A step back for education
Since we have statutory bodies in our course so UGC becomes an important topic. So first some gyaan on UGC:
The University Grants Commission (UGC) of India is a statutory organisation set up by the Union government in 1956.
Current Chairman : Prof Ved Prakash
Mandate:
The UGC has the unique distinction of being the only grant-giving agency in the country which has been vested with two responsibilities: that of providing funds and that of coordination, determination and maintenance of standards in institutions of higher education. The UGC's mandate includes:
1.Promoting and coordinating university education.
2.Determining and maintaining standards of teaching, examination and research in universities.
3.Framing regulations on minimum standards of education.
4.Monitoring developments in the field of collegiate and university education; disbursing grants to the universities and colleges.
5.Serving as a vital link between the Union and state governments and institutions of higher learning.
6.Advising the Central and State governments on the measures necessary for improvement of university education.
Some history (for prelims)
The present system of higher education dates back to ''Mountstuart Elphinstone's minutes of 1823, which stressed on the need for establishing schools for teaching English and the European sciences'''. Later, Lord Macaulay, in his minutes of 1835, advocated "efforts to make natives of the country thoroughly good English scholars".' Sir Charles Wood's Dispatch of 1854, famously known as the ' Magna Carta of English Education in India', recommended creating a properly articulated scheme of education from the primary school to the university. It sought to encourage indigenous education and planned the formulation of a coherent policy of education. Subsequently, the universities of Calcutta, Bombay (now Mumbai) and Madras were set up in 1857, followed by the university of Allahabad in 1887. The Inter-University Board (later known as the Association of Indian Universities) was established in 1925 to promote university activities, by sharing information and cooperation in the field of education, culture, sports and allied areas.
The first attempt to formulate a national system of education in India came In 1944, with the Report of the Central Advisory Board of Education on Post War Educational Development in India, also known as the Sargeant Report. It recommended the formation of a University Grants Committee, which was formed in 1945 to oversee the work of the three Central Universities of Aligarh, Banaras and Delhi. In 1947, the Committee was entrusted with the responsibility of dealing with all the then existing Universities. Soon after Independence, the University Education Commission was set up in 1948 under the Chairmanship of Dr. S Radhakrishnan "to report on Indian university education and suggest improvements and extensions that might be desirable to suit the present and future needs and aspirations of the country". It recommended that the University Grants Committee be reconstituted on the general model of the University Grants Commission of the United Kingdom with a full-time Chairman and other members to be appointed from amongst educationists of repute.
In 1952, the Union Government decided that all cases pertaining to the allocation of grants-in-aid from public funds to the Central Universities and other Universities and Institutions of higher learning might be referred to the University Grants Commission. Consequently, the University Grants Commission (UGC) was formally inaugurated by late Shri Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the then Minister of Education, Natural Resources and Scientific Research on 28 December 1953. The UGC, however, was formally established only in November 1956 as a statutory body of the Government of India through an Act of Parliament.
Now understanding the controversy:
Events in 2013:
Vice-Chancellor of Delhi University announced a Four Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUP) in order to 1. better target courses to industrial requirements
2. to make the UG course equivalent to international UG courses.
(This was considered to be Kapil Sibal's pet project)
Problem with the course:
1. Syllabus was drafted in a hurry and the most of it is too basic thus defeating its purpose.
2. It violates the National Policy on Education that mandates a 10+2+3 format
3. The change was not brought about through an amendment of the Universities Act; the President (the Visitor to all central universities) was not consulted either.
So in 2014, after one year of implementation UGC declares the course illegal (after protest by ABVP, student wing of BJP).
DU's stand:
1. UGC had supported the University’s move last year and said that as per the Indian Education Commission (1964-66), the duration of a programme may vary from varsity to varsity and also within the same varsity.
2. FYUP programme was approved by the academic council and the executive council of the university, which are statutory bodies under the Delhi University Act of 1922
But finally DU had to scrap the program (as UGC declared it illegal and threatened to stop funding)
Now author's view in the article:
1. Section 12 (1) of the UGC Act clearly states: “It is the duty of the Commission to determine and maintain standards in higher education in consultation with the universities [emphasis added].” This makes it incumbent on the UGC to respect the institutional autonomy of all universities and accord them due deference and latitude in complying with its regulations. This is necessary to empower universities to undertake bold academic initiatives.
