospects, uncertainties and confusions are staring into the collective face of ad hoc teachers.....
Desired DUTA Leadership
In such a situation it is imperative that we have a DUTA leadership which is capable of rising above narrow partisan considerations for uniting all sections of teachers (after all there is only one DUTA). Also the vision of the DUTA leadership should be geared towards inclusive and comprehensive development. The leadership should be capable of simultaneously pursuing all issues: pay scales and promotions; service conditions; provision of academic and research facilities; preservation and strengthening of democratic norms and the university statutes, ordinances, etc in the decision making processes; reestablishing
the prestige of the University Court, the Executive Council and the Academic Council; provision of appropriate infrastructure (classrooms, laboratories tutorial rooms, departmental / individual rooms for academic/research work, internet/research/books/journals allowance) to all teachers; rationalization of admission processes, etc.
HRDM’s Offensive
Friend, we have noticed that the Central Government, more particularly the H R D Ministry and the Minister Kapil Sibal, has launched a sustained offensive against the university system. After irreversibly mauling the edifice of the school education system, the HRD Ministry is now aiming its destructive attention on our university systems, With bills like ‘Foreign Educational Institutions Bill’, ‘Educational Tribunal Bill’ & ‘National Accreditation Regulatory Authority Bill’ the autonomy of the university would vanish totally. Market forces shall rule the academic processes in higher education domain. The forced implementations
of the semester system, despite its glaring defects, is the trailer of the future scenario.
DUTA’s Duty
It is the duty of the collective body of teachers to honestly and persistently oppose the offensive jointly launched by the UPA Government, the HRDM and the university team. The beginning of such a united struggle was reflected in the initial few months of the ‘semester’ struggle. But after the November 2010 order of the Delhi High Court on semester related PIL, both the unity and the struggle completely collapsed. The AAD/Congress leadership of the DUTA abandoned all will to fight on the semester issue except through legal presentations in the court. The DTF-Left broke the united struggle by floating JAB which intervened in the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court with disastrous results. The collapse of the semester struggle has emboldened the university and the MHRD authorities to ride roughshod over all decision making processes in the university. The
manner in which the incumbent VC has implemented the semester courses in all the faculties and departments at the UG level has surpassed the authoritarianism even of the outgoing VC, Deepak Pental. The HRD Minister and the UPA Government are obviously behind all these moves to destroy the autonomy of our university system. The trouble is that the AAD-Congress leadership of the DUTA has now completely surrendered to the Vice Chancellor Proof, Dinesh Singh and is functioning ‘at his pleasure’. The DTF leadership is in collusion with many factions of INTEC-Congress (for electoral and other gains) and indulges only in theatrical and rhetorical militancy. One or two examples would prove
that both groups are hand in gloves with the university and governmental authorities. Both AAD and DTF have one elected teacher member teach in the D.U. Executive Council. Yet neither of them lodged any formal protest when the E.C. raised the WUS membership fee to Rs. 500 per month and renewal (for retiring/retired teachers) fee to whooping Rs.60,000. And that too retrospectively!! Again when the concept of ‘contractual’ teachers to be
appointed against teachers availing of child care leave was mooted by the UGC, no protest was raised. Full time ad hoc / regular leave vacancy appointments should be made against CCL posts. Once the concept of contractual appointments is accepted, this ‘contractual’ malaise will spread in all other domains of appointments. And this is what the MHRD wants!
The need of the hour is to unite and launch a united, protracted struggle against the massive assault launched by MHRD- University team combine. Though we are contesting elections on different platforms, but we should remember that there is only one DUTA and that once the elections are over all of us have to struggle together under a common banner. The DTF claims that they are the monopoly holders on all forms of struggles. History has proven them wrong. The AAD claims that their proximity to the government and the university bosses will bring the desired results. Nothing could be more wrong and ridiculous. What
would yield result is one constant and united struggle. The NDTF assures you to launch such a struggle.
SOME ISSUES
No group has any exclusive issues, all groups have common issues. The NDTF will pursue all the issues, all the demands, accepted by the General Body of the DUTA. Of course the issues have to be prioritized but all issues have to be pursued.
Ordinances on Promotions / Placements, etc. : The thrust of the PBAS-API scheme, sought to be enforced by the UGC-MHRD, is to deny rather than grant promotions. The University AC-EC should frame ordinances so as to eliminate the negative rigor of the PBAS-API scheme. The self appraisal system should replace the points system.
Removal of Anomalies The new pay package has created a huge number of anomalies. Some seniors are forced into a lesser point Vis a Vis some their juniors. Some professors have been placed at lesser pay point compared to their colleagues. All professors must be placed at Rs.43, 000 (min.) w.e.f. 1.1.2006. Similarly all senior lecturers, whether promoted before or after 1.1.2006, should be placed at Rs.18, 600 + Rs. 7000 AGP. Appointments of assistant professors directly at the AGP of Rs.7000 / 8000 have downgraded some of the senior Asstt. Professors in term of AGP. This must be rectified.
No Quota System at any stage of promotion to Professorship.
CPF to GPF. Those teachers who did not opt to remain in the CPF before 30-09-1987 should be deemed to be in the GPF scheme (in consonance with the GOI order on CPF/GPF of 1st May 1987). Others must be allowed to switch over from the CPF to the GPF scheme.
Parity of Librarians: with teachers in all respects. This issue should be settled by the University EC & AC all times to come.
Ad hoc teachers: exploitations and uncertainties faced by ad hoc teachers should end. 54% increase under the OBC expansion has created more posts but the authorities are not filling them. Besides, the implementation of the semester courses, coupled with rumors of ban on regular appointments for the next 3 years have made ad hoc teachers very nervous and vulnerable. All posts should be filled appropriately during the next 6 months.
Cap on PF Interest: The 8% cap on the interest on PF enforced by the university on its employees & teachers, and some of its colleges, must be scrapped. The principle of distributing the entire interest earned, with minor adjustments, to the subscribers must be strictly adhered to.
Improvements in the Health Care Medical Schemes and Housing facilities.
