Archive

July 19, 2010

Browsing

The Federation of Central Universities Teachers’ Association (FEDCUTA) called a strike on Saturday, the 16th of January against the University Grants Commission’s (UGC) proposed service condition for college teachers. As a result, the mid term exam schedules in several colleges were disrupted.
The contentious proposals have been outlined in the Draft Notifications on Revision of Payscales and Service Conditions, etc for the maintenance of Standards 2009. This draft talks about introducing a three tier hierarchy of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor with the number of these posts being in a fixed ratio. The teachers believe this will be inimical to their interests as their upward mobility would be restricted. The UGC has also laid emphasis on activities like campus development, consultancy projects etc. which according to teachers is the responsibility of the Administrative Department of the college. This, teachers say, will incentivise teachers to focus on activities apart from maintaining and improving the quality of teaching which is their primary responsibilty.
In many colleges, including Sri Ram College of Commerce, Kirori Mal, Sri Venkateshwar, JMC and Hindu, mid term exams that were scheduled on Saturday were postponed to other later dates. However colleges such as Hansraj, Miranda House and Ramjas among others remained unaffected and continued with their examination schedule as planned.
Several students were pleased with the effective prolonging of their preparatory leaves. However, many other students were left fuming due to the postponement. A student of a North Campus college said, “These strikes are really getting ridiculous now. They are causing a lot of harm to the students who have been preparing for the exams and the administrators and teachers who planned the datesheets. I just want the exams to end, not be extended for so long for no apparent reason.” A teacher contended that when ridiculous and unfair laws come into practice they need must protest against it, even if it inconveniences a few people. She said that students should be aware of the reason behind the strikes, which is a matter of concern for them as well, and should join the initiative rather than condemn it.

– Chavi Kotwal, SRCC “Exams are not a futile exercise. How else would we be assessed? But the pattern of exams should be changed, especially at the school level because exams at the end of the year focus on rote learning to get marks rather than understanding. Therefore all year round assessment is a much better way with focus on application rather than theory. Internal exams are essential since they let us know where we stand, and they are what actually drive most of us to put in the effort to study.” -Aditi Saxena, Hindu College “The vision of an education system should be to inculcate knowledge and power in the younger generation. It should facilitate an all round development. However the vision of the education system in India is merely to impart degrees and make money. The system definitely needs an overhauling to make it a process of total personality development. This should be started at the grassroots level by rethinking the Primary Education System.” -Fern, St. Stephen’s “I am not against internals or mocks per se because they help you evaluate what you have learnt in that one year, but I am also not a fan of the kind of exams we have in DU. In DU you can pass your internals with just two days of study. This doesn’t let us know our subject better since we are too concerned about the marks. Moreover this only leads to a general aversion to exams and hence also to our subject.” -Ira, SRCC “Exams are required to judge how much one has learnt. However, as the system now stands there is too much emphasis on exams. Even though assessment is important, it shouldn’t be the only reason why one should study. Also schools and colleges should set realistic date sheets for exams. Giving no gap in between really does not help.” -Dikshant Bag, Hansraj College “I think all these things just look good on TV. Exams have always been a part and parcel of our lives and these exams just can’t have any other replacement in the Indian Education System at least.” -Parineeta, KNC]]>

The January Tests for students at St. Stephens’ college, which started on Friday, January 8, literally took off on a dark note as commonwealth games construction work in the North Campus led to a power cut that lasted nearly two days.
“Trenches are being dug up right outside the college. Our power supply cable snapped during this work on Wednesday night,” said Nandita Narain, Dean of Students’ Welfare, when questioned by the press.
The resident students were worse affected and resorted to studying under candlelight or shifted to their friends’ places. The college hall and dining room were lit by generators and most students managed to write their exams comfortably. When power finally came back on Friday evening everyone heaved a sigh of relief.

