American politicians and financial houses supported free economy for almost five decades. They had phenomenal success of the American financial institutions as evidence to prove their point. These companies were apparently self regulating themselves and working for the benefits of the shareholders. It seemed perfectly fine until one day nearly all of them collapsed together and needed support from tax payers for their day-to-day operations. Now the same American politicians are talking for tougher regulations for the financial market.
I have not a big fan of television and do not watch it very often so I have been alien to what is happening on the cable television for the TRPs. Each of these cable network wants more and more viewers at the cost of anything. Until now these cable channels have got free hand from the government to show whatever they want to produce but now some of the channels have gone to far in exploiting this freedom. At the moment, these channels have to follow only guidelines prescribed in Cable Television Network (regulation) Act 1995. This act was brought to stop some of the foreign channels (e.g. FTV, etc) being broadcasted freely to the public. I remember in my city some of the people burnt down their TV set when these programmes broadcast initially almost 15 years back. This act gave teeth to the I&B ministry and it worked fine till recently.
Now the time has changed again and there is challenge to stop the abuse of freedom by the Cable Networks. The channels response to the production of these reality programs (e.g. Sach Ka Saamna, Dadagiri, Bal Vivah, Rakhi Sawant ka ... etc) are very similar. They choose one or more of the following defence arguments. Any combination of these arguments seem very convincing but if we try to look deeper these are hollow arguments and does not serve any purpose on ground for masses. Lets discuss each of them.
1. It follows the guidelines of the Cable Act 1995. The guidelines of the Cable Act 1995 are irrelevant to what they are producing. This act had some other purpose (to stop free semi-porn channels) when in-acted rather than regulating the content. As the challenges before the I&B ministry are different so this law need to be amended. These programs are promoting cheap mentality that no responsible producer should produce but it is debatable if they are responsible.
2. There is freedom for the viewer to change channel and not watch. where is the choice if someone wants to change the channel. All the channels are competing in producing low grade programs. People can shut the TV at all, that is the only option left. But people do not buy TV or cable connection to shut the TV.
3. Program is air at late night time. Is this really late night at 10 PM? A large number of people who have access to electricity sleep between 11-12 PM or even later. And when there is advertising all the day and week for a particular program that is aired 10PM and Vinod Kambli says that he did not have good relationship with Sachin, how can people miss that program? No mater next week it might be TV start talking about watching male striptease and adultery.
4. There is warning and children should not watch this program. When does Indian children and parents started to bother to read or listen such warnings? Do all the programs rated by any independent body? There is no such mechanism in place. So how does we or even the producer of the program know which program is suitable for children or even adults?
5. Khajuraho has more nude sculpture than our program. Khajuraho is not about nudity and vulgarity. It is pure art. Any sensible person who has interest in art must know that vulgarity and art do not go together even though both can have nudity.
6. This format of program is very popular internationally. Program should be made for the taste of the local culture, tradition and needs. People should know what is happening in the world and how the other cultures are but there is no need to bombard common masses with something that is not normal or acceptable in other, so-called advanced, societies.
7. There are so many channels today, how to regulate them? Regulation does not mean censorship of each and every program. A independent regularity body means that when a case is brought to the bodies attention, it can check and judge the program against some pre-defined standards and guidelines. This regulatory body will need resources but there are so many channels why not charge a small amount to each channel for maintenance of the regulatory body?
Our observation shows that current system has inadequate powers to stop channels from producing unbearable and non-sense programs and this generate need for an independent regulatory body for Cable channels in India.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
UPCC chief Rita Joshi should resign
This is a very low time in the UP Congress politics when a women from Congress ask the price to be paid for Mayawati's rape. Equally Mayawati and her party workers are wrong in burning the house of UPCC chief Ms Joshi. Violence is not answer to politics and it can not solve any political issue.
Some video footage shows that Mayawati had used exactly similar language for Mulayam Singh when she was in opposition. (only difference is that she offered Rs 4 lacs but Ms Joshi offered Rs 1 crore, may be there is high inflation). But this argument can not justify what Ms Joshi commented. Ms Joshi might be furious on the scheme that provide compensation to the rape victims and she wanted to criticise that but this is not the way to criticise or oppose. She is currently Chief of the UPCC and expected to play key role in national politics in 5-10 years. Her behavior and comments have raised a question on her suitability for national role in politics. Someone who do not know how to respect individuals but still oppose their actions should not have much role in national politics or even state politics when the state is the largest state in the country.