Uniform upward revision of for taking guest lecturers at the SOL, NCWB, Colleges without differentiation.
Some principals of colleges (viz. RLA, Dayal Singh, and Kalindi) are on path of destroying their institutions. They play tricks to deny the rights to teachers and deviate the focus from teaching-learning process. The university should take appropriate actions against such principals.
There is an urgent need for providing the desired infrastructure and facilities for differently-abled teachers & students.
The long standing demand of science teachers from colleges for providing them with research facilities and allowing them to guide Ph.D student must be addressed immediately.
In some colleges like A.N.D. and Dyal Singh, ad hoc teachers are forced to sign the attendance register. This must stop immediately.
When teachers vote on 25th August, 2011 for electing the DUTA leadership for the next two years, it will be desirable that they ponder over the state of our Delhi University, and its colleges, today. There is an utter unmitigated chaos prevailing at all levels of administration, all democratic norms of lawful decision making are being ignored without any resistance, academic norms are being violated in the name of hurried implementation of the semester system, the university statute book (its statutes ordinances and regulations) have lost all meaning and the decisions are being dictated from above, students and teachers are confused on the contents of the illogically assembled semester based courses of study (in certain cases there are multiple drafts of the syllabus circulating will no one to
clarify as to which one is the correct draft), 54% OBC expansion has taken place without appropriate addition to the infrastructure resulting into space crunch in the classrooms and laboratories, admission norms-dictated from the ministerial and university authorities are darkening the future of thousands of deserving students, even though the new pay package is effective form 01-01-06 the administration has failed to frame ordinances relating to promotions and placements, there is an anomalies galore prevailing on the issues of
‘pay, placement and promotion’, the points gathering system under the quantified PBAS & API regime is making all young teachers apprehensive about their future prospects, uncertainties and confusions are staring into the collective face of ad hoc teachers.....
Desired DUTA Leadership
In such a situation it is imperative that we have a DUTA leadership which is capable of rising above narrow partisan considerations for uniting all sections of teachers (after all there is only one DUTA). Also the vision of the DUTA leadership should be geared towards inclusive and comprehensive development. The leadership should be capable of simultaneously pursuing all issues: pay scales and promotions; service conditions; provision of academic and research facilities; preservation and strengthening of democratic norms and the university statutes, ordinances, etc in the decision making processes; reestablishing
the prestige of the University Court, the Executive Council and the Academic Council; provision of appropriate infrastructure (classrooms, laboratories tutorial rooms, departmental / individual rooms for academic/research work, internet/research/books/journals allowance) to all teachers; rationalization of admission processes, etc.
HRDM’s Offensive
Friend, we have noticed that the Central Government, more particularly the H R D Ministry and the Minister Kapil Sibal, has launched a sustained offensive against the university system. After irreversibly mauling the edifice of the school education system, the HRD Ministry is now aiming its destructive attention on our university systems, With bills like ‘Foreign Educational Institutions Bill’, ‘Educational Tribunal Bill’ & ‘National Accreditation Regulatory Authority Bill’ the autonomy of the university would vanish totally. Market forces shall rule the academic processes in higher education domain. The forced implementations
of the semester system, despite its glaring defects, is the trailer of the future scenario.
DUTA’s Duty
It is the duty of the collective body of teachers to honestly and persistently oppose the offensive jointly launched by the UPA Government, the HRDM and the university team. The beginning of such a united struggle was reflected in the initial few months of the ‘semester’ struggle. But after the November 2010 order of the Delhi High Court on semester related PIL, both the unity and the struggle completely collapsed. The AAD/Congress leadership of the DUTA abandoned all will to fight on the semester issue except through legal presentations in the court. The DTF-Left broke the united struggle by floating JAB which intervened in the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court with disastrous results. The collapse of the semester struggle has emboldened the university and the MHRD authorities to ride roughshod over all decision making processes in the university. The
manner in which the incumbent VC has implemented the semester courses in all the faculties and departments at the UG level has surpassed the authoritarianism even of the outgoing VC, Deepak Pental. The HRD Minister and the UPA Government are obviously behind all these moves to destroy the autonomy of our university system. The trouble is that the AAD-Congress leadership of the DUTA has now completely surrendered to the Vice Chancellor Proof, Dinesh Singh and is functioning ‘at his pleasure’. The DTF leadership is in collusion with many factions of INTEC-Congress (for electoral and other gains) and indulges only in theatrical and rhetorical militancy. One or two examples would prove
that both groups are hand in gloves with the university and governmental authorities. Both AAD and DTF have one elected teacher member teach in the D.U. Executive Council. Yet neither of them lodged any formal protest when the E.C. raised the WUS membership fee to Rs. 500 per month and renewal (for retiring/retired teachers) fee to whooping Rs.60,000. And that too retrospectively!! Again when the concept of ‘contractual’ teachers to be
appointed against teachers availing of child care leave was mooted by the UGC, no protest was raised. Full time ad hoc / regular leave vacancy appointments should be made against CCL posts. Once the concept of contractual appointments is accepted, this ‘contractual’ malaise will spread in all other domains of appointments. And this is what the MHRD wants!
The need of the hour is to unite and launch a united, protracted struggle against the massive assault launched by MHRD- University team combine. Though we are contesting elections on different platforms, but we should remember that there is only one DUTA and that once the elections are over all of us have to struggle together under a common banner. The DTF claims that they are the monopoly holders on all forms of struggles. History has proven them wrong. The AAD claims that their proximity to the government and the university bosses will bring the desired results. Nothing could be more wrong and ridiculous. What
would yield result is one constant and united struggle. The NDTF assures you to launch such a struggle.
SOME ISSUES
No group has any exclusive issues, all groups have common issues. The NDTF will pursue all the issues, all the demands, accepted by the General Body of the DUTA. Of course the issues have to be prioritized but all issues have to be pursued.
Ordinances on Promotions / Placements, etc. : The thrust of the PBAS-API scheme, sought to be enforced by the UGC-MHRD, is to deny rather than grant promotions. The University AC-EC should frame ordinances so as to eliminate the negative rigor of the PBAS-API scheme. The self appraisal system should replace the points system.
