The University Grants Commission (UGC) has advised universities to adopt a string of curricula that it has designed for undergraduate subjects with an added emphasis on enhancing vocational skills. The move has, however, raised doubts and misgivings among University teachers.
The higher education regulator has uploaded on its website what it describes as a “learning outcome-based curriculum framework” or LOCF for 11 subjects and nudged all the universities to embrace them.
A section in the academia maintained that LOCF is an infringement into academic freedom, the Telegraph has reported.
University teachers have alleged that these curricula threaten institutions’ autonomy and argued that the focus on “skill enhancement courses” doesn’t come with a corresponding increase in teaching posts. They further said that these vocational courses tend to overburden the students.
In 2015, the commission had prepared common curricula under a “choice-based credit system” that most universities have already adopted. This credit system allows students of a particular subject to take up courses from other disciplines – accounting for up to 30 per cent of the curriculum – thereby promoting inter-disciplinary studies. It also allows the students to earn a stipulated number of credits from another university.
Academics who have examined the LOCF said it had merely added a few skill enhancement courses.
Abha Dev Habib, who teaches physics at Miranda House College under Delhi University, said these skill courses had been proposed for each of the first four semesters. “Under the choice-based credit system, there were two skill enhancement course modules, one in the third semester and the other in the fourth. Now there will be one skill course in each of the first four semesters in Physics Honours,” she told to the Telegraph.
In Physics Honours, skill courses like energy-harvesting, data interpretation and programming have been proposed without any reduction in the core subjects. “Just because the Central government is talking about “Skill India”, the regulator has added the skill component to general courses. No consultation or study has been done to find out the students’ response to the already introduced skill courses under the choice-based credit system.” She further added that the skill courses were overburdening the students who wanted to focus on their core subjects.
She said Miranda House was getting guest faculty to teach the skill courses. The commission had not sanctioned any additional teaching posts for any Delhi University college when the skill component was introduced under the choice-based credit system. Before this universities would design their own syllabus without any skill component.
A commission official, however, said that the LOCF was an improvement on the choice-based system curricula, and had been mooted at a conference of vice-chancellors in July last year. The LOCF seeks to specify the expected learning outcome from every student on the completion of the course.
“All esteemed vice-chancellors are requested to take necessary steps in consultation with the statutory authorities of the universities to revise and implement the curriculum based on the “learning outcome-based approach,” a letter issued last month by commission chairman D.P Singh said.
Delhi University executive council member Rajesh Jha said the commission’s advisory to adopt its syllabuses undermined the universities’ academic autonomy.
“There is a defined procedure for designing and adopting a university curriculum. It starts with the committee of courses, followed by discussions in the board of studies of the faculty and then in the academic council and executive council,” Jha said.
“But since the regulator started issuing directions for the adoption of its curricula, all the procedures are being violated. For instance, the choice-based credit system curricula were passed at Delhi University’s academic and executive councils without discussion within the faculties,” he added.
Jha further said that the regulator allowed the universities to change the content of its common curricula by up to 30 per cent without altering the overall framework. “It’s difficult to measure 30 per cent of a curriculum. A university designs its courses according to its faculty strength and (in the case of humanities) the local needs. That freedom is denied under the choice-based credit system and LOCF, he explained.
Comments are closed.