That Extra Year

• On July 24, DU  will begin a 4-year degree programme
• It was created in a hurry and rushed through, many teachers and students feel
• Prominent academicians have met the president, who is the DU chancellor, seeking his intervention
• Politically, the FYUP is seen as part of ‘Americanisation’

***

Trouble Spots

Among the sticking points in the FYUP are the following:

• Multiple exit points tend to encourage dropping out
• They also create inequities among students
• How employable are the students who exit early?
• UG programme was decided without eye on PG courses

***

Cleared in no more than a year and agreed upon by a handpicked few without an informed debate, the new-fangled four-year undergraduate programme (FYUP) of Delhi University has stirred up a heated debate. Come July 24, when the university begins the academic year, some 4.6 lakh students from across the country will have no choice but to opt for the FYUP. Why the furore over the new plan, and why the studied silence over it from the UPA government? Is it just a clash between a group of teachers and vice-chancellor Dinesh Singh, who is attempting a curriculum overhaul that is long overdue?

Sitaram Yechury of the CPI(M) and Arun Jaitley of the BJP—from two ends of the political spectrum—have argued in favour of caution and debate. Not surprising, considering that Delhi University was established by an act of Parliament and hence any change needs a debate at the highest forum. The ruling Congress has only offered a po-faced silence. This is being interpreted in some circles as a sign of the government’s determination to push its reformist agenda through first at DU, expecting other universities will gradually follow suit. “The vice-chancellor is appointed by the government and the HRD ministry has already made its intentions clear in spearheading the foreign universities bill. Perhaps opening up Delhi University will allow foreign universities to come in easily,” says Abha Habib of Miranda House. The apprehension is that other universities will be under pressure to go for four-year graduation courses. Already, Hyderabad University has expressed concern at the haste with which the change is being effected in Delhi.

Raising the ante is a delegation of eight teachers, led by Romila Thapar and Krishna Kumar, who met President Pranab Mukherjee—the chancellor of Delhi University—this week, seeking his intervention. Pranab can offer a word of advice to the vice-chancellor, which the latter is not bound to follow. The president  can also seek information on the infrastructure required to kick off the curriculum and the procedures that were followed to implement it. Senior professors from Jawaharlal Nehru University too have cautioned against haste in implementing the curriculum.

Rush hour Opposition to the FYUP has been widespread. (Photograph by Sanjay Rawat)

Where does that leave students? Before they venture to their subject proper, they must clear 11 foundation courses. All students, regardless of the discipline they have chosen, have to clear them. These range from philosophy and psychology to mathematical ability and IT. This has led to a lot of confusion. “For instance, if a student who wishes to major in economics wants to opt for mathematics as a minor discipline in the second year, information on the seats available etc will not be easily available, for this has not been indicated to the colleges yet,” says S. Bohidar, a professor at the Shri Ram College of Commerce (SRCC). 

Concerns such as these are hardly addressed on the university website, which is devoted to praising the new FYUP: prominently displayed are opinions from some teachers and students, lavishly praising the new format. But there is a whole group of teachers concerned at the pace in which the new curriculum is sought to be pushed through. Says Saswati Mazumdar, a lecturer, “Students really have no choice. They have to clear the 11 foundation courses. There is very little option in the Discipline 1 and Discipline 2 streams. So where is the choice?” The national policy framework envisaged a 10+2+3 education system for the entire country with some states opting for the 10+2+2 system. But with multiple exit points, it’s unclear how students will be accommodated in other colleges outside Delhi. In a critique by teachers, the following concerns were raised in early February this year:

• The shift from the 10+2+3 scheme to the 10+2+4 scheme shall create problems for students from other universities wanting to do post-graduation at DU and vice versa.
• The proposal does not outline the structure of post-graduate programmes. Undergraduate programmes should not be decided independent of post-graduate studies.
• Much of the extra time given for an honours course is spent on foundation courses. A student has to do a total of 42 credit courses in the four years,  of which as many as 11 are compulsory foundation courses in various disciplines.
• It is important to investigate the employability of those who will quit early—after the first, second and third years—with lesser degrees. The first exit point—after a year—mars the credibility of such a programme, as the university has decided to offer an “associate degree” (equivalent of a dip­loma) to students exiting at this point without employable or critical skills.
• The other two exit points—after the second and third years—will lead to a fluctuating workload for colleges. It will be difficult to provide stability to institutions and to retain talent. The class size has not been defined.

In fact, many professors feel, the multiple exit points will encourage dropping out and actually lead to greater inequity among students. Raising this issue, Satish Deshpande, professor and head of the department of sociology, had written to the Planning Commission a couple of months ago, expressing apprehension at the undue haste in implementing the new curriculum. Delhi University could perhaps take a leaf from Ambedkar University (much, much smaller in size in that it has less than 300 students) where a four-year curriculum is in place—but minus the heartburn and criticism. Three years of study leads to an honours degree, with the student choosing whether to stay on and do another year, during which s/he is awarded a dual major. It is left to the student to make the choice and stay on. Delhi University, in contrast, does not offer a dual major—leaving the student disadvantaged.

Clearly, change is in the air. Jawaharlal Nehru University is currently debating the introduction of undergraduate courses on its campus. This has split the academic community into two. At the heart of the matter is whether the move, if it passes muster, will change the character of the university, which is perceived as a centre for research and higher studies, rather than a place to earn an undergraduate degree. Will such a change at jnu be for the better? The jury is studying this one.