New Delhi – After repeated encounters in the United States where the issue of the dilution of the IIT brand (by abolishing the present JEE for IIT and other allied measures) was raised by Tejinder Singh, Editor of India America Today, Kapil Sibal, the Minister for Human Resource Development, promised a written explanation in support of his reform. Here is the unedited version of the paper received from his ministry.
Philosophy behind the national test –
The multiplicity of entrance examinations that a student has to appear for admission to engineering institutions has been a cause of concern. There are over 100 different admission tests administered at present for admission to engineering institutions across the country. The burden imposed on students in terms of time, payment of examination fees and the consequent stress in scheduling and preparing for multiple examinations is enormous. The students have to perforce restrict their choice of institutions for which they can compete. Government has been working on reforms in entrance examinations by moving towards a national test to reduce this burden and at the same time preserving the autonomy of the State Governments and Institutions in devising their admission process. This is consistent with international practice. Universities in the US, for example, rely on SAT as one of the parameters for admission. They do not conduct their own admission test. The same practice is adopted in UK where the performance in the A-levels forms a basis for admission. In the longer term, Government intends to cerate the environment for a SAT-kind of structure which is reliable, credible and can be used as a reference point for admission tests with each Institution having the autonomy to decide on additional parameters for admission without having to conduct its own separate test.
Another serious problem with the present system is the almost complete disregard of the secondary school system and neglect of education in schools impacting quality and access. Parents and children have been forced to seek access to outside-the-school instruction methods for preparation for multiple entrance examinations. The model of indoctrination through coaching for cracking admission tests disregarding the school as a place of education has to be discouraged. The proposed reform attempts to bring the schooling system centre-stage by giving weightage to performance in the Class XII Board examinations, the results of which will be normalized on percentile basis. The reform would, in the longer term, impact on the quality of secondary education by signaling the importance of secondary education in schools.
The third problem with the multiplicity of tests is that it encourages adoption of unacceptable practices for admission in some institutions. Instances of demand for capitation fees and admission disregarding merit have been noticed. Admission based on a single national test would provide assist in curtailing this practice to the benefit of the large student community and uphold the credibility of the higher education sector.
Therefore, the philosophy behind the national test has to be viewed in the larger context rather than limiting it to the IITs. The dialogue with State Governments is underway the Forum of State Education Ministers has given its approval to the national test. A few States have already expressed their decision to join in the national test. Other States have sought some time for a decision. A meeting with institutions deemed to be universities has been planned for 25th June to carry forward the dialogue with deemed universities.
Concerns expressed –
1) The proposal affects the autonomy of the IITs –
Fact : Those against the national test state that admission process is within the power of the Senate and the Government or the IIT Council cannot interfere in the autonomy of the Senates. The legal proposition behind this argument is inherently unsound. Section 15 of the Institution of Technology Act, 1961, reads as under:
Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Statutes and the Ordinances, the Senate on an Institute shall have the control and general regulation, and be responsible for the maintenance, of standards of instruction, education and examination in the Institute and shall exercise such other powers and perform such other duties as may be conferred or imposed upon it by the Statutes.
The above provision makes it clear that the powers of the Senate relate to maintenance of standards of instruction, education and examination in the Institute. This power is also subject to provisions of the Act, Statutes and Ordinances. Section 33(1) laying down the powers of the IIT Council states that it shall be the general duty of the Council to co-ordinate the activities of all Institutes. Clause (a) of section 33(2) specifically provides that the IIT Council shall advise on matters relating to the duration of courses and degrees, admission standards and other academic matters. This is being interpreted by some as restricting the role of the IIT Council to only an advisory capacity.
However, greater clarity can be obtained from the Ordinances. Reference can be made to Ordinance 1.3 of IIT-Kanpur, for example. The said Ordinance reads as under:
The minimum admission standards and the duration of each Programme, whether existing or new, shall be advised by the IIT Council.
There can be no doubt from a reading of this provision that the minimum admission standards shall be as advised by the IIT Council. The mandatory nature of the advice of the IIT Council can be understood from the use of the word “shall” in the Ordinance. (The President is also advised by the Council of Ministers but the President is expected to act in accordance with such advise). Ordinance 3.2 of IIt-Kanpur requires admission to be made on the basis of a Joint Entrance Examinations for all IITs. No IIT can, therefore, take a decision on its own to have its own examination for admission.
