The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

EDUCATION

Students up in arms against varsity’s
‘dubious policies’
Sanjog Gupta

New Delhi, October 28
At least 1,500 students converged on the Kashmere Gate campus of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (GGSIPU) in protest against the dubious policies of the authorities pertaining to the management of two courses – Bachelor in Information Systems (BIS) and Bachelor in Business Administration Computer Aided Management (BBA CAM)

The protest, which began on October 24, will bring forth the main issues of contention - the non-certification of the BIS course by the All-India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) and the plight of the students belonging to the Learning and Education Centres located in Noida and Faridabad. The congregation today witnessed the presence of police officials in riot control geared to “manage the situation”.

The authorities have been negotiating with the students for the past five days but the students insist that the discussions have been meaningless. A fourth year student of BIS said, “The representatives are shouted at and are told to do what they can. We have been sitting outside the academic bloc without food the whole day but the authorities haven’t even expressed concern for our state.”

The four-year BIS course is not an AICTE certified course, which negates the ‘professional & technical’ status of the course and equates it with any other three-year bachelors’ course. This hinders the opportunities available to the students since higher education as well as job opportunities require the student to have completed an AICTE certified course.

The BIS students, who were recruited in 1999 (the year of the course’s inception) and 2000, numbering almost 700, alleged they got reassurance from the authorities that the four-year course would be approved within one year. But the university authorities have refuted this allegation by saying, “We never promised any such certification even though we did inform them that the course is under consideration for the certification. We never claimed for the course to be equivalent to an engineering degree, it teaches something more than a BCA and something less than a M Tech.”

The other issue, which constitute the imbroglio, pertains to the status of those students enrolled into the Learning Centres of the university outside New Delhi – JSS Academy of Technical Education, Noida, and DAV Institute, Faridabad, and affiliated institutes – the BLS Institute of Management, Ghaziabad, and the Ansal Institute of Technology, Gurgaon. The issue of concern stems from the 85 per cent reservation in IP University for Delhi students, which the students would prefer to avail of but cannot since they are treated as non-Delhi students, in spite of the Learning Centres being explicitly mentioned as ‘extensions of the IP University’.

One official said, “When these students were taking admission to the centres, did they not realise that these were outside Delhi.” One student reacted to this by saying, “It was never mentioned and further these centres charge higher fees (almost Rs 12,000) under the pretext of being an extension of the Delhi state university, so why should their students be treated as non-Delhi students?”

The students pointed out several other issues such as non-issue of any mark sheets for students who have completed seven semesters, reduction in the number of repeats that a student can avail of and major disparity in fees across centres. The students have also alleged that the affiliated colleges in connivance with the authorities are indulging in malpractices to subdue the agitation. They sight the instances of students involved in the protests being rusticated by colleges through a circular.

One student of BBA CAM tried summing up the whole situation by saying, “The university is playing with students’ future and has shown no consideration for the same, it is just a money-making racket wherein they charge us exorbitant fees and do not deliver on their aforementioned promises.”

CAMPUS SCENE
JNU elections: Low on real issues
Sanjog Gupta

New Delhi, October 28
Students have been losing interest in the Jawarharlal Nehru University Students Union (JNUSU) elections, which threatens to relegate the state of elections to those conducted in Delhi University - largely perceived to be a “game of political upmanship”. A stark reflection of this trend is the declining voter turnout in the JNUSU elections, which at one point of time used to be as high as 85 per cent. Since 1996, the voter turnout has been oscillating between 60 and 70 per cent, reaching an all-time low last year with only 62 per cent of voters casting their votes.

Even though the Election Commission remains adamant that the low turnout is an outcome of the proximity of the polling date with Divali, the real reason for this declining trend became clear at a press conference held at JNU, where all parties presented their election agenda.

There is a growing alienation of students in JNU from the political process aimed at providing the students representation and a ‘say in university matters’. The main reason causing this de-linking of students from the electoral process is the perceived ‘unique’ nature of the JNU elections.

The JNU elections have traditionally been fought on ideological grounds. Issues relating to the national and international affairs have dominated the campaigns. International terrorism, globalisation, nationalism, fundamentalism and issues of similar nature have hogged the attention of the candidates. The party agendas revolve around the central objective of “presenting an intellectually sound image”, which implies the relegation of ‘real campus’ issues to the background.

If in case of DU, where the relegation of issues was primarily caused due to the grandiose showmanship of the parties, in which the flamboyant budgets of the campaigns throttled the voices that raised issues, then the JNU paradox is no different. The only difference being that JNU elections are not devoid of issues, but, as one MA student, said are fought on “the wrong issues”.

There is a growing insecurity on the campus due to the growing number of incidents relating to violence and harassment. Hostel messes are in a bad shape and infrastructure facilities are of a deprecatory nature. One student said, “There are so many things that need to be put right on the campus and the rhetoric from the candidates is about globalisation. If we really want to hear opinions on ideological subjects we would attend seminars, debates and lectures. Why the need for an electoral process?”

The trend is bound to continue this year, a fact that became increasingly clear at the press conference. The ABVP presidential candidate elaborated the BJP ideology of nationalism while the SFI outgoing JNUSU president spoke at length about the proliferation of American hegemony in India. The NSUI spokesperson devoted her speech to the objective of convincing the audience of their “unique secular status” while the AISA presidential candidate was too busy establishing the difference in ideology of her party from that of the Left unity. The ABVP and the SFI also took the opportunity to point fingers at each other – the ABVP blaming the SFI for the lack of any development initiated in their term on campus while the latter blamed the former for the violence succeeding the Guru Dakshina ceremony organised by them.

The real issues surfaced at sporadic intervals and were soon negated by the resurgence of the dogma, which clearly reflected that all parties were planning to adhere to the time-tested formula of “seeming intelligent and ideological”. The issue of messes received a passing mention, while a suggestion of ‘part-time jobs on campus’ was buried under the muddle of ideological jargon.

Some students believe that the deplorable state of the campus is an outcome of this aspect. One PhD student said, “When these parties have no space on their agenda for campus issues, then how can they be expected to actually deal with them?” While the parties mull over ideological issues and decide “how to present the right image”, the student community is left feeling disenchanted with the whole process, labeling it only as a “platform for the launch of political careers”.