22 June 2015
Sub: Implementation of CBCS should be deferred and wider consultation should be done
Dear Professor Kuhad,
Dr. Jaswinder Singh,
We have come to know from today’s newspaper reports in TOI and Dainik Jagran that a Committee is meeting under your leadership to discuss implementation of CBCS.
We appeal to you to place the DUTA’s view point before the committee members. The DUTA, the collective body of teachers, has expressed reservation on this top-down imposition of reforms without wider consultation. While the UGC has held workshops for Vice Chancellors, no efforts were put to consult teachers who shape any change in class-rooms and labs. It is unfortunate to see that the implementation of CBCS is even more rushed than FYUP and the University is ill-prepared to implement it. Even as admission are to start on 25 June 2015, there is no clarity of course structure, syllabi and examination scheme. We hear that even as General Body Meetings of teachers in various Departments like History, Political Science, Urdu and Physics; courses were passed in few minutes in Faculty meetings amidst protests.
The FYUP adversely affected the careers of thousands of students of Delhi University. The hurried implementation of the CBCS, which is directed at all colleges and universities in the country, would adversely affect the careers of lakhs of students. The DUTA has represented to the UGC and the MHRD on the issue.
We wish to draw your attention to the following major concerns regarding the CBCS:
- The CBCS has a ‘cafetaria’ approach that is supposed to allow students to choose from a basket of courses. Any widening of choice will be unworkable due to acute shortage of infrastructure and teachers and the reality of overcrowded classrooms in almost all public-funded higher education institutions. Further, the ‘cafetaria’ approach, which is an extreme version of the idea of wider choices, requires papers to be designed to make them self-contained so that any student can opt for any paper. This will lead to dilution of in-depth study of any subject.
- The CBCS is supposed to provide ‘seamless mobility’ of students by assigning credits to courses and making credits transferable across institutions. In practice, mobility will not work across public-funded institutions which are already filled to capacity and will be unable to take on additional students from other institutions. It will rather promote mobility to private universities, both domestic and foreign. High fees and the absence of Reservation will limit the benefits of such mobility to the wealthy and already privileged.
- The CBCS replaces the existing evaluation mechanisms with a uniform grading system. While the objective of a uniform grading system is to promote mobility, it will not change the reality that the same grade given by two universities with different standards will not be considered equal.
- The CBCS imposes uniform syllabi on all institutions in the country, allowing only 20% variation.This disregards the social and cultural diversity of this country, the specific needs of students in different regions and the diverse expertise of the faculties of different universities. It also does away with the participation of teachers in syllabus making, impoverishes course designing by failing to utilise the large pool of experience and expertise that teachers possess and undermines the autonomy of universities. It will destroy good universities and result in the overall decline in the quality of education.
- The CBCS is based on the Semester System without any review of how this system has worked. In fact, the Semester System with its two exams a year has reduced teaching time. It has compelled teachers and students to become more exam-oriented and led to dilution of in-depth study of any subject. While frequent examinations have promoted rote learning, the possibilities of addressing the specific needs of students from heterogeneous and underprivileged backgrounds have been reduced. Both excellence and equity have become casualties. It has imposed the strain of conducting two exams a year on institutions which are ill equipped for this task and has caused a decline in the efficiency and quality of exam-related work.
- The CBCS is a model imported from America which is unsuited to the mass expansion of public-funded higher education needed for this country. Uncritical borrowing of models without debate over their applicability to our context or examination of the requirements of such models to succeed can be counter-productive.
We believe that the CBCS would be deeply anti-democratic as it would intensify the divide between privileged and underprivileged students and threaten to reduce the public funded higher education institutions to the poor quality level that has become the fate of most government schools. It would take the country in the direction of quality higher education only for the rich and privileged and low quality higher education for the mass of underprivileged and deprived sections of our society.
We have taken up the matter with the Minister for HRD as well as the UGC. A joint delegation of the FEDCUTA and AIFUCTO met the Secretary UGC on 19th June and, while asserting our firm opposition to UGC-made syllabi being imposd on Universities in violation of their autonomy, pointed out to him that even if a 20% (now changed to 30%) deviation is to be implemented, it needs time to work out what the deviations could be. Rushing through half-baked syllabi will damage the fundamental concepts of lakhs of students.
We would appeal to you to halt the implementation of the CBCS in the same spirit and to make it one of the issues on which consultation and feedback is sought and on which there is wider debate before any decision is taken for its implementation.
Regards,
Nandita Narain
President, DUTA
Encl:
https://duta.live
Leave a Reply