Removal of Anomalies The new pay package has created a huge number of anomalies. Some seniors are forced into a lesser point Vis a Vis some their juniors. Some professors have been placed at lesser pay point compared to their colleagues. All professors must be placed at Rs.43, 000 (min.) w.e.f. 1.1.2006. Similarly all senior lecturers, whether promoted before or after 1.1.2006, should be placed at Rs.18, 600 + Rs. 7000 AGP. Appointments of assistant professors directly at the AGP of Rs.7000 / 8000 have downgraded some of the senior Asstt. Professors in term of AGP. This must be rectified.
No Quota System at any stage of promotion to Professorship.
CPF to GPF. Those teachers who did not opt to remain in the CPF before 30-09-1987 should be deemed to be in the GPF scheme (in consonance with the GOI order on CPF/GPF of 1st May 1987). Others must be allowed to switch over from the CPF to the GPF scheme.
Parity of Librarians: with teachers in all respects. This issue should be settled by the University EC & AC all times to come.
Ad hoc teachers: exploitations and uncertainties faced by ad hoc teachers should end. 54% increase under the OBC expansion has created more posts but the authorities are not filling them. Besides, the implementation of the semester courses, coupled with rumors of ban on regular appointments for the next 3 years have made ad hoc teachers very nervous and vulnerable. All posts should be filled appropriately during the next 6 months.
Cap on PF Interest: The 8% cap on the interest on PF enforced by the university on its employees & teachers, and some of its colleges, must be scrapped. The principle of distributing the entire interest earned, with minor adjustments, to the subscribers must be strictly adhered to.
Improvements in the Health Care Medical Schemes and Housing facilities.
Uniform upward revision of for taking guest lecturers at the SOL, NCWB, Colleges without differentiation.
Some principals of colleges (viz. RLA, Dayal Singh, and Kalindi) are on path of destroying their institutions. They play tricks to deny the rights to teachers and deviate the focus from teaching-learning process. The university should take appropriate actions against such principals.
There is an urgent need for providing the desired infrastructure and facilities for differently-abled teachers & students.
The long standing demand of science teachers from colleges for providing them with research facilities and allowing them to guide Ph.D student must be addressed immediately.
In some colleges like A.N.D. and Dyal Singh, ad hoc teachers are forced to sign the attendance register. This must stop immediately.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
DEEPAK PENTAL EARNS HIS PLACE IN HISTORY
During the golden period of Spain Miquel de Cervantes (1556-1615) created a masterpiece of European literature,’ Don Quixote’, It was the story of a funny fictional character, who styled himself as a knight errant Don Quixote, and who had convinced himself that he was destined to vanquish all (imagined)evil enemies. In his hilarious adventures he is encouraged and egged on by his 'squire' Sancho Panza. This Don tilts against windmills because Panza had convinced him that they were giant evils. In this monumental epic both of them bring a lot of ridicule upon themselves with their amusing misadventures and crazy imagery.
The university community sees shades of Quixote-Panza combo in some of the recent acts of VC-Registrar duo. Any advice for sagacity, any demand for dialogue and debate, any criticism of violations of university statutes or of past established practices was seen as emanating from evil carnates; that is, DUTA or 'self appointed teacher activists'. Like Quixote, Deepak Pental threw his knightly lances at the evil spirits. He shot out 20 letters and orders to college principals and GBs. They were mostly treated with quiet contempt they deserved. Teachers were not deterred.
The similarity with the epic parody does not end here. This epic influenced European literature for the next 300 years. Pental has also ensured his place in future history. Many a management institutes will surely have in their curricula text book the case studies of ' "how not to run an organization" or "how not to introduce a reform ": a case study of semester introduction in DU”. Dr Deepak Pental not only failed as a vice chancellor but also as the CEO of DU he thought he actually was.
The purpose of this piece is not to repeat the often repeated arguments of multiple violations of lawfully laid down procedures by the VC. The purpose is to lament the loss of excellent opportunity to introduce innovations and interdisciplinary in curricula and teaching methods, make evaluation processes not a test of rote memory but of real knowledge, encouraging research and, above all, devising ways and means through which 'quality' could be introduced to mammoth the number of undergraduate students. Friends, if Dr Pental and the university community introspect, the failures are many and monumental. First is that teachers have been tarred with black brush as opposing any or all reform. The fact is that the teachers have been in the forefront of all positive changes in structures and syllabi in DU during the last few decades. Second is the impression created by Pental that he is under force introducing semester scheme at the behest of the union MHRD. That the university spent over Rs 90 lakhs of public money over huge ads in prominent news papers and over court cases, and yet failed every time and everywhere, has further confirmed this impression. Third, the 13 science courses in which the VC sought to implement an ill conceived half baked semester based syllabi cover only about 12%of students’ strength in the formal stream. Pental had always boasted that he would introduce semester in all the courses, in all the faculties-a boast which has fallen flat on its face. Even in sciences in over 75% cases teaching is being done in the annual scheme despite farcical claims by some subCEOs(read principals).The process of starting Pental's dream semester project has not yet even started in Arts, Humanities, Mathematics, Social Sciences, Commerce and Business departments which cover over 85% of the students. Also the semester based science courses, somehow assembled by the VC in a hurry, betray no evidence of interdisciplinarity or innovation. The two exams per year instead of one cannot in itself be a positive reform. The actual teaching days have been reduced so as to provide for two exams and preparatory holidays.
The incoming new administration of DU, it is hoped, will learn from these mistakes. An era of the much needed reforms will start with the active help of all concerned. The processes to consult, confer, discuss, debate, and, argue with permanent stake holders- students and teachers, and will yield positive results. The top down approach is bound to fail.
October 10, 2010
INDER KAPAHY
Dept.of Physics
KM College,DU.