If people are not punished through proper channel they get encouragement to continue to use their abusive language and actions. It is not about which party such people belongs to rather it is about cleaning the political system. We have many criminals in the politics but none of them has been convicted in the court so they can be given benefit of doubt but in case of Mrs. Joshi, there is not doubt so she should be punished by the party and forced to resign from her current posts. At the same time, there should be proper enquiry to identify who torched her house in her absence. It will be difficult to have unbiased enquiry because gut feeling says it must be instigated by Ms Mayawati and her supporters.
Some video footage shows that Mayawati had used exactly similar language for Mulayam Singh when she was in opposition. (only difference is that she offered Rs 4 lacs but Ms Joshi offered Rs 1 crore, may be there is high inflation). But this argument can not justify what Ms Joshi commented. Ms Joshi might be furious on the scheme that provide compensation to the rape victims and she wanted to criticise that but this is not the way to criticise or oppose. She is currently Chief of the UPCC and expected to play key role in national politics in 5-10 years. Her behavior and comments have raised a question on her suitability for national role in politics. Someone who do not know how to respect individuals but still oppose their actions should not have much role in national politics or even state politics when the state is the largest state in the country.
If people are not punished through proper channel they get encouragement to continue to use their abusive language and actions. It is not about which party such people belongs to rather it is about cleaning the political system. We have many criminals in the politics but none of them has been convicted in the court so they can be given benefit of doubt but in case of Mrs. Joshi, there is not doubt so she should be punished by the party and forced to resign from her current posts. At the same time, there should be proper enquiry to identify who torched her house in her absence. It will be difficult to have unbiased enquiry because gut feeling says it must be instigated by Ms Mayawati and her supporters.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Can sanction drive democratic change in China?
Sanction is not a new method to teach a lesson to someone who is going out of way. Parents sanction their kids, village panchayat used to announce sanctions against anyone doing something wrong or immoral. They work in many cases but when they have been used in broader perspective in global politics then the effectiveness of sanction is doubtful. Current phenomenon of economic sanction has started after the world war 2 and formation of United Nations. But time and again, even the smaller countries (e.g. Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba etc) have not vowed under the economic sanctions.
In case of smaller countries, they get some sympathiser country (ies) who support them and the impact of sanction is minimised. But in case of China, impact will be on the country that will try to cut economic/trade relationship with China. Most of the major countries, who fancy the use of sanctions, are also large consumer of products produced in China. Though human right violation might be rampant in the country but a large number of customer need cheap goods, essential or non-essential. In the last two decades, production has sifted to China from the consumer countries and the current income level in the developed countries is not good enough to support purchasing power if goods are produced with ethical practices.
It is not always about the cheap products but even the branded companies (e.g. Apple, Sony, GM, Walmart, Marks and Spencer or Debenham etc) have production facilities in China. If the sanctions have to used against Chinese government then the production facilities have to be moved out of China eventually if not immediately. With the environment concern and workers right and pension scheme, none of the developed country will be ready to accept these polluting production plants.
Thought he use of labour without (or little) rights and human right violation can not be accepted but one should not forget that the developed countries of today have used all short of cheap labour (e.g. slaves) when they were industrialising themselves. People have to work hard and long hours if the country need to progress in materialistic world. The problem with China is that most of the people have no option to choose this life, they have to work hard and long hours.
In current market situations, no country or world community would care to isolate themselves from Chinese economy. China is not only major exported of cheap/ low cost goods but also biggest consumer of products of foreign brands. Companies see future growth in Asia (and particularly China). A large number of countries who talk about human right violations in China have some sort of involvement in human right violation around the world. NATO countries and America are violating all human rights in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They did same in Iran. Very few countries took any action against Israel when it attacked Palestine (or Gaza strip). People are not allowed even the drinking water tanks supplied by UN.
Theoretically it is possible to use sanctions against China but pragmatically they are possible and neither they will have big impact on China to change its policies and governance. In the end, they are serving our purpose - supplying cheap goods. So why bother.
In case of smaller countries, they get some sympathiser country (ies) who support them and the impact of sanction is minimised. But in case of China, impact will be on the country that will try to cut economic/trade relationship with China. Most of the major countries, who fancy the use of sanctions, are also large consumer of products produced in China. Though human right violation might be rampant in the country but a large number of customer need cheap goods, essential or non-essential. In the last two decades, production has sifted to China from the consumer countries and the current income level in the developed countries is not good enough to support purchasing power if goods are produced with ethical practices.
It is not always about the cheap products but even the branded companies (e.g. Apple, Sony, GM, Walmart, Marks and Spencer or Debenham etc) have production facilities in China. If the sanctions have to used against Chinese government then the production facilities have to be moved out of China eventually if not immediately. With the environment concern and workers right and pension scheme, none of the developed country will be ready to accept these polluting production plants.
