The news item AICTE may shut the door on new colleges (Hemali Chhapia, Times of India, February 28, 2012) opens, “With supply outstripping demand for engineering and management seats, the country may stop new professional colleges coming up from 2014.”
In whatever meaningful way one looks at engineering education – be it quantity or quality – this is an indefensible position, from the perspective of a civil / construction industry insider for over thirty years. Alas, this is the position AICTE takes, as per the news item.
But, what is worse is that the same organization had said in December 2011, “Why should a regulator say don’t start any institution now?” (Dec. 12, 2011, TNN). Admittedly, this was in response to the plea from one particular state whereas the new position is undergirded by the position of a collective of a small group of states. But the flip-flop is so total, no such justifications would suffice. Do we know why AICTE changed its position, so fast and so drastically, in a matter of just 2 ½ months?
AICTE is looking at the issue of demand and supply through wrongly tinted glasses – the demand numbers justified through the number of engineering and engineering and management seats that have had no takers – “nearly three lakh seats”. The demand issue is hijacked by the current fads of the society, with no long term perspective, for the individual as well as the society. It is not in the interest of the nation for its apex body for technical education to toe the line drawn in sand by group think. That way lies short-term perspective driven unsustainable development.
Let me reiterate that the Twelfth Five Year Plan envisages investment of nearly Rs. 50,00,000 crore over five years, mostly in infrastructure. The realization of this Plan, absorption of the Plan allocations, needs engineers – civil, mechanical, electrical, chemical, metallurgical – in multiples of what is available and what can be expected to be available under BAU scenario. Remember, the Plan realization of the Eleventh Plan, the investment levels only about half of what is proposed for the Twelfth Plan, is nothing to write home about. That must wake up all of us to reality of the quantum of engineers needed. And, we have AICTE tracing the path backwards!
As the recent article also makes clear that it is a small set of states that have propelled this proposition of not granting permission to new requests, it is anybody’s guess as to why AICTE mentions “the country may stop new professional colleges” (as mentioned in the news item).
True, AICTE looks out for engineering education. However, in my opinion, it is too sharply focused on engineering education per se rather than on engineering contributions to and as demanded by society, with the XII Plan outlay being the robust metric. It appears to me, then, that the recent article’s, indeed AICTE’s thrust is misdirected, is shifted from the earlier, more relevant position.
Raghuram Ekambaram
In whatever meaningful way one looks at engineering education – be it quantity or quality – this is an indefensible position, from the perspective of a civil / construction industry insider for over thirty years. Alas, this is the position AICTE takes, as per the news item.
But, what is worse is that the same organization had said in December 2011, “Why should a regulator say don’t start any institution now?” (Dec. 12, 2011, TNN). Admittedly, this was in response to the plea from one particular state whereas the new position is undergirded by the position of a collective of a small group of states. But the flip-flop is so total, no such justifications would suffice. Do we know why AICTE changed its position, so fast and so drastically, in a matter of just 2 ½ months?
AICTE is looking at the issue of demand and supply through wrongly tinted glasses – the demand numbers justified through the number of engineering and engineering and management seats that have had no takers – “nearly three lakh seats”. The demand issue is hijacked by the current fads of the society, with no long term perspective, for the individual as well as the society. It is not in the interest of the nation for its apex body for technical education to toe the line drawn in sand by group think. That way lies short-term perspective driven unsustainable development.
Let me reiterate that the Twelfth Five Year Plan envisages investment of nearly Rs. 50,00,000 crore over five years, mostly in infrastructure. The realization of this Plan, absorption of the Plan allocations, needs engineers – civil, mechanical, electrical, chemical, metallurgical – in multiples of what is available and what can be expected to be available under BAU scenario. Remember, the Plan realization of the Eleventh Plan, the investment levels only about half of what is proposed for the Twelfth Plan, is nothing to write home about. That must wake up all of us to reality of the quantum of engineers needed. And, we have AICTE tracing the path backwards!
As the recent article also makes clear that it is a small set of states that have propelled this proposition of not granting permission to new requests, it is anybody’s guess as to why AICTE mentions “the country may stop new professional colleges” (as mentioned in the news item).
True, AICTE looks out for engineering education. However, in my opinion, it is too sharply focused on engineering education per se rather than on engineering contributions to and as demanded by society, with the XII Plan outlay being the robust metric. It appears to me, then, that the recent article’s, indeed AICTE’s thrust is misdirected, is shifted from the earlier, more relevant position.
Raghuram Ekambaram
4 comments:
our strength is our man power.both managerial and technical..
so this type of an announcement makes no sense..why should they control anything? except the quality of education..if supply is more no new collages will come..why should they act as guardians..ridiculous..control metaphor..
Raghuram, I've always wondered (as a teacher) how some of the biggest 'jokers' (clowns, should I say) of the class ended up as engineers, doctors, and (more understandably) entrepreneurs. I have a potentially classic case of a boy who failed in a lower class and managed to pass class XII with 35 percent or nearabout,but went on to become a successful businessman (or entrepreneur, because he managed to start something new).
I think AICTE need not worry about the courses offered and the standards manintained by the insitutions. People have the power within and they just need a certificate from a legally valid institution. After all, as I have mentioned repeatedly, the Taj Mahal was not built by any university qualified architect.
Matheikal, your last statement was echoed by Mu. Karunanidhi a few years ago when he asked who was the engineer who built the Shri Ram Setu!
My father was a teacher in a college after retirement (mercifully only for a year or two) and he had no powers to discipline his students: The principal told him, "he is the son of a big donor. With this degree his dowry will jump up an order. Go with the flow."
In my original and longer version I had pointed out that AICTE must focus more on quality and how that is undermined.
RE
Thank you DS sir for so unreservedly endorsing the thought behind the post.
RE
Post a Comment