The ‘Semesterisation’ Impasse at Delhi University: Saumyajit Bhattacharya

Soumyajit Bhattacharya

This essay appeared as COMMENTARY in the 22 may, 2011 vol xlvi no 19 issue of the Economic & Political Weekly.

The arbitrary and authoritarian imposition of the semester system in the undergraduate courses of Delhi University is nothing but the current manifestation of a market-driven “vision” for Indian higher education. It is part of a move to standardise university education in ways which will make it more elitist and less open to critical thought. The present struggle against “semesterisation” is part of the larger struggle against the surrender of our universities to the logic of the market.

The two-year long stand-off between the teachers and authorities of Delhi University (DU) over the introduction of the semester system in the undergraduate courses has perplexed many. The EPW editorial (23 April) is a case in hand. While being highly critical of the authoritarian ways in which the semester system is being introduced in the university, it wonders why the teachers are fighting for such “non-issues” when much larger issues that ail higher education in the country are at stake. Are semesters not the modern system of education – short, concise, flexible with choices? The obvious conclusions which follow are that teachers have a static mindframe and refuse to change. Continue reading

Posted in Autonomy, Pedagogy, Privatization, Teaching, University | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Is the Semester Fever Curable?: Alok Rai

By ALOK RAI

[This article was first sent to the Indian Express which refused to publish it and was subsequently published on Kafila on 24 November 2010. We have since seen how the successor to the earlier VC decided to carry on the 'inherited battle'.]

Deepak Pental’s inter-personal skills are, of course, legendary. And this last – his parting shot in Indian Express (28 October)merely strengthens his already formidable reputation, and ensures that he will be regarded with the customary affection even as he leaves. Thus, not only is the Teachers’ Association compared to a khap panchayat – could this conceivably be a compliment, either to his beloved teachers, or to the khap panchayats? – but an entirely gratuitous insult is directed at college teachers, en bloc. Thus, they are stagnant, distant from research, unlike (!) University professors. This is rich, but Professor Pental can manage his own friends and enemies, and I have no desire to engage with him at this point. However, this is being written in the hope that his successor – whoever he or she may be – would at least like to choose their own battles, and not merely fight inherited ones on the bloodied, toxic battlefield bequeathed to them. And, indeed, by way of doing my citizenly duty to assist the honourable judges of the High Court, who are periodically asked to take a stand on the vexed question of “semesterization”.

There is something about the idea of the semester that appeals to the minds of people who have otherwise very little to do with education. (It has a certain appeal to some educated others also – to wit, the grandees of the Knowledge Commission, who are apparently the authors of this current instalment of semester-fever. But with these latter it is at least theoretically possible to have a discussion – even though there are no fora where such discussions could happen. The usual process is that some Moses brings a tablet of wisdom down from the mountain where the gods of the KC abide – and lesser mortals then struggle to interpret and implement the magic formulae.) But to the half-educated, “semesterization” appears like a panacea for the many and undeniable ills of education. Suddenly, as if by magic, syllabi can become flexible – and not be subject to the current, generational cycle. Something like continuous evaluation – and modularized, micro-managed pedagogy – ensures that students and teachers – both groups currently perceived to be slacking off – are forced to work in a closely monitorable format. And in some ideal world – in relatively homogeneous institutions with decent faculty-student ratios, and not vulnerable to the political pressures that make for both sub-standard faculty and sub-standard students – such a “semesterized” solution might even be possible. But if it were possible, I suggest, it would not be necessary. It would be strictly superfluous. Continue reading

Posted in Autonomy, Decentralization, Pedagogy, Teaching, University | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Social Sciences and Higher Education in India: Prathama Banerjee

Why social sciences? What kind of social sciences?

By PRATHAMA BANERJEE

There is a long history of debates around the place of higher education in India, and in higher education, around the question of social sciences and humanities. At independence, while the likes of Radhakrishnan envisioned a general education for its citizens, involving science, liberal arts, philosophy, literature etc, there was great apprehension that a ‘general education’ model, not dissimilar to the colonial one, would continue to create low-level professionals out of Indians rather than a productive and creative citizenry. The planning and developmental orientation of the newly-independent nation-state also demanded emphasis on technical and technological education. This meant that in the first few decades after independence humanities and social sciences fell back in terms of state and societal support – except, for obvious reasons, economics. In the following years, the additional factor against high-end social science research was the popular political belief that a developing country such as India should spend more on universal primary education – which gave social returns – and less on higher education – which gave private returns to an elite group of academics. In the 1990s, with liberalization, the emphasis on technical training became stronger, to the extent that for a while it seemed that few good students would seek to specialize in history or literature or philosophy. The higher education discourse at this time got reduced to notions of global employability and service/skill-generation, as citizens began to be seen as human capital of a nation.
Continue reading

