Unfortunately, the downfall of the university began almost immediately afterwards, in 1974, when the government brought in the Maharashtra University Act (for non-agriculture universities). Thus began the government interference, which brought in caste and other politics in education. This petty politics is one of the biggest factors for the varsity's journey downwards.
Till 1974, vice chancellors (VC) were part-time persons nominated by the 'court' comprising of academicians and experts in various fields. The government always wanted its own people to run the university. This brought in substandard people in the VC's position, and NU was no exception.
However, NU was more severely hit because the city, like Vidarbha, has always been an abandoned and neglected child for the state. We cannot blame the government alone, though, for the present state of the university.
People are equally responsible for this, since, like the local social and political leaders of Vidarbha, they never reacted aggressively to any issue plaguing the university. In cities like Mumbai and Pune, the entire academia, bureaucracy, judiciary, which are the basic intellectual pillars of any society, react to any turmoil. NU never had such support of the people or leaders who could exert pressure, and continues to be no one's baby.
Petty politics of caste, language and power began in NU as far back as 25 years ago and will continue to harm it until someone very radical, a pure academic man, takes over as VC. Then again, the lower tiers of hierarchy should give that person a chance to change whatever he/she wants.
Today all VCs are appointed for extraneous considerations. The university has been reduced to nothing less than an examination centre. The damage is so huge that it would take many years to put things right again.
I am sorry to have witnessed the downfall from 1974 to 1994, when I resigned to take over as the managing director of Tarun Bharat newspaper. After that, I have seen the university standards fall by the day. One reason for the downfall has been the lack of academicians as VC, registrar, pro VC or the executive council members (leading lobby).
Non-academicians have always ruled the university, and this has resulted in NU lagging at least 30 years behind in academics as compared to any other varsity in the state or country.
I still fail to understand how many academicians also happily joins the coterie which runs the university. To give an example, PS Mene, the then LIT director, who was known for his academic and technological knowledge, was contesting the election for dean of science faculty. One of his juniors, WM Kalmegh, stood against him, with support from the university politicians and became the VC.
The basic fault lies here, where the lower cadre works on the principle of 'cash for vote'.
Except for MG Bokare, I have not seen any academician as VC. No one in a decision-making position has any commitment or will to improve academics and research in the university. In fact, very few understand the meaning of research and its value in the growth of a university.
To cite a recent example, my own, I submitted my treatise for the DSc degree to NU two year back. The university sat over it all this while, before sending me a letter in June saying that the subject (organisational science) of the treatise is outside the ambit of the faculty who would judge it.
I was amazed to get this reply. I have produced more than 50 PhDs and written plenty of books in metallurgy and other subjects. I have challenged the university, but have not received any reply so far.
The apathetic attitude of the government too is to be blamed for filling selection committees with people who see the VC as nothing more than an administrator who can manage various committees. I have myself been told once that was the only job of a VC.
So what can save the university? Certain radical changes at the grassroots level in the education system as well as a broad minded, well read and academic VC. However, the VC should preferably be a local, who understands the politics and wants to rise above it.
One of the radical changes can be as simple as nominating members of board of studies, rather than electing them. These should be senior academicians, who will have no vested interest. Good universities like BHU bring in a lot of executive members from outside the state, and the government. In BHU, the eight external executive members include dignitaries like Jayant Narlikar and Vice President Abdul Hamid Ansari.
Only educationists should be brought in for management. Instead of giving affiliation to colleges, the university should rate teachers. Every college should display stature of staff, and let students decide where they want to study. Some minimum norms should be evolved, which every college should follow. These should be displayed on the board.
Most important, there should be an academic audit. The VC usually lands up doing only administrative jobs at this level. Let the VC govern only post graduate students and research.
(The writer is former chairman, board of governors, VNIT, and former member of all executive bodies of university)
0 comments:
Post a Comment