9810037679
imkkmc@gmail.com
The university community sees shades of Quixote-Panza combo in some of the recent acts of VC-Registrar duo. Any advice for sagacity, any demand for dialogue and debate, any criticism of violations of university statutes or of past established practices was seen as emanating from evil carnates; that is, DUTA or 'self appointed teacher activists'. Like Quixote, Deepak Pental threw his knightly lances at the evil spirits. He shot out 20 letters and orders to college principals and GBs. They were mostly treated with quiet contempt they deserved. Teachers were not deterred.
The similarity with the epic parody does not end here. This epic influenced European literature for the next 300 years. Pental has also ensured his place in future history. Many a management institutes will surely have in their curricula text book the case studies of ' "how not to run an organization" or "how not to introduce a reform ": a case study of semester introduction in DU”. Dr Deepak Pental not only failed as a vice chancellor but also as the CEO of DU he thought he actually was.
The purpose of this piece is not to repeat the often repeated arguments of multiple violations of lawfully laid down procedures by the VC. The purpose is to lament the loss of excellent opportunity to introduce innovations and interdisciplinary in curricula and teaching methods, make evaluation processes not a test of rote memory but of real knowledge, encouraging research and, above all, devising ways and means through which 'quality' could be introduced to mammoth the number of undergraduate students. Friends, if Dr Pental and the university community introspect, the failures are many and monumental. First is that teachers have been tarred with black brush as opposing any or all reform. The fact is that the teachers have been in the forefront of all positive changes in structures and syllabi in DU during the last few decades. Second is the impression created by Pental that he is under force introducing semester scheme at the behest of the union MHRD. That the university spent over Rs 90 lakhs of public money over huge ads in prominent news papers and over court cases, and yet failed every time and everywhere, has further confirmed this impression. Third, the 13 science courses in which the VC sought to implement an ill conceived half baked semester based syllabi cover only about 12%of students’ strength in the formal stream. Pental had always boasted that he would introduce semester in all the courses, in all the faculties-a boast which has fallen flat on its face. Even in sciences in over 75% cases teaching is being done in the annual scheme despite farcical claims by some subCEOs(read principals).The process of starting Pental's dream semester project has not yet even started in Arts, Humanities, Mathematics, Social Sciences, Commerce and Business departments which cover over 85% of the students. Also the semester based science courses, somehow assembled by the VC in a hurry, betray no evidence of interdisciplinarity or innovation. The two exams per year instead of one cannot in itself be a positive reform. The actual teaching days have been reduced so as to provide for two exams and preparatory holidays.
The incoming new administration of DU, it is hoped, will learn from these mistakes. An era of the much needed reforms will start with the active help of all concerned. The processes to consult, confer, discuss, debate, and, argue with permanent stake holders- students and teachers, and will yield positive results. The top down approach is bound to fail.
October 10, 2010
INDER KAPAHY
Dept.of Physics
KM College,DU.
9810037679
imkkmc@gmail.com
A Critique : Prof. S C PANCHOLI REPORT ON SCRAP SALE OF GAMMA CELL
(An attempt to hide truth)
As was suspected the Prof. S.C. Pancholi ‘enquiry’ report on the sale of gamma cell 220 as scrap by the chemistry department, DU, is nothing but an attempt not to expose the truth behind this strange sale. The report does not recognize the group of persons responsible for the scrap sale and does not fix responsibilities. It blames the entire chemistry department when it concludes “it appears to be a collective failure of the department of chemistry, Delhi University.”
How does the appearance become a conclusion in a formal report! Well informed circles in Delhi University had always emphasized that the enquiry committee comprises persons handpicked by the Vice-chancellor and the then Head of the chemistry department, Prof. V.S. Parmar. That is why the committee has not even examined the role of the Vice chancellor and the pro Vice chancellor who are directly connected with the sale as the ‘competent’ approving authorities. The scrap dealer, Sh. Harcharan Singh, resident of D2/80 Mayapuri, New Delhi- 110064, was also not examined lest he should reveal some uncomfortable truths. The entire chemistry department has been blamed without any logic.
The fact, not properly examined by the enquiry committee, is that the ‘write off’ committee and the ‘disposal’ committee constituted by the Department of Chemistry, were only carrying out the orders to dispose off the unserviceable/obsolete items in record time without due deliberation and care. No attempt was made by the enquiry committee to recognize these invisible givers of orders. The note initiated by the then HOD, Prof. V.S. Parmar, on 20th January 2010 reveals the whole story of criminal neglect to please the bosses. On 20th January 2010, prof. V.S. Parmar moved an official note stating, inter-alia, “I have consulted some of my colleagues in the department who have given their opinion that the old and obsolete items of equipments should be disposed off as early as possible, in particular because one block has to demolished immediately for the construction of new T.R. Sheshadri block of the department.” On the same one page note teachers of the department have signed their approval with the words “we strongly support that all the obsolete items stored in several rooms and laboratories of the department be disposed off ‘as requested by our HOD, as soon as possible’.”(Emphasis added) also on the same page a request was made to approve a committee of 8 professors under Prof. V.S. Parmar to dispose off the obsolete/junk items. Both V.C. (on 1st February 2010) and proV.C. (On 4th February 2010) approved of the suggestions mooted by the then HOD. That the V.C. signed the documents even before the proV.C., establishes as to who is actually behind all this sordid drama. Why was Dr Deepak Pental not questioned by the enquiry committee ?
It is evident from this one page note initiated by the then HOD that no formal meeting of the Department of Chemistry was convened to constitute ‘write off’ or ‘disposal’ committees. It was all informal- ‘as requested by the HOD’, kind of informality. In the absence of examination of the VC and the proVC by the committee it is difficult to establish or deny that both of them were in league to quickly dispose off the obsolete item including the 4 ton gamma cell. The committee’s failure to examine the VC and proVC is a serious violation of the proper procedure. In a single meeting on 10th February 2010 of the disposal committee, which was the same as the write off committee with the addition of one each representative of the engineering department and internal audit, it was decided to dispose off all ‘obsolete items’ through public auction. There is no indication of any scrutiny of the list of items which also included the gamma cell.
