DUTA Letter to VC, 01.04.2019

April 1, 2019


Prof. Yogesh K. Tyagi
Vice-Chancellor
University of Delhi
Delhi – 11000

Sub: Appeal to Withdraw Instructions and Schedule pertaining to UG   Curriculum Revision, as issued to Deans and Heads of Departments

Dear Prof. Tyagi,

The University of Delhi has reportedly issued instructions, along with a 3-month schedule, to all Deans and Heads of Departments, to accomplish Curriculum Revision as per the Learning Outcomes Curricular Framework (LOCF) across all subjects taught at the UG level. The DUTA is surprised that such a large-scale academic exercise is being carried out without any consultation with the collective body of teachers, and sans any discussion in the Academic Council. Even in good faith, it will be presumptuous of the University officials to imagine that such a Revision, done without adequate application of mind and by a select group of hand-picked teachers and students, can produce a sustainable and academically effective result. 

While the CBCS was also implemented across the University without proper discussion or consultation with teachers, its failures are all too evident for the academic community. Students are not being given adequate choices due to the glaring lack of adequate teachers and infrastructure across colleges and departments. The second tranche of OBC-expansion teaching posts still await sanction from the UGC, while we are facing yet another challenge in terms of the expected increase in student-intake due to the EWS 10% Reservation scheme. In the current scenario, it is wishful to hope for the success of any academic reform that is not completely thoughtthrough with the help of the larger body of teachers and students. 

The LOCF itself is open to consideration and scrutiny. A curricular framework based on standardised and measurable learning outcomes may not necessarily be justified, keeping in mind the diversity of academic disciplines, courses and programmes that are taught at the UG level. The University is required to make a close and objective assessment of infrastructure, as well as the prevalent pedagogical and learning processes, prior to the identification of learning outcomes. Without an honest evaluation of current challenges encountered in teaching-learning across colleges and departments, the LOCF forces a mechanical compliance that can only have a disastrous impact on the academic health of the University.

Further, the time-schedule and composition of the drafting committee notified for the Curricular Revision is impractical and allows the scope for extreme bias. While three months are never adequate for an exercise of this scale, the period spanning the last week of March and the first week of June will witness hectic efforts in the preparation for, and conduct of, the end-semester examinations. It is injudicious to expect teachers and students to invest their labour in Curriculum Revision during this period. Moreover, the provision of “three best teachers”, subject to the choice of the HoD/Convener, as members of the drafting committee is highly arbitrary and prone to favouritism. University departments have always observed the democratic convention of appointing paper-wise Curriculum Revision committees through consensus established in department-wise general body meetings of all subject teachers. Inputs from the general bodies of subject teachers have always formed the basis for curricular revision. The papers thus prepared are then put through a statutory process of scrutiny, vetting and ratification by the CoCs, Faculties, Standing Committee of the Academic Council, and eventually, the Academic Council itself. This process has consistently yielded the best possible results. There is no apparent justification for deviating from this convention of best practices, in favour of a selectively chosen committee.

At this point, the DUTA is also compelled to remind you that a similarly hasty implementation of a Four-Year Undergraduate Programme, by your predecessor, had resulted in an unsustainable curricular structure that had to be eventually withdrawn. This had a catastrophic impact on the confidence of the students who had been enrolled in the FYUP, while it also tarnished the academic image of the University.

As the academic leader of our University, you are expected to represent – indeed embody – the collective wisdom of the University’s academic community. Additionally, you are expected to stand up for the University’s Academic Autonomy. If you insist on going ahead with the Curricular Revision as per LOCF in this hasty manner, your actions will be unfortunately tantamount to the surrender of this autonomy. The DUTA earnestly appeals to you to consider all the points of objection raised in this letter and immediately withdraw the instructions and schedule that the University has circulated, in this regard. The DUTA also urges you to bring the LOCF proposal before the Academic Council and allow a thorough discussion on its feasibility and merits, before taking any step on the matter of Curricular Revision.

Regards,