I have logged in as a one time guest to help clear any misconceptions or issues that may catch the attention of viewers.
Perhaps this can be thought of a a sort of conclusion to the discussion that has happened here. But that does not mean all issues and points have been tackled.
I wish to acknowledge the interest, critical comments and appreciation of all who have participated in the discussion post my recent public lecture 'Redefining Education : Enabling India'. I cannot claim to have the ability or the wisdom to have answers. In fact far from it and this is not false humility.
I have read with great interest the discussion posted on AwareMonk. I am happy to participate in the discussion.
First, I wish to clarify that the B.Tech (Humanities): Design Your degree programme was intended to prove the point that we should not worry too much about the nomenclature of a degree. In fact as time goes by I feel even more strongly that we should not be obsessed with the business of granting or obtaining degrees. In today's world degrees are not too relevant. In fact were they ever relevant for those who believed in themselves? I am thinking of individuals like Kabir, Gandhi, Faraday, Mendel, Jesus Christ, Buddha, Ramanujan and so many other great ones who had no 'degree' from a university system. The B. Tech (Humanities) programme had a very unique structure. It allowed students to specialise in several ways. Out of the four years two years (not in continuity but during the four year period) were to be spent in undertaking mentored group based projects connected to the real world. These projects were to be very hands on and trans-disciplinary. Two years of credit would come from choosing-in association with your mentor-from the entire gamut of the UG courses of the entire DU under graduate system. Of course this was the philosophy; in practice some limitations do creep in but it had been working well. In fact when the senior government officials complained to the then minister Mr. Sibal, he supported me after hearing us all. I was also asked by him to address the entire Central Advisory Board of Education on it and I must say that after my address the CABE overwhelmingly congratulated me. The programme was allowed. It was shot down later by other hands.
Professor Hari Mohan, thank you for your kind words.
Bharti ji I am quite sure that the realities in the school system at the ground level are very different. But please do not give up. We must all-each one us-keep contributing to gradually bring about change for the better.
Feroz Khan ji, your query is addressed to Professor Hari Mohan, but kindly allow me to also put in my penny's worth as they say. I find it hard to blame students too much. If we do interesting things that are relevant and useful srudents do enjoy and participate eagerly.
Sudanshu ji, I shall be happy to share my thoughts on the Internet College in a few days. I am busy finalising them. Yes I agree with you that we need to be far more professional and alert in mentoring startups. Hence the College of Startups!
Aman Rawal ji, To some extent I agree that teachers lack passion sometimes! But the malaise is much deeper than just in the process of recruitment; but yes, we should think of better processes of recruitment.
Sakshi Sharma ji, Please read my comments above. Perhaps I did not make myself clear enough in the lecture.
Rohit Pande ji and Sudanshu ji, Please do not form impressions under misconception. I was allowed to take my reform ahead at that time with much support
Rohit ji, I totally agree that people need good and inexpensive health care and quality education leading to finding there true passion. That will lead to a satisfying life.
Ishita Nangia ji, Perhaps if you have read what I have said in the rather large para above then you may get my point on the business of nomenclature of degrees. Allow me to also add that a Ph. D. stands for Doctor of Philosophy. So what does a Ph.D have to do with Chemistry or Horticulture or Metallurgy? Just think about this and then perhaps a meaningful discussion may follow.
Malik ji, I agree with you that technology can serve the needs of education exceptionally well. But we will have to redefine education and we must change pedagogical practices.
Syed Raza ji, With the greatest of respect I wish to state that I was not glorifying the past. I was trying to show-in my lecture-that India was an enabled place in the past and the reason for that was to a large extent because we had a knowledge based economy. This lasted upto the 17th century. My point in the lecture was to make an enabled India-in the present-by creating the right education system which shall help create and feed a knowledge based economy.
Ashima Singh ji, I have not even once said that we should not recover from our problems. All through I have emphasised that we must be alert to the dangers and problems that exist (which I keep mentioning throughout). In fact I mentioned some of the reforms; they were designed to bring about the right changes. Nothing happens in an instant and no reform is perfect. But that cannot mean that therefore we should not bring about reform. We msut be open to change especially when we are all convinced that the education system is not delivering as much as it should.
Hello!I have logged in as a one time guest to help clear any misconceptions or issues that may catch the attention of viewers.Perhaps this can be thought of a a sort of conclusion to the discussion that has happened here. But that does not mean all issues and points have been tackled. I wish to ackn