The following was my response to a private e-mail regarding IITs' admission policies being challenged for not being merit-based enough. First scroll down to read the original post.
cm Begin forwarded message: > From: Chan Mahanta <cmaha...@gmail.com> > Date: August 25, 2010 9:48:34 AM CDT > > Subject: Re: It is everywhere.Image of IIT-tarnished? > > Greetings ***. > > Thanks for including me in this private mailing list. I hope recipients of my > response here will excuse me for invading their privacy. Ordinarily I would > not have done that, but I had an interest this particular subject and banking > on your knowledge of your circle of friends' interests, figured they may be > interested in my two bits as well . > > Some of you in this list I know are IIT-KGP (or other IIT )graduates, as I > was too ( KGP, Arch. 68). Actually I was the third of three successive > siblings who went to IIT-KGP. Two of my elder brothers studied electronics > engineering and I did architecture. I have no idea what the acceptance > criteria were , way back in 1963 when I entered IIT-KGP or earlier. Or for > that matter later. I know I got in by the skin of my teeth :-). I came from > what used to be known as the Pre-University course in Science, a post > high-school, one year junior college course at Cotton College, Guwahati ( > barely 6 months in reality), which was way below par in its curriculum, > compared to say St. Xaviers' Coillege or Southpoint School or Calcutta Boys' > School from Kolkata and other such preparatory schools and colleges from > elsewhere in India whose grads. dominated the roster of accepted students. > They also got the choicest disciplines of engineering, like Electronics, > Mechanical, Electrical, Chemical and so forth, depending on test scores > alone, never mind whether they had any aptitude for the discipline. > > I did pretty poorly in my test, did not know half the subjects in physics, > chemistry, algebra and so forth. I got in primarily because I wanted > architecture and had enough to show for my aptitude and because one of my > interviewers was the Head of the Dept. of Architecture, who definitely wanted > me in. My class of about 30 students of architecture had exactly seven who > WANTED architecture. The rest were assigned to it, because they did not cut > it for other engineering subjects, because of their not-so-enviable test > scores, like mine. > > So far so good. There was this APPEARANCE of an entirely merit based > system, merit being measured by the entrance test scores ALONE that everyone > thinks WAS or IS the only RIGHT way to do it. It was there then and > apparently it is there now. > > That is what *I* take issue with, for a number of reasons: > > A: The IITs were entirely supported by public funding. All of India paid for > it. But certain regions and states hogged those resources with their > children, while others were left holding the bag. In my batch we were just > three from Assam in a class of over 400 or so freshmen at IIT-KGP. Why were > there so few from Assam? We just could not cut it with our 'MERIT', merit > measured with a set of skewed scales that rewarded those who could attend > those choice private or public schools and colleges from more advanced > regions or states. > > But were we any LESS than those others, deemed more meritorious? Not by a > long shot! It was hard getting in, harder the first year in, but we not only > made up but did pretty well. Two out of us three topped or nearly topped our > graduating classes. > > My point? My point is that this so-called MERIT based system in which > entrance test scores ALONE is the measure, is a grossly unfair system. India > is NOT a homogeneous country. Access to education and its quality is > unimaginably disparate. Under the circumstances, it is not only FAIR, it is > the RIGHT thing to RECOGNIZE and give adequate consideration and weightage, > in ADDITION to the merit measured by test entrance scores, so that > educationally less advantaged students from regions like Assam and elsewhere > get a FAIR shot at entering these premier institutions, supported by ALL of > India. > > B: Even though the landscape of what the choicest disciplines of study were > or are, has changed over the decades and will continue to evolve, one > undebatable fact stands out that A VERY LARGE percentage of IIT graduates, > trained with the country's scant resources leave the country to become > successful people in fields that have nothing to do with engineering or other > fields they were trained in. > > What is wrong with that, you might ask. > > This is what is wrong: Engineering and technical education requires a lot of > expensive infrastructure that India expends in its IITs at the cost of other > institutions, whose grads. don't get to leave the country in such high > numbers to become accountants, business managers, stock-brokers and what not. > Not that anything is wrong with that as far as the individual is concerned, > but it IS wrong for India to expend disproportionately high amount of its > resources > to produce non-engineering professionals who leave the country for good. > > Two things need attention here: > > * Admit only those who can demonstrate engineering aptitude for the > field they opt for, in addition to the merit measured by test scores. > Others can always go to institutions better suited for their > personal needs, thus making room for the truly technically oriented. In spite > of the > remarkable bank of intellect, India's appalling lack of engineering > and technical innovation or achievements is a proof of the prevailing > system's inadequacy. > > * Inject some means of promoting