It is a criminal neglect of procedure by the committee not to examine the scrap dealer to whom the entire ‘kabad(!)’ was sold. Perusal of documents reveals a bizarre fact. The 4 ton gamma cell (220), with pencils of radioactive cobalt-60, was sold to the kabadi for Re. 1. The scrap dealer would have revealed as to how the disposal price of this gigantic size machine was fixed at Re. 1. How was the gamma cell decommissioned? What was the role of the three ‘Radiological Safety Officers (RSOs)’ – not examined again by the committee- in advising security measures while dismantling the machine? Why was the Dean of Science Faculty included in he Write off and Disposal committees and what role did he play? All these questions have been left unattended.
The use of word ‘lapse’ by the enquiry committee for criminal neglect of required and mandated safeguards is revolting. Mishandling of gamma cell by the chemistry department and its dismantling and scrap sale to a kabadi without radiological safety procedures has been described merely as ‘an initial but significant lapse’. The initiation to write off the gamma cell without adequate knowledge about the equipment has also been described as ‘another lapse’. Failure of the write off committee to obtain the technical information of gamma cell is also ‘another lapse’.
The enquiry committee emphasizes that after the retirement of prof. B.K. Sharma in 1993 – he was the only professor conducting research associated with the gamma cell- the gamma cell was transferred on records to M.Sc. Physical Chemistry lab but no faculty member was made responsible for its use. Yet the committee is trying to indirectly and unfairly put blame on Prof. Rita Kakkar for writing off the gamma cell. She is a theoretical chemist having nothing to do with the gamma cell experimentation. The committee has also come to a bizarre conclusion: “as she was not the user of the gamma cell, she should have ascertained the technical details of the gamma cell before initiating the write off of this equipment.” It is a matter of investigation why she recommended writing off of the gamma cell when she had nothing to do with it. Was she coerced/ persuaded to do so? Also it is unbelievable that the HOD, chairman of the write off and disposal committee, was not aware of the radioactive contents of the gamma cell. The very word ‘gamma’ denotes radioactive emission. Also the room housing the cell had always had the radioactive emission danger sign prominently displayed on the door. Feigning of ignorance about radioactive nature of the cell cannot be accepted. It is evident that the whole Chemistry Department was under pressure of higher authorities to get rid of the junk post haste.
The enquiry committee has completely ignored the non-observance of AERB mandated safety guidelines on the use of gamma cell by the chemistry department. When the University of Delhi gave application, seeking permission of the AERB in January 1970 for the use of radioactive gamma cell 220, the AERB clearly stated ‘item number 14 of the above application contains the “safety instruction” in the form of “terms and condition” for the safe handling of the gamma cell 220.’ Yet the enquiry committee has come to the completely erroneous conclusion that ‘lack of communication between the chemistry department, DU and the AERB led to the auction of AECRL 220 gamma cell containing radioactive cobalt- 60 sources.’
To conclude, some technical details. The enquiry committee concludes that though the initial radioactivity of gamma cell in July 1969 was 4373 curie (Ci) it was reduced to 20.6 Ci in March 2010. Exact calculation shows that the residual activity was 15% more, that is, 23.9 Ci. Be that as it may. 1 Ci in itself is a gigantic radioactivity. It amounts to 37 billion radioactive decays per second. And gamma decays are particularly dangerous as they are long penetrating. It is not safe for human bodies to be exposed to even a millionth part of a curie. The radioactive exposure caused by the DU through scrap sale to a Mayapuri kabadi was thousands of times greater than the human tolerance limit. It has already resulted into one death and many people in critical conditions. Many may suffer in future. The scientific research has suffered in DU by the AERB ban on the use of radioactive material in any manner and for whatever purpose in the laboratories of DU.
It is pertinent to comment that the University of Delhi would not have suffered the indignity and disrepute that it did if the VC had not developed and encouraged the culture of CEOisation of decision making process. The VC has become the chief CEO of DU and heads have become junior CEO’s . Instead of disposing of junk material through EC sponsored committees ,the chemistry department decided to sell it on their own under pressure of the VC . If Dr Deepak Pental runs away from his responsibility it will have serious disastrous consequences for the conduct of research in science departments of DU.
The Prof. S.C. Pancholi committee report is full of inanities and lacks focus. Instead of coming to logical conclusions it only gives ‘opinions’. It comes to the conclusion that nobody is responsible; everybody is responsible. Criminal acts of neglects are described as lapses (which are nothing but brief failure of concentration, memory or judgment) the university must reject the whitewashing report if it has to restore its lost credibility. An independent actionable judicial enquiry must be instituted.
Inder Kapahy 3 October 2010
Dept of Physics
K M College DU
9810037679
imkkmc@gmail.com
As was suspected the Prof. S.C. Pancholi ‘enquiry’ report on the sale of gamma cell 220 as scrap by the chemistry department, DU, is nothing but an attempt not to expose the truth behind this strange sale. The report does not recognize the group of persons responsible for the scrap sale and does not fix responsibilities. It blames the entire chemistry department when it concludes “it appears to be a collective failure of the department of chemistry, Delhi University.”
How does the appearance become a conclusion in a formal report! Well informed circles in Delhi University had always emphasized that the enquiry committee comprises persons handpicked by the Vice-chancellor and the then Head of the chemistry department, Prof. V.S. Parmar. That is why the committee has not even examined the role of the Vice chancellor and the pro Vice chancellor who are directly connected with the sale as the ‘competent’ approving authorities. The scrap dealer, Sh. Harcharan Singh, resident of D2/80 Mayapuri, New Delhi- 110064, was also not examined lest he should reveal some uncomfortable truths. The entire chemistry department has been blamed without any logic.