1. The more you refuse a job, the more eager they will be to hire you.
2. One can take a road trip to Ladakh in borrowed pants and bridal dress without bothering to stop by a woolens shop on the way. Friends provide the warmth in our lives we suppose.
3. One can offer to ‘invent’ common devices long in existence but still have a professor of engineering disbelieve such appliances can exist. A remote control helicopter or a battery operated inverter anyone? Perhaps someone should offer to invent the wheel now.
4. When gate crashing a wedding, mind your own business and concentrate on the food. Otherwise you may be stuck with your professor for a father-in-law.
5. How to woo a girl? Spill chutney on her fiancé’s shoes. If that doesn’t work steal her watch. If that too fails disappear for a while and then return a mad scientist with multi-billion contracts in tow. The multi-billion part ought to catch her attention.

The B.Com(H) course in Delhi University is one of the most sought after courses by students all over India. However, a small change in the way the examinations are being conducted now has demotivated students who are currently pursuing the course.
Over 3 years, a student writes 24 papers. Most papers are of 75 marks while a few are of 50. Earlier, in the 75 mark papers, 20 marks were for internal assessment while a student wrote a three hour exam for 55 marks. The 50 mark papers consisted of 12 marks for internal assessment and 38 from writing the exam.
With a view to bring parity in the paper between students who attend college and those who opt for distant learning, the university gives common papers to both. This means that students who attend college regularly have to write for 75 marks instead of 55. Their marks then get scaled down to 55. This is very unfair as the duration of the exam remains the same while the students now have to write more for a 75 mark paper, not to mention the effort that goes into submitting assignments and writing an internal exam for the remaining 20 marks. A student who did not wish to be named said, “Earlier we got 3 hours to write for 55 marks and now we have to write for 75! We submit assignments; write internals, so why should we write for an additional 20 marks when they are just going to get scaled down? What is even more frustrating is that apart from this initial scaling down the University often moderates and reduces our marks even further. It’s very discouraging and highly unfair, but no one can do anything about it and we are at the mercy of a tyrannical university”
These strong words simply echo the increasing feeling of dissatisfaction among the students regarding what they consider an unfair examination procedure.

CONGRATULATIONS!

WORDSPILL

What Should President Obama do when he comes to India?

RESULTS:

1. Siddharth Upasani
2. Avantika Sukhia
3. Neharika Gupta
—————————————————————————————

The top 10 entries were judged by:
• Editor in Chief of SPAN
• Minister Counselor for Public Affairs
• Deputy Counselor for Political Affairs
• Diane N Brandt (Cultural Affairs for North India)

WINNING ENTRY:

WHAT SHOULD PRESIDENT OBAMA DO WHEN HE VISITS INDIA?

When President Obama does visit India, the first thing that should be done is to organize a nice and pleasant tour for him. After all, India is such culturally rich and diverse country,and it would be a shame if he was unable to get a glimpse of India’s heritage.

President Obama should be taken to Maharashtra, not to see India’s Manhattan Mumbai, but to see the dry, caked land,caused due to a 3 degree Celsius rise in temperatures.He should be taken to Andhra Pradesh,not to see glorious Hyderabad,but to see farmers’ incomes decreasing even as India’s GDP nears the $1.5 trillion mark.He should be taken to Orissa,not to gaze at breathtaking Puri and Bhubhaneshwar,but to see how India’s flooding areas have more than doubled from 5% to 12%.He should be taken to West Bengal,not to see the colourful festivities of Durga pooja, but to to see how Bangladeshi migrants are flocking at the borders,afraid that their homes will be submerged before they are built.

Not a nice tour,you might say.But if India’s slums can storm the Oscars,why can’t the world’s future move the President?

As a senator,and presidential candidate,Barack Obama had been a revelation,rallying the voice of a whole nation,which did opt for change.Now,as the president of the United States of America,its his decisions which could change the earth’s future.