and holding its graduates instead of > leaving for good. > > Apologies for extending my two bits to two-hundred. > > Best. > > Chandan Mahanta > St. Louis > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 24, 2010, at 11:09 AM, Kumud Das wrote: > >> HC notice to Centre over IIT admissions >> Aditi Tandon/Tribune News Service >> New Delhi, April 8 >> A development that has put under scanner the admission procedure of IITs, >> the Delhi High Court today issued notices to the Ministry of Human Resource >> Development, IIT Council and Joint Admission Board (JAB) on a petition >> alleging irregularities, tampering and fraud in the system. And the move has >> come three days ahead of the IIT-JEE 2010, in which about five lakh students >> are slated to appear on April 11. >> Notably, this is the first comprehensive PIL ever filed against IITs, which >> raises questions over the admission procedure — from “arbitrary” fixing of >> cut-offs to “benefit” some students and eliminate top scorers, unattended >> errors in question setting and evaluation, tampering and shredding of >> optical response sheets (ORS) in unexplained haste, selection of faculty >> wards and closed admission counselling resulting in vacant seats. Even >> today, five to 20 per cent vacancies exist across IITs despite huge demand >> for seats. >> Slamming the current “non-transparent” admission system, petitioner Prof >> Rajeev Kumar of IIT Kharagpur sought court’s intervention for a special >> investigation team (SIT) inquiry into the alleged irregularities in all JEEs >> from 2006. He demanded that a committee of independent experts, not from >> IITs, be formed to fix rational cut-offs, which students must attain to >> qualify for admissions to the institutes. The current system of fixing >> cut-offs is ad-hoc. >> In February, The Tribune had highlighted gross deficiencies in IIT >> admissions based on the information Kumar had gathered under the RTI on JEEs >> 2006 to 2009. Shocking revelations followed on how 994 top scorers failed to >> make it to IITs while low scoring candidates succeeded in doing so. In JEE >> 2006, brilliant candidates were rejected because IITs calculated cut-offs in >> a faulty, arbitrary manner. >> “Those with 156 marks were selected; those with 279 rejected,” the petition >> states, seeking SIT probe into JEEs, especially 2006, which saw wards of IIT >> faculty scoring high marks in chemistry. The marks they obtained were in >> typical patterns which couldn’t have occurred except through ORS tampering, >> the petition alleges. >> Kumar also requested the court to institute IIT-JEE reforms under >> independent experts, rather than a closed panel of four IIT directors, which >> the HRD ministry recently constituted. >> Besides, as earlier reported by The Tribune how current IIT practices (they >> don’t disclose answers on the day of test) aided coaching institutes, the >> PIL seeks directions to JAB to release model answers soon after the JEE is >> held. The court has put the ministry and IIT Council on notice for May 19. >> >> >> The whistleblower IIT professor >> Aditi Tandon/TNS >> New Delhi, April 8 >> He has braved threats for taking on the IITs and slogged three years to get >> the institutes to answer his RTI queries. For Rajeev Kumar, it’s all in the >> game that started in 2006 when the 50-year-old computer engineering >> professor at IIT Kharagpur decided to fight for transparency in the IIT >> admission process, which has remained opaque since 1961 when the institutes >> were set up under the central act. >> Armed with RTI, Kumar finally got the highly-secretive IITs to disclose >> their admission secrets. The information he obtained under the RTI Act now >> forms the basis of the first PIL against the IIT-JEE system, which has >> operated arbitrarily all these years. >> “My battle began when my son missed the IIT seat by three marks in JEE. He >> got through all other exams. I was curious to know why he missed the IIT,” >> Kumar tells The Tribune. >> While his son went on to join BTech computer science at Jadavpur University >> in Kolkata, Kumar went on to dissect the IIT system, exposing one admission >> anomaly after the other and forcing even HRD Minister Kapil Sibal to sit up >> and think. The latter advised him to go to court or represent before the >> ministry instituted IIT-JEE reform panel. But Kumar had a problem. He >> couldn’t have represented his case before people who were part of the >> problem. Hence, his demand to the Delhi High Court to order SIT probe into >> JEEs for admission to 15 IITs, Institute of Technology, BHU, and Indian >> School of Mines, Dhanbad. >> Incidentally, it was on September 5, 2006, when the Chief Information >> Commissioner ordered the UPSC to reveal its admission procedure that Kumar >> saw some hope. So started his journey to discover how IITs selected their >> students. For the first time in 2006, IITs revealed marks students obtained >> in the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE). >> “When they released the marks in August, students couldn’t find a pattern to >> selections. My son with a high aggregate of 224 marks was rejected but a low >> scorer with 154 got a counseling call,” says Kumar. >> He eventually forced the IITs to admit before the CIC that there was “no set >> procedure to determine cut-off marks”. Till date, the institutes haven’t >> been able to explain how they reached the cut-off in JEE 2006 whereby 994 >> top scorers were rejected. >> The court will help, believes Kumar. >> >> >> >> Kumud C. Das, > _______________________________________________ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