The fact, not properly examined by the enquiry committee, is that the ‘write off’ committee and the ‘disposal’ committee constituted by the Department of Chemistry, were only carrying out the orders to dispose off the unserviceable/obsolete items in record time without due deliberation and care. No attempt was made by the enquiry committee to recognize these invisible givers of orders. The note initiated by the then HOD, Prof. V.S. Parmar, on 20th January 2010 reveals the whole story of criminal neglect to please the bosses. On 20th January 2010, prof. V.S. Parmar moved an official note stating, inter-alia, “I have consulted some of my colleagues in the department who have given their opinion that the old and obsolete items of equipments should be disposed off as early as possible, in particular because one block has to demolished immediately for the construction of new T.R. Sheshadri block of the department.” On the same one page note teachers of the department have signed their approval with the words “we strongly support that all the obsolete items stored in several rooms and laboratories of the department be disposed off ‘as requested by our HOD, as soon as possible’.”(Emphasis added) also on the same page a request was made to approve a committee of 8 professors under Prof. V.S. Parmar to dispose off the obsolete/junk items. Both V.C. (on 1st February 2010) and proV.C. (On 4th February 2010) approved of the suggestions mooted by the then HOD. That the V.C. signed the documents even before the proV.C., establishes as to who is actually behind all this sordid drama. Why was Dr Deepak Pental not questioned by the enquiry committee ?
It is evident from this one page note initiated by the then HOD that no formal meeting of the Department of Chemistry was convened to constitute ‘write off’ or ‘disposal’ committees. It was all informal- ‘as requested by the HOD’, kind of informality. In the absence of examination of the VC and the proVC by the committee it is difficult to establish or deny that both of them were in league to quickly dispose off the obsolete item including the 4 ton gamma cell. The committee’s failure to examine the VC and proVC is a serious violation of the proper procedure. In a single meeting on 10th February 2010 of the disposal committee, which was the same as the write off committee with the addition of one each representative of the engineering department and internal audit, it was decided to dispose off all ‘obsolete items’ through public auction. There is no indication of any scrutiny of the list of items which also included the gamma cell.
It is a criminal neglect of procedure by the committee not to examine the scrap dealer to whom the entire ‘kabad(!)’ was sold. Perusal of documents reveals a bizarre fact. The 4 ton gamma cell (220), with pencils of radioactive cobalt-60, was sold to the kabadi for Re. 1. The scrap dealer would have revealed as to how the disposal price of this gigantic size machine was fixed at Re. 1. How was the gamma cell decommissioned? What was the role of the three ‘Radiological Safety Officers (RSOs)’ – not examined again by the committee- in advising security measures while dismantling the machine? Why was the Dean of Science Faculty included in he Write off and Disposal committees and what role did he play? All these questions have been left unattended.
The use of word ‘lapse’ by the enquiry committee for criminal neglect of required and mandated safeguards is revolting. Mishandling of gamma cell by the chemistry department and its dismantling and scrap sale to a kabadi without radiological safety procedures has been described merely as ‘an initial but significant lapse’. The initiation to write off the gamma cell without adequate knowledge about the equipment has also been described as ‘another lapse’. Failure of the write off committee to obtain the technical information of gamma cell is also ‘another lapse’.
The enquiry committee emphasizes that after the retirement of prof. B.K. Sharma in 1993 – he was the only professor conducting research associated with the gamma cell- the gamma cell was transferred on records to M.Sc. Physical Chemistry lab but no faculty member was made responsible for its use. Yet the committee is trying to indirectly and unfairly put blame on Prof. Rita Kakkar for writing off the gamma cell. She is a theoretical chemist having nothing to do with the gamma cell experimentation. The committee has also come to a bizarre conclusion: “as she was not the user of the gamma cell, she should have ascertained the technical details of the gamma cell before initiating the write off of this equipment.” It is a matter of investigation why she recommended writing off of the gamma cell when she had nothing to do with it. Was she coerced/ persuaded to do so? Also it is unbelievable that the HOD, chairman of the write off and disposal committee, was not aware of the radioactive contents of the gamma cell. The very word ‘gamma’ denotes radioactive emission. Also the room housing the cell had always had the radioactive emission danger sign prominently displayed on the door. Feigning of ignorance about radioactive nature of the cell cannot be accepted. It is evident that the whole Chemistry Department was under pressure of higher authorities to get rid of the junk post haste.
The enquiry committee has completely ignored the non-observance of AERB mandated safety guidelines on the use of gamma cell by the chemistry department. When the University of Delhi gave application, seeking permission of the AERB in January 1970 for the use of radioactive gamma cell 220, the AERB clearly stated ‘item number 14 of the above application contains the “safety instruction” in the form of “terms and condition” for the safe handling of the gamma cell 220.’ Yet the enquiry committee has come to the completely erroneous conclusion that ‘lack of communication between the chemistry department, DU and the AERB led to the auction of AECRL 220 gamma cell containing radioactive cobalt- 60 sources.’
To conclude, some technical details. The enquiry committee concludes that though the initial radioactivity of gamma cell in July 1969 was 4373 curie (Ci) it was reduced to 20.6 Ci in March 2010. Exact calculation shows that the residual activity was 15% more, that is, 23.9 Ci. Be that as it may. 1 Ci in itself is a gigantic radioactivity. It amounts to 37 billion radioactive decays per second. And gamma decays are particularly dangerous as they are long penetrating. It is not safe for human bodies to be exposed to even a millionth part of a curie. The radioactive exposure caused by the DU through scrap sale to a Mayapuri kabadi was thousands of times greater than the human tolerance limit. It has already resulted into one death and many people in critical conditions. Many may suffer in future. The scientific research has suffered in DU by the AERB ban on the use of radioactive material in any manner and for whatever purpose in the laboratories of DU.
It is pertinent to comment that the University of Delhi would not have suffered the indignity and disrepute that it did if the VC had not developed and encouraged the culture of CEOisation of decision making process. The VC has become the chief CEO of DU and heads have become junior CEO’s . Instead of disposing of junk material through EC sponsored committees ,the chemistry department decided to sell it on their own under pressure of the VC . If Dr Deepak Pental runs away from his responsibility it will have serious disastrous consequences for the conduct of research in science departments of DU.
The Prof. S.C. Pancholi committee report is full of inanities and lacks focus. Instead of coming to logical conclusions it only gives ‘opinions’. It comes to the conclusion that nobody is responsible; everybody is responsible. Criminal acts of neglects are described as lapses (which are nothing but brief failure of concentration, memory or judgment) the university must reject the whitewashing report if it has to restore its lost credibility. An independent actionable judicial enquiry must be instituted.