In order to appreciate this fact better, reference can also be made to Ordinance 1.2 of IIT-Kanpur. This requires the Board of the Institute to seek the advise of the IIT Council before starting any new programme. The IIT Council is a body infused with experts appointed by the Visitor, Director, IISc, Bangalore, Chairmen and Directors of all IITs, DG, CSIR, Chairman UGC, Chairman AICTE, three Members of Parliament and headed by the Minister of Human Resource Development. Surely it was never intended that such an august body should have a role for it to render advice and the Senate to cast it away. It may also be pertinent to mention that the powers of the IIT Council are not circumscribed or limited by the subordinate legislation such as Statutes or Ordinances unlike the Senates. Further, section 34(2) of the Act specifically casts a duty on the Chairman of the IIT-Council to ensure that the decisions of the IIT-Council are implemented.
IITs are institutions of excellence. The country can be justifiably proud of its achievements. The autonomy of the IIT system has to be respected for IITs to further enhance its reputation for excellence. No one, including those from within the IIT system, can deny that there has been severe disquiet in the distortions that have emerged in the admission system of IITs. The need for a change emerged from the IIT system in 2009 when there was a suggestion to increase the cut-off eligibility for admission from 60% to 80%, which was vehemently opposed by some States. After a long and tedious process over two years of deliberations, consultations and discussions and two separate Committees, the final formulation was accepted by the IIT Council. During this period, several other decisions that enhance the autonomy of the IIT system have been taken. In the same week as the outcry about the examinations, IIT-Delhi announced that it was opening an extension centre in Haryana. This was possible due to a decision in 2011 permitting IITs to expand provided they are able to obtain their own resources. IIT-Kharagpur has now established a centre in Dubai. Another decision taken recently is that the Chairman of the Board of Governors of IITs shall be appointed from a panel of names to be suggested by the Board of each Institute. Previously, the Chairman was appointed by the Minister of HRD as Chairman of the Council directly. A decision was taken in 2010 that the BoG of each IIT shall recommend a panel of names for appointment as Visitor’s nominees distancing the Ministry of HRD from the process of identification of names for nomination. By no means can the proposed admission standards and process be said to curtail the autonomy of IITs or limit its standards of excellence.
2) The new process will take away the control of IITs over their admission process
Fact – This is an irrational fear that mistrusts every other education system in the country. The decision of the IIT-Council for the sake of repetition is reproduced as under –
(ii) The Class XII Board/equivalent marks normalized on percentile basis through an appropriate formula plus the marks obtained in the JEE-MAIN examination, with equal weightage, would be used by IITs for purposes of gating/screening. Only a fixed number of candidates (five times the number of the seats for admission in the IIT system or a pre-fixed cut-off) screened on the basis of merit assessed on the basis of cumulative score of normalized School Board marks and performance in JEE-MAIN examination would be eligible to be considered for admission. The ranking for admission to undergraduate programmes in IITs would be based entirely on the performance in the JEE-ADVANCED examination from amongst the candidates screened through this process.
——
(iv) JEE-MAIN tests shall be multiple choice objective type paper whereas the nature and modalities of the JEE-ADVANCED shall be determined by the Joint Admission Board of IITs.
The above decision requires that performance in JEE-Advanced shall form the sole basis for ranking for the purposes of admission and that the nature and modalities of the JEE-Advanced shall be determined by the JAB of IITs. Therefore, control of the determining examination for admission to IITs would be solely in the hands of IITs. The decision on the cut-off for eligibility (cumulative Class XII Boards and JEE-Main) to be assessed in IIT-Advanced is to be taken by the JAB of IITs. Infact, the credibility that IITs bring to their examination process is proposed to be drawn upon for admission to other Central Institutions too. In so far as State Governments are concerned, the three States that have agreed to the process have all indicated that they would not require the JEE-Advanced and their admissions would be based on performance in Class XII Boards and JEE-Mains alone.
3) Is it not unfair to consider Board marks for admissions as different Boards have different marking patterns.
Fact – This question reflects lack of understanding of how Board marks would be considered. While it may be true that in some Boards it is easier to score than others. But it is not the marks but the percentile score in the Board that will be converted to 50 marks and taken into consideration. The rank in the Board exam would be important and not the absolute marks obtained.
This means if two students in different boards get 95 percent and 89 percent marks will still get same percentile score for qualifying if they get the same rank in their respective Boards. Hence relative differences of Boards will not make a difference.
Assume further that there are 1 lakh students who have cleared Class XII Board examinations. There would be 1000 students in the top 1 percentile with a percentile score of 99 or above. There would be 10,000 students in the top 10 percentile with percentile score of 90 and above. Weighting the percentile score with 50 percent (weightage for Class XII performance), the difference in scores between the top 10,000 students in the State would be 5 marks. If a student is brilliant and has not scored too well in the Class XII Boards, he can gain from his performance in JEE-Main and reach the cut-off point. If a student is average and has been able to score well in the Board exams using unfair means, the gain in percentile score can be lost very easily by average performance in the JEE-Main. The screening through Board percentile based marks and JEE Mains will ensure that only consistent performers and talented students move to the ranking stage for IITs. The new examination pattern will enable IITs to administer and maintain the quality of the JEE advance paper, which will be the basis for ranking for admission to the IIT system. Hence, the new pattern will enhance the quality of incoming students in IITs and there will be no dilution of the brand of IITs.
4) Should not the Government improve the secondary schooling system first before including school performance as a parameter for admission to IITs
Fact – There can be no second opinion that the quality of secondary education has to improve. This cannot be done by complete secession of the schooling system from admission to premier institutions and recourse to full-time coaching with the farce of attending school. The right signals of the importance to secondary schooling would create the demand pressure to improve the quality of secondary education in the longer term.
5) There is a demand for the JEE-Advanced to be a subjective-type paper whereas the decision requires the JEE-Advanced to be multiple choice type paper
Fact – This is factually incorrect. For clarity, the decision taken in the IIT-Council meeting on 28.5.2012 is reproduced as under –
(iv) JEE-MAIN tests shall be multiple choice objective type paper whereas the nature and modalities of the JEE-ADVANCED shall be determined by the Joint Admission Board of IITs.
The decision requires only the JEE-Main to be a multiple choice objective type paper whereas the nature and modalities of JEE-Advanced has to be decided by the JAB of IITs. A decision in this regard has to be mindful of the logistics of organizing the JEE-Advanced as well as the requirements of transparency under the Right to Information Act which now require answer sheets to be made available to the student and the possible queries that may emanate for revaluation and correction.
6) When the Senates have not accepted the proposed reform, is it proper for the change to take effect.
Fact – The decision was taken in the IIT Council on 14th September to move forward on the new admission process with effect from 2013. When some opposition emerged from within the IITs to the proposal, it was decided after a meeting with the Faculty Federation to formally seek the opinion of the Senates. The recommendations of the IIT Senates differed widely with IIT Guwahati expressing complete support for the proposal approved by the IIT Council in September, 2011, and IIT Bombay proposing to retain the present system with minor modifications at the other extreme. The recommendations of the other IITs spanned the range of qualified support to the proposal (IIT Madras, Kharagpur, Roorkee and Delhi) to substantial modification sought to the proposal (IIT Delhi).
By and large, the middle ground of opinions expressed by IIT Senates recommended that the Class XII Board results along with the National Test (Mains) be considered as screening or gating with the National Test (Advanced level) being solely used for ranking purposes for admission to undergraduate programmes. Some Senates had also proposed that a limited number of candidates (say 50,000) from the screening be eligible to appear in the Advanced test to be conducted by the IITs. Based on the recommendations of the Senates, the IIT Council in its meeting on 12.5.2012, decided to adopt the middle path and go along with the suggestion made by 4 of the 7 Senates in respect of the IITs. In so far as the NITs are concerned, the NIT Council unanimously reiterated on 28.5.2012 its earlier decision to adopt a 40:30:30 ratio for admission.
Kapil Sibal
Kapil Sibalis a lawyer and an active politician in India. He is currently the Minister of Human Resource Development and Minister of Communications and Information Technology.