There have been lots of discussion/debates among certain academic community who share the kind of concern expressed by Prof. Pankaj Jalote, not just in IITs but also in the higher education sector in general and central research institutes and universities in particular. There has been a hue and cry over `fall in quality’ and how to improve the quality of higher education, especially in the post 1990s. One major reason for the alleged fall in quality was the `governmental interferences’ as also mentioned in the Prof.Pankaj Jalote opinion as the autonomy of IIT is a `myth’ and also by citing some e.g. It is important to locate these debates in the context to understand the larger `forces’ that shaped it. 1990s was crucial period to understand the history of modern political India. The government’s decision to implement mandal commission report, the liberalization of country’s economy, the growth of identity politics of subaltern groups and also the rise of Hindutva politics happened during this period. As these factors are pertinent to the topic in debate I would like to go little further to show the link between these factors and the current debate on the falling standard of quality education and fixing the government for it. Studies have shown us that there was a near absence of OBCs, Dalits (both faculty and students) in these so called premier institutes (like IIT) ever since its inception and also there were ways and means to subvert the meager reservation made mandatory for the SCs and STs. The government’s decision to implement mandal commission was to make these exclusive spaces more inclusive. One has to welcome any such move in the otherwise deeply hierarchical society like ours. But the sudden hue and cry over falling standard of quality can ben seen as a response to the govt’s decision to implement 27% reservation for OBCs and also a strategy to subvert it. It is also important to notice the conspicuous absence of the notion of equality in any of these `how to improve the quality’ debates also in the above subject, which is of crucial important in a hierarchical society like ours. One can raise disturbing questions like why don’t you speak about equality which would lead to point out the problems of the positions taken in the above subject. Another major aspect I have with the Prof.Pankaj Jalote is that he is trying to put IIT vs universalities in other countries, especially US and countries which have, of late, been following neo-liberal market economic policies. As one goes through this topic one feels as if IIT has nothing to do with this society. And also the job of the national universities and the research institutes SHOULD NOT be to serve the market and its needs. If one feel so that is because of the intellectual dishonesty. IIT are established to fulfill certain objectives not to compete with other countries institute where social structure is entirely different from ours and also not to fight for ranking list. Criteria used for ranking is ultimate and perfect one? Any one criteria used for ranking in the list is there in the IITs objectives? International Publication and Prize award method is it not biased? The running of public institutes cannot be compared with that of the private as the former especially knowledge production centers like universities DO NOT run with the market principle of profiteering. It’s important to monitor what kind of knowledge these so called premier institutes like IIT are producing and who the products of these institutes serve. As more and more private forces, to name one TATA, are trying to take stake in the higher education, it becomes more important to see what role IIT like institute should have to perform. If one argues, by any means, that it has to continue to be exclusive spaces, then one goes against the very basic principle on which our constitution is founded, that is equality. The votaries of `global standard’, `competition’ etc (which is largely a discursive construct of the market economy) do not and will not understand the spirit of our constitution because they are blind to the social reality and lack insight Selection committee is existed in present day also, their duty is to suggest suitable candidate, but final selection power should not in the hands of again selection committee members. If these institutes are getting fund from the Government. Why they need autonomous, they must follow the guidelines of the Govt. If they need complete autonomy it is better to go for Capital Market instead of asking autonomy for Tax payer’s money. I will be happy if IIT education is accessible lowest section of our society without too much competition. There should be minimum one IIT in every state in the country. Then this is really tremendous achievement than being NO 1 in the World Ranking list. Thanks Manju Naika Send free SMS to your Friends on Mobile from your Yahoo! Messenger. Download Now! http://messenger.yahoo.com/download.php <!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --> There have been lots of discussion/debates among certain academic community who share the kind of concern expressed by Prof. Pankaj Jalote, not just in IITs but also in the higher education sector in general and central research institutes and universities in particular. There has been a hue and cry over `fall in quality’ and how to improve the quality of higher education, especially in the post 1990s. One major reason for the alleged fall in quality was the `governmental interferences’ as also mentioned in the Prof.Pankaj Jalote opinion as the autonomy of IIT is a `myth’ and also by citing some e.g. It is important to locate these debates in the context to understand the larger `forces’ that shaped it. 1990s was crucial period to understand the history of modern political India . The government’s decision to implement mandal commission report, the liberalization of country’s economy, the growth of identity politics of subaltern groups and also the rise of Hindutva politics happened during this period. As these factors are pertinent to the topic in debate I would like to go little further to show the link between these factors and the current debate on the falling standard of quality education and fixing the government for it. Studies have shown us that there was a near absence of OBCs, Dalits (both faculty and students) in these so called premier institutes (like IIT) ever since its inception and also there were ways and means to subvert the meager reservation made mandatory for the SCs and STs. The government’s decision to implement mandal commission was to make these exclusive spaces more inclusive. One has to welcome any such move in the otherwise deeply hierarchical society like ours. But the sudden hue and cry over falling standard of quality can ben seen as a response to the govt’s decision to implement 27% reservation for OBCs and also a strategy to subvert it. It is also important to notice the conspicuous absence of the notion of equality in any of these `how to improve the quality’ debates also in the above subject, which is of crucial important in a hierarchical society like ours. One can raise disturbing questions like why don’t you speak about equality which would lead to point out the problems of the positions taken in the above subject. Another major aspect I have with the Prof.Pankaj Jalote is that he is trying to put IIT vs universalities in other countries, especially US and countries which have, of late, been following neo-liberal market economic policies. As one goes through this topic one feels as if IIT has nothing to do with this society. And also the job of the national universities and the research institutes SHOULD NOT be to serve the market and its needs. If one feel so that is because of the intellectual dishonesty. IIT are established to fulfill certain objectives not to compete with other countries institute where social structure is entirely different from ours and also not to fight for ranking list. Criteria used for ranking is ultimate and perfect one? Any one criteria used for ranking in the list is there in the IITs objectives? International Publication and Prize award method is it not biased? The running of public institutes cannot be compared with that of the private as the former especially knowledge production centers like universities DO NOT run with the market principle of profiteering. It’s important to monitor what kind of knowledge these so called premier institutes like IIT are producing and who the products of these institutes serve. As more and more private forces, to name one TATA, are trying to take stake in the higher education, it becomes more important to see what role IIT like institute should have to perform. If one argues, by any means, that it has to continue to be exclusive spaces, then one goes against the very basic principle on which our constitution is founded, that is equality. The votaries of `global standard’, `competition’ etc (which is largely a discursive construct of the market economy) do not and will not understand the spirit of our constitution because they are blind to the social reality and lack insight Selection committee is existed in present day also, their duty is to suggest suitable candidate, but final selection power should not in the hands of again selection committee members. If these institutes are getting fund from the Government. Why they need autonomous, they must follow the guidelines of the Govt. If they need complete autonomy it is better to go for Capital Market instead of asking autonomy for Tax payer’s money. I will be happy if IIT education is accessible lowest section of our society without too much competition. There should be minimum one IIT in every state in the country. Then this is really tremendous achievement than being NO 1 in the World Ranking list. Thanks Manju Naika Send free SMS to your Friends on Mobile from your Yahoo! Messenger. Download Now! http://messenger.yahoo.com/download.php