Inder Kapahy 3 October 2010
Dept of Physics
K M College DU
9810037679
imkkmc@gmail.com
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
An Open Letter To The Vice-Chancellor
The Vice-Chancellor,
University of Delhi,
Delhi
7th June 2010
Sub: Building of consensus on academic reforms – re.
Sir,
I write this open letter in my personal capacity as a science teacher with a fond hope that it will open not only closed minds but also open a comprehensive debate on the semester issue, an issue which vitally impinges upon the future health of our university system.
It is by now well established that you have blatantly exploited your position as the Vice-Chancellor of the University to illegally implement the semester system at the undergraduate level and to arbitrarily assemble semester based Science Courses. In this process you have violated expressed provisions of the University Act, Statutes, Ordinances, and academically healthy past practices. In your enthusiastic zeal to be the appointed hatchet man of the MHRD / UGC, an enthusiasm which will make even them squirm, you have ignored all statutory processes and bodies. There is no point in enlisting the whole litany of your irregularities since you yourself do not deny having committed them. However, we are concerned that myopic actions of the university authorities have the ominous portents of destroying the teaching-learning process in Delhi University, particularly the Science Courses. We shudder to remember how the ‘visionary dream’ of the then outgoing Vice-Chancellor, buttressed by a self serving coterie of sycophants, turned into a nightmare for B.Sc. (Programs). Thankfully B.Sc. (Hons) Courses were then saved from slaughter. Now when you are soon to acquire the status of the outgoing Vice-Chancellor, please do not infect all Science Courses with debilitating virus.
Sir, you must realize that by denying a debate on the desirability and feasibility of the semester system at the UG level, you have converted the ‘semester system’ into a hate phrase amongst dominant majority of university teachers. This in itself is a sure recipe for the failure of the system you want introduced. We realize that change is ‘eternal’; but in a university system it has to emanate from ‘internal’ debate, not from ‘external’ arm twisting. Why, pray why, are you so afraid of a structured debate on the semester issue!!
You have often enlisted some advantages of the semester cum credits system which can be delineated as: (a) mobility across universities in India and abroad; (b) encouragement to interdisciplinarity; (c) conformity with global standards; (d) academic activity throughout the year instead of the year end. But these advantages are only anecdotal, there is no quantifiable data to substantiate these claims. Merely because a system is prevalent in USA and Europe, it does not make it desirable in a university of the mammoth size of Delhi. Where is a university in the west with about 3 lakh students distributed in over 70 departments and 80 colleges? In IITs, IIMs, JNU, etc where the semester system exists, the total strength in each institution is less than the average students’ strength in a Delhi College.
Some relevant questions arise:
How are you encouraging ‘mobility’ when you are denying semester system to over 1.5 lakh students of SOL of Delhi University? Is mobility possible when the course structures of different universities are not compatible and comparable? Are you not encouraging mobility towards ‘foreign universities’ as and what they establish base in Delhi and around?
How are you encouraging ‘interdisciplinarity’ when (a) you have a fixed 24:6:2 structure at all levels, and (b) when non-science faculties are not prepared to join the semester stream. Can a student of B.Sc. (Hons) Physics take a course in, say, forensic science or psycho-analysis?
Can the interdisciplinarity not be built up in the well established ‘annual’ scheme? How is it a function only of the semester scheme?
Is it not a fact that semester system has merit only where teachers have autonomy to frame courses, teach and evaluate (like in IITs, IIMs, JNU, etc).
How does the semester system not reduce itself merely to a bi-annual system (instead of an annual one). Students may have a long period of leisure followed by a short period of intense memorization by rote, repeated twice a year. A cohesive paper may be split into two semesters, as has actually happened in your proposed scheme and the help which a student gets in doing them together vanishes.
Is it not necessary to keep in mind that admissions in DU Colleges do not stabilize before August end, that extra and co-curricular activities have to be accommodated, that examinations have to be held in climatically suitable conditions, etc before ejecting out the existing and healthy annual system.
The University had few years back introduced semester system in courses like BBS, BA (H) Business Economics, B.Sc. (H) Computer Science, etc. How many students of these courses have earned credits, availed of mobility towards foreign universities, earned credits there and came back to DU to finish the course. Such inputs are required before extending the semester scheme across all undergraduate honours and other courses. Scientific spirit demands drawing of inferences from empirical observations.
Mr. Vice-Chancellor, no system in itself is superior per se. It is always how people use it and whether it is the right fit for the society at a given time. Even by following the annual scheme for the last 88 years, the Delhi University is one of the top universities of India and well respected in the knowledge centres all around the globe. Also there are examples of universities which follow semester systems, most private professional universities do, and are counted as academic catastrophes. There is no reason why innovative, globally accepted, teaching and evaluating methods can not be implemented within the framework of the existing annual scheme.
Let me conclude by asserting that we are not opposed to change; we are not per se opposed to the semester system. But we are certainly opposed to the abhorrently crude manner in which you are seeking to push the semester system down the collective throat of the university. It is often said that on the semester issue our Vice-Chancellor is behaving like bull in the china shop. Please do not take it as a personal affront if the teaching community feels that, striding nearly across 7 centuries, Mohammad Bin Tuglaq speaks through the present university administration. Tuglaq was convinced that he was a reformist administrator, but the history judged him differently.
Sir, I respect your faith in the semester system. As an individual you are entitled to it, but as a Vice-Chancellor you should share your faith with us through an open and democratic debate? Why do you think that we, a collection of 20-30 noisy ‘activists’ as you call us, will hijack the debate. If you are convinced please convince others and do not throw the university down a clearly visible precipice. You will surely appreciate that teachers would be accused of intellectual cowardice if they take whatever the authorities dictate as revealed wisdom.
I hope you will listen to the voice of reason, and postpone the implementation of semester based Science Courses, and initiate the process of building a consensus on the desired and required changes in our university system.