Thought he use of labour without (or little) rights and human right violation can not be accepted but one should not forget that the developed countries of today have used all short of cheap labour (e.g. slaves) when they were industrialising themselves. People have to work hard and long hours if the country need to progress in materialistic world. The problem with China is that most of the people have no option to choose this life, they have to work hard and long hours.
In current market situations, no country or world community would care to isolate themselves from Chinese economy. China is not only major exported of cheap/ low cost goods but also biggest consumer of products of foreign brands. Companies see future growth in Asia (and particularly China). A large number of countries who talk about human right violations in China have some sort of involvement in human right violation around the world. NATO countries and America are violating all human rights in Afghanistan and Pakistan. They did same in Iran. Very few countries took any action against Israel when it attacked Palestine (or Gaza strip). People are not allowed even the drinking water tanks supplied by UN.
Theoretically it is possible to use sanctions against China but pragmatically they are possible and neither they will have big impact on China to change its policies and governance. In the end, they are serving our purpose - supplying cheap goods. So why bother.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Gujarat can live without alcohol ban
107 dies of drinking home-made alcohol, Modi should resign, hooch available despite crackdown. It seems that the time has come when the state government of Gujarat should allow the sell of alcohol in authorised shops. We are living in 21st century, India is free country, why a state should ban alcohol? All these questions seems relevant and logical but it can not be allowed in the state where Gandhi was born.
Does Gandhi belong to only one state? No one ask this question? Why not ban alcohol in whole India? Are we really following the teachings of Gandhi? Rural empowerment and Hindu-Muslim harmony, for example. Answer are unanimously NO. Then why this hypocracy in Gujarat? It is more political than social. Something started by Congress party and being followed by successive governments. This topic is a burning hot potato that no one wants to touch or talk about. If Modi government decide to lift the ban then Congress will play political card and try to dismiss the Gujarat government. Though some people drink alcohol in Gujarat but it is not a mass practice, I believe. A large number of people would not like the idea of making alcohol legal in the state. They will care if some people die of drinking illegal alcohol. What does matter to the parties are number of votes in next elections and not social reforms.
If the political parties really want to legalise the sell of alcohol in the state they should come together and pass a resolution in the state assembly. They may first need to come in public and say they want to lift the ban. Parties may need to educate their workers at grass root level to pass the message that it is for public good and not to hurt the feelings of Gandhi's.
At the moment, even the families and relatives of the deceased will accuse their dead relative for drinking alcohol at the first place. A large number of them are, generally, low paid daily wage workers. Alcohol brings family tension and drain on the resources, it is hated by the family members, anyway. They might show outrage feeling when provoked by the national media but they will settle down and forget this tragedy eventually. No loss of vote bank.
We might think the policy is wrong in current time but first people need the social change to accept the new policy of legalising alcohol sell in the state before anything can happen.
Does Gandhi belong to only one state? No one ask this question? Why not ban alcohol in whole India? Are we really following the teachings of Gandhi? Rural empowerment and Hindu-Muslim harmony, for example. Answer are unanimously NO. Then why this hypocracy in Gujarat? It is more political than social. Something started by Congress party and being followed by successive governments. This topic is a burning hot potato that no one wants to touch or talk about. If Modi government decide to lift the ban then Congress will play political card and try to dismiss the Gujarat government. Though some people drink alcohol in Gujarat but it is not a mass practice, I believe. A large number of people would not like the idea of making alcohol legal in the state. They will care if some people die of drinking illegal alcohol. What does matter to the parties are number of votes in next elections and not social reforms.
If the political parties really want to legalise the sell of alcohol in the state they should come together and pass a resolution in the state assembly. They may first need to come in public and say they want to lift the ban. Parties may need to educate their workers at grass root level to pass the message that it is for public good and not to hurt the feelings of Gandhi's.
At the moment, even the families and relatives of the deceased will accuse their dead relative for drinking alcohol at the first place. A large number of them are, generally, low paid daily wage workers. Alcohol brings family tension and drain on the resources, it is hated by the family members, anyway. They might show outrage feeling when provoked by the national media but they will settle down and forget this tragedy eventually. No loss of vote bank.
We might think the policy is wrong in current time but first people need the social change to accept the new policy of legalising alcohol sell in the state before anything can happen.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Zardari admits nurturing Taliban and anti-India militants
A while ago US secretary of state Hillary Clinton had admitted that US played key role in creating Taliban in Pakistan and now the President of Pakistan Mr Asif Ali Zardari admits in an interview that the taliban were created and nurtured as a policy to gain some short-term benefits. It is a very candid admission from the head of state of Pakistan. Though it has always been known to the world that Pakistan has systematically supported the terrorist organizations in India since 1990s but official statement had been that they sympathise with the people of Kashmir.