The destructive effects of climate change are more than just facing us,and have left us gasping for air-literally.The latest Copenhagen talks are approaching sham status.Walkouts have become the latest trend,and sacrifices are only for the heroes.Sadly,there are no heroes amongst us anymore.

Why is it so tough to see that drastic actions have to be taken?And quickly at that.Its lamentable to see that the USA is willing to cut emissions to 17% below 2005 levels-a sorry figure amounting to a dismal 4% below 1990 levels.

The USA, which produces almost a sixth of the world’s greenhouse gasses,had a GDP close to $14.2 trillion in 2008. Sure,the times are bad,the economy is reeling,and unemployment is rising. But what economy will be left when the floods decimate houses,tsunamis massacre the shores,droughts parch our throat,and rising temperatures kill man and beast? There won’t be a stock market to boom or crash,no banks to provide a loan to restart the world;no expansionary policy will be able to propel man out of the trenches of Nature’s recession.And if any economists are left,their precious hindsight will be of little use.

David Hawkins very aptly said-”We change the world not by what we say or do,but as a consequence of what we have become”. Man’s greed can’t be fulfilled anymore,and we need to look inside ourselves,and see what each one of us has become.

So, what should President Obama do when he visits India? He should make us believe that the world has a future. That yes,we can save the world from ourselves. That if given the choice between our children and a vault of gold,we will make the right choice.

-Siddharth Upasani

Change the Education System, and fast!

One rather very enjoyable movie that made news at the box office recently was “3 Idiots”. It could be one of those movies which everyone watches, has a lot of fun, buys the DVD and always remembers. Or it could be one of those movies that everyone watches, has a lot of fun, and forgets. However, all that aside, it was definitely one of those movies that raised a very important issue which can, under no circumstance, be dismissed and forgotten: our education system.

One of the major flaws in our education system is the characteristic of being extremely exam oriented. To quite an extent, classroom teaching at any level; be it primary, secondary or high schools or our colleges; is undertaken keeping in mind the “exam point of view”. Classroom discussion is minimal, and it generally takes place, if at all, at the beginning of the session and then too is quashed out in the race to finish the course before the exams. Students are, therefore, molded to care about the exam and marks rather than actually study a subject because they enjoy it. They are not encouraged to think creatively or to explore their subject in more depth, in fear of digressing from the prescribed syllabi. Learning is limited to what is in the textbook, and very few students actually think beyond them. Many of them lose interest and therefore the increasing trend among colleges to offer marks for attendance to make students attend classes. Another reason for this may also be because of a deeper social problem. Students are often forced to study disciplines that they are not really interested in, because society considers other disciplines worthless as they deviate from societal norms. Therefore classes are considered to be a burden. But even the students who choose a subject of their choice are often condemned to being incentivized only by marks for attending classes due to the poor quality of teaching. Learning then becomes learning about how astutely to attempt an exam and maximizing marks from it. Exams also then become a burden because students are forced to study something they are uninterested and uninvolved with. Students learn very little about the subject. Very few graduates actually remember what or why they studied a particular thing even though they spent 3-4 years studying it!

This does not mean we do away with exams. Quite to the contrary exams are required to test how well students their subject. But it shouldn’t be the sole purpose of the educational institutions. Teachers should be encouraged to make the subject they are teaching as interesting as they can. Students will then be encouraged to study and understand their subject and actually enjoy it. Marks in the exams will automatically follow. Exams should be therefore made more challenging. They shouldn’t just test the reading of a textbook, but the application of the subject.

Many efforts are now being made to include everyone in the education system by opening for schools and colleges and reaching out to the hinterland of the country. Changing the orientation of the system will ensure quality along with the increasing quantity, so that at the end of the day we have well educated individuals in our society
– Devika Dutt

Why blame the Education System? Change the Economy first.