Posted in Pedagogy, Regulation, Research Institutes, Social Science, University | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Privatisation of Higher Education In India: Sunalini Kumar

By SUNALINI KUMAR, Crossposted from Kafila

I do not exaggerate. I am not being hasty. The writing is on the wall. What started as a glimmer in the eyes of the IIC-frequenting bureaucrat, the industrialist with profit-making dreams and the politician with an obscenely large government house in Lutyens’ Delhi is now a raging reality. Pick up any newspaper or magazine and check out the number of advertisements for private universities. Do a google search for the latest news reports on committees on higher education. If you have the time and patience, go through all the government documents on higher education in the past five years, almost neatly coinciding with the exit of Arjun Singh as Human Resources Minister and the entry of Kapil Sibal. Speaking of Mr. Sibal, if his cheerfully unapologetic blundering on the 2G scam is anything to go by, we should have an idea of the kind of subtle and layered approach he has in mind when he speaks of ‘reforming the education system.’

Continue reading

Posted in Privatization, Teaching, University | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The UGC’s dictates: Pratiksha Baxi

By PRATIKSHA BAXI, Crossposted from Kafila

The UGC’s new regime of qualifications, evaluation and supervision of teachers employed in universities makes fascinating reading for those who are entertained by the sublime ludicrousness of those with the power to shape our everyday lives in the academia.

The new regime betrays a lack of understanding of the basic enterprise of what academics do. The new regime is too voluminous to be read with lucidity at once. However it is not too difficult to understand immediately that the new regime, ushered in with the new pay hike, has imposed adverse conditions of employment. This is specially true for assistant professors who now are eligible for associate professorship only after 12 years of serving the University (instead of 5 years as earlier). The doctrine of reasonable and legitimate expectations  stands fully violated by the UGC, as assistant professors at the time of employment would not have expected the imposition of these adverse conditions.

The UGC has ignored the fact that the revision of pay scales cannot enforce a contract – signed or otherwise – on any faculty to adhere to the new rules since such a contract can only be constituted as un-free and therefore, not valid. In other words, better pay which was ostensibly ushered in to meet the rising cost of living cannot be conditional to the UGC’s homogenising and uncreative vision of how to enhance evaluation of teachers’ performance and determine promotions. Continue reading

Posted in Pedagogy, Teaching, University | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Academic autonomy – new questions today: Prathama Banerjee

The question of academic autonomy has taken on a renewed importance and meaning today.  We are now in a new context that is marked by a change from the earlier post-1947 developmental imagination of India to the post-liberalisation political imagination of India as emerging knowledge society.  This shift is arguably also global.  As we know the World Bank and the UNESCO, since the late 1990s, have already begun asserting that investment in higher education brought social, political and economic returns of a kind hitherto not fully anticipated.  The global and national contexts therefore are beginning to demand an unfettering of intellectual capabilities of societies – requiring reform and rethinking.  In India, the setting up of the Knowledge Commission to begin with and later the Right to Education Bill, Yashpal Committee and the series of proposed bills regarding a regulatory body, foreign universities and so on reflect this new imagination.  And within this new imagination, one does see a renewed emphasis on, though not a better imagination of, social sciences and humanities – neglected in the 1990s market thinking – on the ground that only technical or managerial learning are insufficient to produce a long-term orientation towards ideas and learning that a knowledge society demands.
Continue reading
Posted in Autonomy, Regulation, Research Institutes | Leave a comment

A Brief History of Academic Autonomy: Prathama Banerjee

Academic autonomy: history
Both the Yashpal Committee Report and the NCHER Bill talk about academic autonomy as the main rationale behind the envisaged reforms of higher education in India.  This is an effort to initiate a discussion on what academic autonomy means in our context and how we can think of intellectual and institutional means to ensure it.
We will be looking at primarily social science and humanities here, though some of what we say might hold true for the sciences as well.  However, as we know, the sciences – and technology – have had a distinct historical trajectory in India, in terms of its relationship to both state and society and in terms of its location in the global market and global science academia.  The nature of institutional proliferation in the sciences has also been quite different in India.  The question of autonomy of the sciences then would require a different discussion, and we urge colleagues in that field to share their thoughts.
Posted in Autonomy, Regulation, Social Science | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment