Nine months after his appointment, Anna University Vice-Chancellor M.K. Surappa has identified areas in technical education that require urgent attention. He is now faced with protests by sections of students of affiliated private engineering colleges who are opposing the university’s Choice Based Credit System. In a recent interview with The Hindu, he explains his plans to improve engineering education in the State and the new system.
Students from self-financing engineering colleges affiliated to the Anna University are opposing the Regulation 2017. How are you going to tackle this?
The university’s role is to produce quality engineers who are useful to society and can build the economy. Our responsibility is to provide them the right atmosphere, ecosystem, good teaching and learning process, laboratories.
When we admit students they must satisfy some minimum requirements. Institutions across the world have increased the rigour in evaluation and assessment process. If China has gone ahead of us, it is because they have raised their standards. You know I come from an institution where, even from the first semester if a student fails in more than two subjects, then she/he has to quit the programme. Even if it is at the end of the second year of a three-year programme, the student has to quit. Such rigour helps maintain the institution’s standard. The question is would you like to move in that direction, or dilute our efforts.
I had a discussion with very senior people of the university, but I have to get a formal approval of the Board of Studies and the Academic Council before it is placed in the Syndicate.
The whole idea is to provide an opportunity for students, perhaps to reappear for the exam. For each subject, I will give them three chances. [On Saturday, the university Registrar said steps were being taken to address the genuine concerns of the students.]
A section of teachers of private engineering colleges are also supporting the students. What is your response to them?
The regulation was framed by the UGC (University Grants Commission) to improve the quality of engineering education. Not to give hardship to students. We have a responsibility to the 50% students who are doing well, to carry them forward and make them good engineers, good technocrats.
You must have assessed the failure percentage among the students. What is your understanding?
We introduced the Regulations 2017 on campus two years ago. There is no difference between the old and new regulation in terms of the pass percentage. We have introduced two years ago in the affiliated colleges and even there there is no difference in some of the good colleges. Failure percentage is high in colleges which have admitted students with lower cut off marks. More than 50% of the students admitted have a cut off of less than 150 marks.
These are chronic colleges that have no teachers and infrastructure is also poor. Naturally the students are unable to cope. They have probably joined engineering out of social, peer or parental pressure or enticed to join with scholarship. In India, we must ensure there is an exit measure for students who cannot cope with the programme.
But it is the government’s policy to admit students with a mere pass in Plus Two in BE/BTech courses…
I also come from a rural background and had difficulty in the first semester. But I had to make up. In fact, the bar was very high to get a first class in the institute. Unless you have a passion for engineering and dedication, spend sufficient time, it is better to choose other avenues. Do you expect a man with 30 arrears to get a job?
How will you take this to the higher education department or the State government?
It is the decision of the Syndicate and University. The statutes dictate that I must produce quality engineers through quality education. The university has a Board of Studies, an Academic Council and a Syndicate.
But the composition of your Syndicate is such that is dominated by government officials.
Everybody is important to the system — the government, Vice-Chancellor, faculty and students, must all do their jobs. Unfortunately, the government secretaries repeatedly don’t attend the meetings. The government has yet to nominate six, seven members though I have sent a list. The government has not strengthened the university. This is making a joke of the system.
Haven’t some of these issues come to be accepted as the norm so far?
Somebody has to bell the cat. Why did my predecessors, the Education department, the secretaries, not do anything? Shouldn’t students be eligible for at least 50% of the facilities that NITs have? I have been visiting the constituent colleges and intend to visit all 16. Tears rolled down my eyes when I saw the condition of the students’ hostel in Ariyalur. Twelve students sleeping on the floor in one room? Do you want such a thing to happen in the 21st century? And expect high pass percentage from them? I have instructed people to give proposals. I have some funds that I can give the colleges. I have also represented to the government. It is the government’s responsibility to give. Post-merger with other universities issues of recruitment of faculty and non-teaching staff have not been sorted out yet. Fortunately, our four campuses are free of such problems.