Here comes another full frontal masala Bollywood flick with all its traits of ridiculously simplified problems accompanied by naïve and optimistic solutions, all leading up to a nice Happily ever after. Made in the clichéd scheme depicting the spectacular rise of the underdog and his subsequent victory over the authoritative bullies, this movie too contains the wish fulfilling aspect of all such feel good movies.
The problem of the education system has been uprooted from its socio-economic context and posited as an individual case of a ridiculous misguided authority figure, the Director of an institute, imposing his personal brand of competitive uncreative narrow minded approach to learning over the students. The answers to the problem are simple, follow your heart and the world will automatically ensure your well being. Practical concerns and true to life issues are passed over lightly with mere emotional drama. If the real world intrudes it is through the means of a stylized, exaggerated and hence comical representation of a poor stereotypical family.
Look at the method of learning that has been critiqued in the movie. Instead of simply stating that learning by rote is wrong, why not take a look at why this form of learning developed in the first place. The principles behind our education methods aren’t really to blame. Learning theory is a necessary basis before embarking on any practical application. If one does not remember the dates of a famous war one can scarcely understand why historical forces played out as they did at the time. Without remembering the theorems by which one arrived at a formula one can scarcely understand why the formula when applied in a problem will yield results. The reason we make fun of American Education and the reason why their learning centres are chockfull of Indians, Chinese and the Japanese is because they have got too focused on the practical education and lost sight of theory altogether. Hence the ideal solution would of course be to have a combination of both, learning theory and understanding application. However does it really work that way? When competing in a congested rat race of education for a few jobs and fewer resources do students have the time and leisure to think their subject through and approach it roundly? Won’t most end up taking the shortest route of bunging in learning by the shovelful to get ahead in the race and clinch a college, a course, a job? This problem is clearly uniquely Indian, and as such is it because the Indian education system is at fault or the Indian socio-economic system?
Why is the education ‘system’ being called a problem? What is this system? Isn’t the system merely a collective noun for us, all of us, every single one of us? In which case, how many of you, after seeing the movie, will actually go back and change your course or career based upon your interests? I am guessing very few will actually take this step, despite however much they enjoyed the film, for the simple fact that this is real life while the latter was a film. In real life this system exists because realities such as an income, a career and the need to earn a living exist. A job interviewer is not really going to hand you a job despite low marks and bad conduct reports simply because you have the guts to refuse the job they are offering. Indeed it is unlikely to even get a job interview under the circumstances if not for already being enrolled in an ‘elite’ course under an elite college, which he must have also done via good marks. Consider the difference between the film and the book upon which it is based. The Amir Khan character in Five Point Someone also chooses to follow his passion, but he becomes a research student with a tiny stipend. This outcome would have scarcely thrilled a good movie audience however, so the movie made the same character, not a moderately accomplished scientist with a stable government job, but a stupendously gifted one whom multibillionaire firms are after. One need hardly go into the improbability of such a situation. Not everyone can become a great tennis star or an actor simply because of one’s interests. Interest takes you only so far, effort perhaps a bit further, but there are frankly too many people in the world for everyone to be able to do what they please. Competition just can’t be done away with as long as there are fewer resources than there are people. Solve the problem of population, solve the problem of poverty and ensure basic facilities for everyone without the threat of starvation or the slums looming over our heads and we may be able to pursue our passions without care to monetary benefits. However as long as all companies prefer engineers over applicants from other courses and swimming stars of yesteryear end up driving buses to earn their keep, certain professions will always be preferred over others and the rat race to enter these courses will ultimately culminate in a struggle to hog learning rather than enjoying the course.

-Pragya Mukherjee

I am at a loss as to where to begin. From the non- existent story or the blatant lack of effort put in the film; the painful predictability or the frozen faces of actors?
Frankly, I am offended by the lack of respect the Director and Uday Chopra have for the movie patron. We are not retarded that we will accept whatever trash is produced and thrown at us. This movie is casually offensive and downright ridiculous at points.

