General Body of History teachers of Delhi University unanimously reject Government's Choice Based Credit System (CBCS)
Resolution Adopted by
the GBM of teachers of the
Department of History, University of Delhi
Department of History, University of Delhi
The teachers of History, in The General Body Meeting held
on 16/05/2015 in the Department of History, Delhi University, discussed the
issue of CBCS and syllabus making. The house decided to reject CBCS and
disassociate itself from syllabus making as per the letter from the Jt.
Registrar, for the following reasons:
1. Among the proposed reforms is the introduction of a
common syllabus for all Central Universities in India; a common entrance test;
faculty and student mobility; and credit transfers. The justifications offered for these sweeping
changes are enhanced employability, skill development and seamless nation-wide
mobility for students. The teachers
believe that the Choice Based Credit System (CBCS) is part of a larger scheme
of things imposed by the University under direction from the MHRD/ UGC starting
with the semester system. While there is no denial that Higher Education in India
is marred by grave drawbacks and requires serious stocktaking and the resolution
of long-standing issues, standardization, homogenization and centralization,
especially with respect to syllabi and evaluation, cannot be accepted as
one-step solutions for all the problems. They may in fact, end up seriously
degrading the quality of Higher Education, creating more problems and becoming
a prelude to the complete takeover of universities by the state and the logic
of the market.
2. The uniform course structure and syllabi run counter to
the diverse socio-cultural realities and learning needs of our people spread
through varied regions. Each university
possesses a unique culture and specific history and has developed its own
pattern of knowledge production and reproduction. This homogenization would stand in the way of
innovative pedagogic practices and incorporating new courses based on emerging
issues. While higher education must have a strong global component, it must
also address the local—for example, the geology/ history/ art/ ecosystem/ literature
of the locale in which the university is situated.
3. CBCS is a systemic change which is being pushed by the
UGC and MHRD without discussion with the primary stakeholders, i.e. teachers
and students on the desirability, feasibility and long-term implications of
such a systemic change. This is being done with ever greater recklessness and
hurry without even a semblance of respect or concern for academic practices,
intellectual integrity, departmental and university autonomy, democratic rights
and the culture of informed and fearless debate so central to the core life
objectives of any university; the cultivation of respect for equality,
difference, liberty and justice together with the capacity to think critically
and analytically.
4. a) The decision to implement CBCS was taken in the AC, through
an item under “Any Other Matter”. No discussion was allowed. All elected
members present dissented against the decision.
No structure was proposed or put up for consideration.
b) CBCS cannot be considered as passed by the University
because it has still not been tabled in the
EC and no Ordinances have been passed regarding it.
c) For such a major systemic change, statutory bodies like
Staff Councils, Committees of Courses,
Departments and Faculties should have been consulted.
d) The latest
letter issued by the Jt. Registrar (dated. 29.4.2015) instructing Deans and
HoDs to have syllabi framed
on the basis of the structure displayed on the UGC website bypasses the EC and also the AC which never approved such
a structure.
5. Though the CBCS claims to allow greater flexibility and
choices to students, acute shortages of physical
infrastructure, faculty and staff impose disabling limits on the colleges and departments.
6. The “Cafeteria Approach” of CBCS in offering a basket of
courses will lead to academic dilution and commercialisation of higher
education.
7. The UGC Notification on “Minimum Course Curriculum for
Undergraduate Courses under Choice Based Credit System” mentions
fluctuation of workload as a disadvantage but does not elaborate on its adverse
consequences. Fluctuating workloads adversely affect post-creation and regular employment
in every subject, thus increasing the proportion of ad-hoc and guest teachers without
any job security or benefits, and institutionalising a policy of ‘hire and
fire’.
8. Syllabi are always framed and evaluation always done by
teachers who are integrally involved in the teaching of the concerned courses.
The specific advice given by the Delhi University administration to examine the
syllabus uploaded on the UGC website on the other hand, does not take into
consideration this basic, yet fundamental issue. On the contrary, it gives sanctity to the
imposition of syllabi by a faceless body that exists outside the University of
Delhi structure. This is unacceptable in terms of the statutes, ordinances and
the Act that govern this university guaranteeing autonomy to its functioning.
9. The History Department is already in the process of
revising the syllabus since November, 2014. A large number of college teachers
have participated in the process and are involved in framing a blueprint. It is
expected that this will now be taken up by a number of sub committees which
will involve many more teachers. Hence, the General Body of teachers strongly
feels that there is no need to participate in the process of syllabus framing
as per the letter of the Joint Registrar since the syllabus uploaded on the UGC
website is already obsolete.
10.The GBM resolves to unanimously reject the CBCS related
changes being thrust upon DU and all other Central Universities of India, while
simultaneously expressing the urgent need to engage holistically
and democratically with the multiple crises facing Higher Education in the country.
Proposed by Dr. Bhupinder Chaudhry
Seconded by Dr. Surendra Kumar
This resolution was
adopted unanimously
See also:
