One important topic which never gets sufficient attention in curriculum design (school & university)
Does a series vs parallel arrangement matter?
For eg: 10 chapters of Phy, chem, bio
is it better/worse to do them as 30 chapters, 1 after the other (Science) or tri-forked PCB
same for history & geography.
Better to split them & run H&G in parallel; or does it make sense to do them one after the other (assuming total workload same in each case)
Parallel = mental clutter?
Don't think of CBSE-ICSE Sci
'coz for PCB (9-10) latter has 2.5-3x the portion
Govt. should increase testing centers (allow pvt too) but this absurd focus by @scroll_in newspeddlers on "tests per million" is outlandish: shows ignorance about sample sizes (they don't vary much with population size for large N); the focus has to be on sample quality not size.
1. social graph for diseases like this. The disease spreads from certain nodes. Finding one +ve case at the airport before he/she spreads the infection all over (root node for large cluster) is better than finding 100 cases deep inside the country. So not all tests are equal.
2. Sampling doesn't runs on linear scales. Assume some sort of stable state equilibrium with random tests: for the govt to get the approx. rate of infection, the required sample size doesn't increase increase linearly with the population (so "Test per million" doesn't say much)
VJTI churned out tens of thousands of good engineers over the years. So many of them contributed to the growth of Maharashtra. Over 130 yrs old. Too bad we let all these places go into a decline, even though it still remains popular in Maharashtra.
The same holds true for Institute of Chemical Technology (ICT)- known by its old name, the University Department of Chemical Technology (UDCT). Churned out thousands of excellent chem engineers. Mukesh Ambani is also from there! Many went to Stanford/MIT.
The core of the JNU quagmire has not been dissected. The VC is genuinely incompetent as an administrator, however what folk don't realize is, that their post-grad admission process was more like a foot-soldier-recruitment process. The VC disrupted that. Hence the shrieks.
- computerized exam (has its own issues) instead of a narrative one which recruited foot-soldiers with matching ideology
- minimum qualifying cutoff (50%)
- removing the travesty of deprivation points (quotas already exist!)
So, many PG/PhD seats vacant: fewer party-workers!
To identify the points leading to their simmering resentment, check this meandering article by their gang leaders. Very little focus on the academic angle of the exam (yes, MCQs have problems) but their multi-point resentment spills out.
What a Jamia BSc entrance paper looks like. Very basic questions of 11th-12th grade standard: this part is fine.
The cut-offs in such a trivial paper however, are as low as 40-50 on 100. There lies one part of the problem. No gate control for higher-ed. Anyone walks in.
Anything less than 70-80% in this trivial a paper indicates that the student isn't really college ready.
BA Entrance paper. 🥺
Bulk of the questions seem to be GK & trivia
but look at the standard of the English language and reasoning sections.
Is it any surprise that all these colleges are becoming violent ghettos. 7th grade in a half-decent school is more demanding.
Dual degrees were rolled out without sufficient thought & ended up getting a bad name; many places stopped these programs. But for those in a stream of interest, dual-programs open up a whole lot of options. BTechs graduate with just 1 focused yr (3rd yr). Momentum disrupted.
But the dual degree in some places is a nightmare.
IIIT-Hyd folk routinely take 6-7 years. Unrealistic expectations about publishing papers. But that's a private institution, not a JNU with guaranteed taxpayer funding to lifelong-students.
The best way forward will be to
(a) permit students to leave after 5 or 5.5 yrs with the UG degree, if their requirements for the ME or MTech are not completed.
(b) Allow the MS-MTech-ME in areas different from the UG if some pre-reqs have been completed
(c) No-thesis option