2. Some other universities are also not following the 10+2+3 policy but they have not been declared illegal (IISC and Ambedkar University , Delhi)
3. warning the colleges that their grants will be cut if they do not comply with the UGC’s directive reflects the body’s patronising attitude toward institutions of higher learning.
4. to ask a university to scrap its existing undergraduate programme and introduce a new programme in the middle of the admission process is inexplicable.
Our universities will be deterred from undertaking brave academic decisions in future fearing UGC’s indignation. This does not augur well for India’s higher education. This episode is a grim reminder why India, despite having talented academicians and students, has failed to develop world-class universities. Our universities cannot attain global standards till they are freed from excessive officious control and the bureaucratic mindset of regulatory bodies.
My view:
Although UGC's 180 degree turn and undermining of DU's autonomy does not presents a good picture for the future of higher education in India but making reforms for just the sake of it also doesn't augurs well on part of DU. If it wanted to bring changes then they should have been properly planned and executed.
Obama's decision that USA will not send combat troops to Iraq - USA's unwillingness to enforce the global order anymore. (Reason is that now it is not dependent on West Asia for its energy needs because of shale deposit's in USA itself). Implications of this:
1. Powers like China, Russia and India will have to hammer out new rules
2. This may give rise to the Multipolar world creating a web of regional powers that would limit each other’s ambitions.
3. Another possibilty is that faced with threatening regional hegemons, and with no great-power allies at hand, smaller states are likely to expand their arsenals. The first signs of this are already evident. Through the Pacific Rim, fears that the U.S. will no longer be willing to contain China have led states to grow their militaries at an alarming rate.
RBI's Financial Stability Report :
1. On the domestic front, the return to political stability has provided impetus to the outlook and the capital markets reflect the expectations on policy measures to address the adverse growth-inflation dynamics and saving-investment balance as also efficient implementation of policies and programmes.
2.India’s financial system remains stable, though the banking sector is facing some major challenges, mainly relating to public sector banks (PSBs).
>> Although there has been some improvement in the asset quality of scheduled commercial banks (SCBs) since September 2013, the level of gross non-performing advances as percentage of total gross advances (GNPA ratio) of PSBs was significantly higher as compared to the other bank groups.
>> While the ownership pattern and recapitalisation of PSBs are contingent upon government policy and the fiscal situation, there is a case for reviewing the governance structures of PSBs, with a greater emphasis on market discipline.
3. Macro stress tests show that the system level capital to risk-weighted assets ratio (CRAR) of SCBs remains well above the regulatory minimum even under adverse macroeconomic conditions.
4. The regulation of securities markets in India is in sync with international developments, although mutual funds and other asset management activities in Indian markets do not carry risks similar to those experienced in other jurisdictions.
5. The lending activity of insurance companies, though relatively small and within the prescribed exposure limits applicable for insurance companies, may need to be streamlined and monitored under a prudential framework comparable to that for banks to eliminate the possibility of regulatory arbitrage.
6. Revised norms for corporate governance as also warehouse and related processes are expected to strengthen the functioning of the commodity derivatives market.
7. In the context of India’s pension sector, inadequate liability computation in case of several defined benefit pension schemes can be a potential source of fiscal stress in years to come
Moving beyond the Panchsheel deception
1. When it was signed with China it was an agreement between "Tibetan region of China and India" whereas till then Tibet was considered independent based on Simla accord of 1912. So it reflected that India had conceded Tibet's independence.
2. Panchsheel met its end just three months after its signing, when the Chinese were found violating Indian borders in Ladakh in late-1954
3. The history of Sino-Indian relations in the last five decades is replete with instances of violations of sovereignty, mutual animosity, attempts to upstage each other and general ill-will.
4. The Chinese have a clever way of promoting their superiority and exclusivism. Sinologists describe it as the Middle Kingdom syndrome. While Nehru wanted to take credit for the Panchsheel, Zhou told Richard Nixon in 1973 that “actually, the five principles were put forward by us, and Nehru agreed. But later on he didn’t implement them”.
5.We always fall back to these principles and we don't try to do something new and innovative.
India and China can cooperate with each other on the principles of sovereign equality and mutual sensitivity. China has emerged as an economic superpower, but is exposed to serious internal and external threats. It is facing problems with almost all of its 13 neighbours. The fact that China spends more money on internal security than on external security speaks volumes about its internal vulnerability. So, while India is not as big economically as China, its security apparatus is better-placed.
I am preparing current affairs since 15th june 2014. I am taking cse prelims in 2015. Have i started CA too early ? Should i start from January'15 ?
ReplyDelete