Quality is just a distant dream

Updated on: Monday, June 07, 2010

A visit of the high-powered committee revealed the pathetic status of a majority of the centres. The committee found that barring three or four, most of them have no building of their own to function, some are using one premises for admitting/enrolling of candidates and some other place for conducting classes, and a couple of them resemble a stall or a shop. Many centres were found conducting contact classes in a building by renting it for a short period and conducting examinations at different places.

There were no libraries in a majority of the centres and some kept guides/bazaar notes or a question-answer series for use of students instead of providing reference book as prescribed in the syllabus. The committee also found a book published a private publisher using Bangalore University's name on its cover page, giving the impression to the buyer/reader that it is printed by Bangalore University. Other major lacunae included inadequate number of teaching staff and poor level of qualification of teaching staff in many centres.

Grievances

On their side, the study centres have blamed the Directorate for several reasons. Some of the grievances submitted by the study centres before the committee are: delayed approval granted by the Directorate to admit candidates, study materials not being supplied in time and many times reaching centres when only two months are left for the exams, sharing of fee between University and centres being reduced, expenses of conducting exams being borne by the centres, non-supply of copies of syllabus and late receipt of admission tickets.

The committee found that there is in fact a delay in granting permission to admit candidates. It also felt that courses which are currently in demand are not offered by the Directorate and the fee structure is high compared to those of non-Karnataka distance education fees.

As the committee went deeper into the issues, it found that the subject content of most of the study materials was substandard, not updated periodically and full of mistakes, which are repeated in every subsequent reprint. Also, the printing and study materials provided by the Directorate were unattractive. The Directorate was not auditing expenses of the study centres as per the norms, and no periodical supervision, monitoring, and inspection of study centres was being carried out. Referring to the examinations, the committee pointed out that no steps were taken to prevent entry of unauthorised persons into the examination centres, or seek measures such as police security or prevent malpractices.

Regarding renewing the recognition of study centres for 2009-10, the committee, in its recommendation, has asked the university to give five to six weeks for 20 centres (see list) to improve facilities and withdraw recognition if they fail to comply with norms within the stipulated time. It recommended continuation of recognition for nine centres.

Transparency

To make the Directorate more transparent, the committee suggested installation of closed-circuit cameras and video footage of study-cum-examination centres.

The committee suggested that the University overhaul the Directorate by constituting a team of experts and expand its activities keeping in view futuristic developments and technological advances.

As the varsity Syndicate, in its meeting held on May 31, accepted the committee's report (submitted in November 2009), it remains to be seen whether the university will select only the colleges affiliated to universities as study centres for distance education, for maintaining quality in higher education.

Quality is just a distant dream

More Education news