A self- conscious, unattractive geek is smitten by the most gorgeous, not to mention popular girl on campus. They don’t bother to tell us where this campus is, they do not deem it important enough. Some songs thread together a series of events which show the geek (Uday Chopra) saving the girl ( Priyanka Chopra) from drowning and the girl not thanking him. Oh, she doesn’t even know who saved her as she’s too preoccupied screaming and throwing. Abruptly, albeit conveniently, we are transported to Seven Years Later. Abhay (Chopra) has designed a world altering software, Unity. Again, the director does not feel the need to tell the viewers what exactly the earth- shattering software does. Er, he mentions something about it being able to unite all operating systems.
Sidhu (Dino Morea) a self- proclaimed businessman in slick suits manages to steal Abhay’s software. I shout, “Serves him right!” In a rare bout of bravado, Abhay travels to Singapore to reclaim his software and stand up for himself. There he finds Alisha, still beautiful, still perfect and still unattainable. Enter the most annoying kid ever seen on the big screen and the plot gets stupider still. Uday Chopra pushes all thought of the software to remote reaches of his mind and becomes a loving, submissive nanny to the tyrannical spawn of his beloved. Priyanka Chopra waltzes into office wearing practically nothing; flirts annoyingly with a business partner and is the only one who is consulted for the biggest deal her company has ever made. So what if she is PR Head.

The climax is embarrassing. A seven year old could write wittier dialogues. Priyanka Chopra has a strange accent; I’m still wondering where she got it. Everybody in Singapore is Indian. Uday Chopra’s character is spine- less and contradictory. Dino Morea’s face is frozen in one single expression. Oh, and that little monster girl is not cute.

If somebody offers you free tickets for Pyaar Impossible, run in the opposite direction. And run fast.

My Rating- 0/5

Director: Guy Ritchie
Cast: Robert Downey Jr, Jude Law, Mark Strong, Rachel McAdams
Sherlock Holmes is brought to you in a glossy new package – A movie, which portrays the iconic character with a remarkable convergence of innovation and reverence.
The basic plot is woven around Holmes (Downey Jr.) and his partner Watson (Jude Law) as they begin to unfold the murder plot surrounding the mighty Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), whose occult skills allow him to rise from his grave and kill again. Further on, Watson’s declaration that he will move out of Baker Street permanently because he is engaged creates a tricky situation. This disclosure is compensated by the entry of the femme fatale, Irene Adler (Rachel Adams), a former Holmes love interest who needs his help. The very foundation of Watson’s and Holmes’s relationship is challenged. Watson has plans to marry Mary. Holmes acts like an obsessive jealous lover and the humour rests on their regular bickering. They know each other too well, and it transcends beyond the normal ties, a relationship-that-need-not-be-named.
If the plot seems daunting, worry not. Holmes is an out-an-out adventure film on the lines of ‘The Hound of Baskervilles’. There are a few scenes of such cinematic brilliance as to keep you riveted to the edge of your seats-The dockyard scene and the underground boxing match being the best instances. However if the direction is excellent the special effects are a bit lacking, used sparingly or not at all.
Robert Downey Jr. as Sherlock Holmes is a treat to watch. A man shown to have a brilliant mind and the ability to solve any mystery comes across as convincing and charming at the same time, and not to forget, he has the enigmatic Jude Law for company as the sidekick Watson. The dialogue between Jude and Robert flows in wit and their bickering can even be compared to married couples. It’s rare to see the lead actors have such crackling on screen chemistry, but again it’s rare to find a movie as enthralling as this one.
Director Guy Ritchie should be showered the much deserved credit. The skill with which he has presented the legendary character on the silver screen is highly remarkable and Downey Jr. too conveys his act with dexterity and precision. The only minute brickbats I could muster are to the make-up of the artists which seemed overdone in parts, and the repetitive nature of some gags. However these are minor issues indeed and the film is undoubtedly a masterpiece.
Don’t miss it for the world!
My rating: 4.5/5