 |
|
| EDUCATION TRIBUNE |
|
Syllabi designing and the need for dialogue Curriculum-making bodies must follow the practice of inviting not only non-members but also students and research scholars who have familiarity with courses they have studied and are in a position to make wise suggestions for changes. Thinkstock Studyscape
Campus Notes
|
|
|
Syllabi designing and the need for dialogue CURRICULUM, according to Daniel Turner, is “the planned and guided learning experience and intended learning outcomes, formulated through the systemic reconstruction of knowledge and experiences for the learners’ continuous and wilful growth in personal social competence.” To teach students to be critical consumers of information, there is a serious need to understand the present-day requirement for the creation of new knowledge in order to respond to the growing demands and challenges of contemporary society. We, therefore, need to specify not only the objectives of a curriculum but also identify other related disciplines to avoid any constricted compartmentalisation. Thus, the social and cultural context of the learner must be kept in mind, so that the skills he or she acquires can empower him or her in the daily functioning in society. Transference of skills from the classroom to the outside world is therefore of paramount importance. A permanent mechanism for an imaginative and intelligent periodic review of curriculum is the sin quo non of any education system that strives to reach new frontiers of knowledge. Though we forge ahead in expanding our education system, we still lack the will or a conscientious task force that is capable of incorporating changes in view of national or international demands. Scuttling the voice of opposition or standing up for the end of debate and ideology because it may endanger one’s secure position is an attitude that runs counter to all standards of a critically political intervention within the academia. I emphasise this because the designing of a curriculum is of utmost value to the enhancement of excellence and cannot be left to the perfunctory approach that many have towards either framing a new syllabus or the excruciatingly mundane tinkering with the existing one which, anyway, does not need any homework or intellectual application. I am informed by the views of Professor Romila Thapar who tells us how it took months of rigorous exercise at the Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal University, New Delhi, involving seminars and debates to arrive at a syllabus with some international standard deserving attention: “We were given substantial time, close to a year, to frame syllabi based on our new concepts of courses, suited to a semester system. At the Centre for Historical Studies, members of the faculty — we were about 10 initially — constantly debated and discussed what should be included in our courses. We were told not to imitate the curricula of other universities; that there had to be an emphasis on interdisciplinary courses; and that JNU should design a new course curriculum and its own pattern of examination. [JNU relies as much on assignments and tutorials as on written examinations]. We would discuss different proposals intensively, including or excluding many modules according to the requirements of the discipline and what we thought were the needs of students. There were disagreements, compromises and agreements, and it was also one of the most intellectually exciting years for me inasmuch as I was forced to think analytically about many aspects of the discipline of history.” She continues: “Our intention was to encourage analytical thinking among students, promote research and also facilitate the transition to understanding the purpose of history among those students who were from backgrounds other than history.” How then can we allow relevant committees or different boards of studies to come out with half-baked syllabi that lack not only a rationale but any coherence with other existing courses? This exercise, as is well known, is carried out by members who might not possess the expertise in an area/course that is under discussion. Over the years, one has been witness to members participating in such committees making suggestions off the cuff. For instance, Malcolm Lowry’s The Volcano is suggested without the slightest idea of its teachability or its relevance to students situated outside Canada. Not to mention innumerable overlappings and contradictions and irrelevant inclusions that, without the loss of any breath, exclude other much required texts and topics of importance that need to be included. We see regular meetings called for discussion on items that have no mention of syllabus designing where, surprisingly, the issue of revision of syllabus is introduced on the current agenda in haste. This is not explainable or within any sense of logic. It has never occurred to many that weeks of deliberations are required by each member to come prepared for making any alterations or contributing towards the making of a new syllabus altogether. Largely, I am arguing that there is really no application of mind or serious discussion over the designing of a syllabus. Within the academia, it becomes imperative to introduce the culture of discussion by not only limiting the committee to its appointed members but democratically allowing the induction or invitation of relevant experts who have either taught the course or have enough involvement by way of teaching and research in the required area. Statutory bodies need to follow a practice of inviting these much-needed experts who can contribute to an imaginative debate on the requirement of changes as well as framing totally new syllabi. I would go a step further and suggest that such curriculum-making bodies must follow the practice of inviting not only non-members but students and research scholars also who have familiarity with courses they have studied and are in a position to often make wise suggestions for changes. Let us not act like totalitarian presidiums that fear outside influence or remain rigid in their opinions about moving ahead. The more the participation in the making of a syllabus, the greater the chances of it becoming an engaging and forward-looking document of knowledge and learning that helps in promoting quality and excellence. In other words, such committees or boards become internal quality assurance cells that reinvigorate institutions and help in meeting international benchmarks. We need to produce students who are enabled through the education imparted to them to perceive, critically interpret, and transform the world around them. It is a process of reflection in the midst of rapid changes that we all are witness to. In fact, the very process of syllabus designing is itself a process of reflection of which there seems to be no evidence whatsoever at the moment. Fear of discussion, an anti-intellectual diffidence, a narrow squirrel-like attitude is all that we see around us. The slogan from the volatile Sixties, “Be realistic, demand the impossible”, is, therefore, of colossal implication as it does not emphasise the utopian but asks for changes and demands that, in the words of Anthony Arnove, “are achievable but not within the logic of the current system”. Inputs by such broad-based inclusive committees will throw light on the future course of many disciplines such as English Studies, the boundaries of which are fast undergoing change. Let us try at least to get rid of fuzzy parameters that end up in years of slipshod teaching materials of no relevance to our students. In order to have a dynamic education system, we need to face such challenges. We have to develop innovative abilities, skills and expertise, and this puts before us a major responsibility. All other talks about physical infrastructural developments will come to nought if efficient academic governance does not begin to comprehend the need for paying enough attention to such tasks before us. Old moribund statutory or constitutional rigidity will only retard the dynamism that we so much desire in our outmoded systems. I have never understood the often-made proclamation that “this is against the rules”. To move ahead we need to shake up the gloss of order, a step towards critical radical change that breaks our complacency and overturns the systemic dominance of written rules and regulations. The very structure of the universities must change. Providing greater autonomy and operational flexibility would be one big step towards unrestrained innovations in curriculum designing, tackling the challenges of modern-day advancement and ensuring a counterfoil to the conservative love of status quo.
|
|
|
Studyscape LONDON: The University of Birmingham is joining forces with Yale to support the development of a pioneering global justice programme at the University of Delhi. The Nyaya Global Justice Programme will be a major intellectual hub for the study of international ethical questions which have strong implications for India and neighbouring countries. These include questions around India’s role in the World Trade Organisation, G20 and United Nations Security Council, fairness in international trade, cooperation in poverty reduction efforts, and ethics in global security issues. Nyaya, meaning ‘justice’ in Hindi, will also serve as the centre for a trilateral doctoral student exchange programme connecting the University of Delhi, the University of Birmingham’s Centre for the Study of Global Ethics and Yale's Global Justice Program. — ANI China wants austerity in schools BEIJING: China has told schools to shun extravagance and waste, a move in line with a call by the country’s leaders for thrifty lifestyles and a rejection of pomp. All schools are asked to eradicate pompous decorations and cut the size and number of meetings, ribbon-cutting ceremonies, celebrations and forums, the Ministry of Education said in a circular. Schools are banned from having luxury school gates, buildings, offices, hotels and elevators, reported Xinhua citing the circular posted on the ministry’s website. The ministry advocated frugality in official receptions on the campus, promoted energy conservation campaigns and took aim at waste in school cafeterias by encouraging diners to clear their plates.
— IANS
|
|
|
Campus Notes GURU Nanak Dev University organised Dr Paramjit Singh Walia Memorial Lecture at the Conference Hall of Guru Nanak Bhawan recently. Dr Boota Singh Brar from Punjabi University Regional Centre, Bathinda, delivered the lecture on “Historical Perspective of Punjabi Language”. In his lecture, Dr Brar said a language had two faces and the popular form of the language among masses became an ideal form. He also detailed about the various stages in the development of the Punjabi language since the Vedic period. He said the Punjabi language is more closer to the Sanskrit language as compare to other languages. Dr Kanwaljit Kaur Jassal, coordinator of the lecture, detailed about the life and achievements of Dr Paramjit Singh Walia.
Orientation course
Professor Gurmeet Singh, an eminent scholar from the University of Delhi, inaugurated a four-week General Orientation Course-90 on the university campus recently. Professor Singh in his address highlighted the importance of general orientation courses for teachers working in colleges and universities. He said schoolteachers have to undergo teacher-training courses before joining the profession, which is not the case with the teachers engaged in higher education. Therefore, it is imperative for teachers to undergo such courses at regular intervals, he said. Professor Singh emphasised on the need to reform the education system to bring it at par with education systems of other developed countries. He opined that such a system goes a long way in widening the horizons of students.
Environmental hazards
A three-week refresher course in environmental studies was held by the Academic Staff College of the university in collaboration with the Department of Botanical and Environmental Sciences. Professor Thukral in his inaugural address talked about the various environmental hazards being faced by the mankind today. He traced the history of evolution of mankind and said the man had been making inventions and discoveries since times immemorial. He also expressed his concern over the rapid depletion of the natural resources. Professor Avinash Nagpal, course coordinator, acquainted the participants about the thrust area of the course, “Management of Natural Resources”.
GND varsity emerge winner
Guru Nanak Dev University won the All-India Inter-University Best Physique (Men) Championship 2012-13 which was held recently at ML Sukhadiv University, Udaipur. Dr H.S. Randhawa, Deputy Director, Sports, said the university team also won the runners-up trophy in the men’s weightlifting and powerlifting events of the All-India Inter-University Weightlifting and Powerlifting (Men) Championship 2012-13 which was held at the same venue recently. —
Contributed by G.S. Paul
|
CURRICULUM, according to Daniel Turner, is “the planned and guided learning experience and intended learning outcomes, formulated through the systemic reconstruction of knowledge and experiences for the learners’ continuous and wilful growth in personal social competence.”
