Aroused out of its slumber following strident and continuous protests from industry leaders about the poor quality of arts and science graduates churned out by the states 450 arts and science colleges, the Tamil Nadu state government has unveiled a plan to upgrade them. Last month (April) higher education minister K. Ponmudy announced that the government proposes to introduce a choice-based credit system (CBCS) in all the 450 government, aided, self-financing and autonomous colleges in the state from the next academic year starting in June to equip students with industry-oriented skills and make them employable. Essentially, CBCS offers students the freedom to design their own curriculum, pursue skill-oriented elective subjects of their choice, migrate to other colleges mid course and even transfer credits from one institution to another.While welcoming CBCS as a flexible system which has already been adopted by a few autonomous colleges in the state in principle, academics in Chennai particularly of autonomous colleges, are dismayed by the simultaneous imposition of guidelines mandating a uniform curriculum for core subjects and a common course structure for undergrad programmes formulated by the Tamil Nadu State Council for Higher Education (TANSCHE). The course structure designed by TANSCHE on the lines of the model introduced by the Bharathidasan University in Tiruchirapalli two years ago, divides the study programme into five parts. Of a total of 140 credits for the three-year undergrad degree, 60 credits need to be earned in core subjects and the rest are distributed among languages, electives and non-major courses such as environment studies, value-education, skills-based elective courses and study of other languages, and extension activities. The study of English language has been extended to two years to improve the communication skills of students. But simultaneously learning Tamil is also compulsory for two years — a proposal which has outraged academics of autonomous colleges which admit students from other states and abroad
Principals of autonomous colleges argue that uniformity of syllabus and course structure contradicts the concept of autonomy and the prime objective of CBCS, which is to make curriculums flexible and variable. Many progressive autonomous colleges have already introduced innovations in their curriculum to offer students supplementary skills development programmes and are unprepared to surrender the freedom to design their own curriculums to conform with a common minimum standard. Moreover they are also apprehensive about imposing Tamil on non-Tamil and foreign students who may choose not to study in their institutions if the language is made compulsory. They also argue that not all aided and unaided colleges have the physical infrastructure and faculty to implement the CBCS.
I totally oppose uniformity of syllabus as it erodes autonomy and the distinctiveness of universities. Academic autonomy should be given to all universities to draft their own syllabus based on their faculty and infrastructure strengths. In 2002, the University Grants Commission formulated a model curriculum for nationwide implementation by universities but it was strongly resisted as an intrusion on academic autonomy and was ultimately withdrawn, says Dr. R. Sethuraman, vice-chancellor of the SASTRA Deemed University, Thanjavur.
Informed academics who have experimented with CBCS also agree that autonomous colleges should not be subject to standardisation norms fixed by government. CBCS is a flexible model and cannot be applied to all universities and colleges in a uniform manner. Though minimum standards can be prescribed, every college should be allowed to innovate and introduce new programmes and pedagogies. Therefore TANSCHEs proposals should be made applicable only to government and government-aided colleges to maintain minimum standards, says Prof. S.P. Thyagarajan, former vice-chancellor of Madras University and currently director of research at the Chennai-based Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Hospital.
Quite clearly, the state governments interpretation of the CBCS is contrary to the objectives of the UGC which recommended the concept so that arts and science colleges can break out of the rigid and compartmentalised system and expand their curriculums to make students industry-ready. The wooden application of rules devised to raise the rock bottom standards of government and aided colleges to autonomous institutions which have sought — and merit — autonomy because of their superior academic standards, would be a clear case of levelling down, rather than upwards.
Hemalatha Raghupathi (Chennai)