With profound regards,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
(INDER KAPAHY)
Former Member, Executive Council & Academic Council,
DUTA Secretary. Chairman, Science Teachers of Delhi University Colleges
Department of Physics, Kirori Mal College
Mobile: 9810037679, e-mail:imkkmc@gmail.com
University of Delhi,
Delhi
7th June 2010
Sub: Building of consensus on academic reforms – re.
Sir,
I write this open letter in my personal capacity as a science teacher with a fond hope that it will open not only closed minds but also open a comprehensive debate on the semester issue, an issue which vitally impinges upon the future health of our university system.
It is by now well established that you have blatantly exploited your position as the Vice-Chancellor of the University to illegally implement the semester system at the undergraduate level and to arbitrarily assemble semester based Science Courses. In this process you have violated expressed provisions of the University Act, Statutes, Ordinances, and academically healthy past practices. In your enthusiastic zeal to be the appointed hatchet man of the MHRD / UGC, an enthusiasm which will make even them squirm, you have ignored all statutory processes and bodies. There is no point in enlisting the whole litany of your irregularities since you yourself do not deny having committed them. However, we are concerned that myopic actions of the university authorities have the ominous portents of destroying the teaching-learning process in Delhi University, particularly the Science Courses. We shudder to remember how the ‘visionary dream’ of the then outgoing Vice-Chancellor, buttressed by a self serving coterie of sycophants, turned into a nightmare for B.Sc. (Programs). Thankfully B.Sc. (Hons) Courses were then saved from slaughter. Now when you are soon to acquire the status of the outgoing Vice-Chancellor, please do not infect all Science Courses with debilitating virus.
Sir, you must realize that by denying a debate on the desirability and feasibility of the semester system at the UG level, you have converted the ‘semester system’ into a hate phrase amongst dominant majority of university teachers. This in itself is a sure recipe for the failure of the system you want introduced. We realize that change is ‘eternal’; but in a university system it has to emanate from ‘internal’ debate, not from ‘external’ arm twisting. Why, pray why, are you so afraid of a structured debate on the semester issue!!
You have often enlisted some advantages of the semester cum credits system which can be delineated as: (a) mobility across universities in India and abroad; (b) encouragement to interdisciplinarity; (c) conformity with global standards; (d) academic activity throughout the year instead of the year end. But these advantages are only anecdotal, there is no quantifiable data to substantiate these claims. Merely because a system is prevalent in USA and Europe, it does not make it desirable in a university of the mammoth size of Delhi. Where is a university in the west with about 3 lakh students distributed in over 70 departments and 80 colleges? In IITs, IIMs, JNU, etc where the semester system exists, the total strength in each institution is less than the average students’ strength in a Delhi College.
Some relevant questions arise:
How are you encouraging ‘mobility’ when you are denying semester system to over 1.5 lakh students of SOL of Delhi University? Is mobility possible when the course structures of different universities are not compatible and comparable? Are you not encouraging mobility towards ‘foreign universities’ as and what they establish base in Delhi and around?
How are you encouraging ‘interdisciplinarity’ when (a) you have a fixed 24:6:2 structure at all levels, and (b) when non-science faculties are not prepared to join the semester stream. Can a student of B.Sc. (Hons) Physics take a course in, say, forensic science or psycho-analysis?
Can the interdisciplinarity not be built up in the well established ‘annual’ scheme? How is it a function only of the semester scheme?
Is it not a fact that semester system has merit only where teachers have autonomy to frame courses, teach and evaluate (like in IITs, IIMs, JNU, etc).
How does the semester system not reduce itself merely to a bi-annual system (instead of an annual one). Students may have a long period of leisure followed by a short period of intense memorization by rote, repeated twice a year. A cohesive paper may be split into two semesters, as has actually happened in your proposed scheme and the help which a student gets in doing them together vanishes.
Is it not necessary to keep in mind that admissions in DU Colleges do not stabilize before August end, that extra and co-curricular activities have to be accommodated, that examinations have to be held in climatically suitable conditions, etc before ejecting out the existing and healthy annual system.
The University had few years back introduced semester system in courses like BBS, BA (H) Business Economics, B.Sc. (H) Computer Science, etc. How many students of these courses have earned credits, availed of mobility towards foreign universities, earned credits there and came back to DU to finish the course. Such inputs are required before extending the semester scheme across all undergraduate honours and other courses. Scientific spirit demands drawing of inferences from empirical observations.
Mr. Vice-Chancellor, no system in itself is superior per se. It is always how people use it and whether it is the right fit for the society at a given time. Even by following the annual scheme for the last 88 years, the Delhi University is one of the top universities of India and well respected in the knowledge centres all around the globe. Also there are examples of universities which follow semester systems, most private professional universities do, and are counted as academic catastrophes. There is no reason why innovative, globally accepted, teaching and evaluating methods can not be implemented within the framework of the existing annual scheme.
Let me conclude by asserting that we are not opposed to change; we are not per se opposed to the semester system. But we are certainly opposed to the abhorrently crude manner in which you are seeking to push the semester system down the collective throat of the university. It is often said that on the semester issue our Vice-Chancellor is behaving like bull in the china shop. Please do not take it as a personal affront if the teaching community feels that, striding nearly across 7 centuries, Mohammad Bin Tuglaq speaks through the present university administration. Tuglaq was convinced that he was a reformist administrator, but the history judged him differently.
Sir, I respect your faith in the semester system. As an individual you are entitled to it, but as a Vice-Chancellor you should share your faith with us through an open and democratic debate? Why do you think that we, a collection of 20-30 noisy ‘activists’ as you call us, will hijack the debate. If you are convinced please convince others and do not throw the university down a clearly visible precipice. You will surely appreciate that teachers would be accused of intellectual cowardice if they take whatever the authorities dictate as revealed wisdom.
I hope you will listen to the voice of reason, and postpone the implementation of semester based Science Courses, and initiate the process of building a consensus on the desired and required changes in our university system.
With profound regards,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
(INDER KAPAHY)
Former Member, Executive Council & Academic Council,
DUTA Secretary. Chairman, Science Teachers of Delhi University Colleges
Department of Physics, Kirori Mal College
Mobile: 9810037679, e-mail:imkkmc@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)