He has also pointed out that civil government is not weak and now no one is interested in having the taliban in the country. This shows that the country and the civil administration think that there is no way to hurt the neighbours and not being suffer by the same for long. Though the credit should go to Mr Mussaraf for taking a strong stand to eradicate the talibans from Pakistan and have good relationship with India and US. It is hard to believe that some of the officials are still not supporting, actively or passively, to the militants in Pakistan. Over the last two decades a whole generation has developed a mindset that the militants are heroes and they are doing good for the Pakistan and the people of Kashmir.
Mr Zardari's admission also shows his willingness to have good ties with its eastern neighbour, India. India should also reciprocate the positive signs shown by Pakistan and start the discussion at all the levels. As I have always been supporter of strong economic relationship between the two countries to mitigate the risk of distrust and develop confidence in each other, during this time of recession it will be more helpful for each country.
This change in policy is welcomed and time has come for the countries to move decisively.
He has also pointed out that civil government is not weak and now no one is interested in having the taliban in the country. This shows that the country and the civil administration think that there is no way to hurt the neighbours and not being suffer by the same for long. Though the credit should go to Mr Mussaraf for taking a strong stand to eradicate the talibans from Pakistan and have good relationship with India and US. It is hard to believe that some of the officials are still not supporting, actively or passively, to the militants in Pakistan. Over the last two decades a whole generation has developed a mindset that the militants are heroes and they are doing good for the Pakistan and the people of Kashmir.
Mr Zardari's admission also shows his willingness to have good ties with its eastern neighbour, India. India should also reciprocate the positive signs shown by Pakistan and start the discussion at all the levels. As I have always been supporter of strong economic relationship between the two countries to mitigate the risk of distrust and develop confidence in each other, during this time of recession it will be more helpful for each country.
This change in policy is welcomed and time has come for the countries to move decisively.
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Delhi high courst supports Indian culture of Pluralism minus 377
Delhi high court has strike down the section 377 of Indian Panel court. This is a colonial rule that made any kind of "un-natural" sex criminal offence. There is mix reaction in the society, human rights activists and AIDS workers are supporting it and some religious organizations are condemning it and may challenge in the Supreme court.
No doubt some of the laws may not fit well with the religious philosophies and the tradition of the society to support human rights but in this case situation has not gone too far. Everyone has a right to lead his/her life in a free society and sex is private affair and the state or the court should not interfere between the two consensual adults. This is the argument that court has given in decriminalising the homosexual behaviour.
On the other hand, some organizations are planning to challenge this ruling on the basis of Indian tradition, culture and religions. They fail to understand that they are supporting a colonial rule. As the word "un-natural" comes from a catholic religious philosophy and it does not have much value for the Indian philosophy and traditions. The purpose of the sex in Europe was for reproduction only and not for creation or entertainment.
Firstly, Indian culture, pre-colonial era, does not have any indication that same sex relationship is offensive or people should be punished for having homosexual urg. In fact, it has been shown in Khajuraho and some south India temple exlicitly. If it was so offensive then it would have not found place in those art works. Not only that, there is mention of same-sex love (Krishna and Arjun) and gender change (e.g. Shikhandi in Mahabharta and Narayan during Samundra manthan). Though this love might not mean physical relationship but it is clear that these behaviour were acceptable though not glorified.
Secondly, Indian culture has been a plural society. It has accepted and respected people of different believes and non-believes. There is not question for Indian society to reject some people who want to live with people of same-sex.
Bigger questions are the marriage between same-sex partners and right to adopt children. As marriage is mainly an act to protect the rights of partners and property so if the law allow this even without marriage (through a will or power of authority) that can work in a similar fashion as marriage. (Marriage in the court is also a contract anyway). They are consenting "adults" who have right to live as they wish to but they should not be allowed to impose their will on some children by adopting them or by producing through surrogate mothers and sperm donation. As the same-sex partners have right to liberty and live, they should allow others the same rights and freedom.
No doubt some of the laws may not fit well with the religious philosophies and the tradition of the society to support human rights but in this case situation has not gone too far. Everyone has a right to lead his/her life in a free society and sex is private affair and the state or the court should not interfere between the two consensual adults. This is the argument that court has given in decriminalising the homosexual behaviour.
On the other hand, some organizations are planning to challenge this ruling on the basis of Indian tradition, culture and religions. They fail to understand that they are supporting a colonial rule. As the word "un-natural" comes from a catholic religious philosophy and it does not have much value for the Indian philosophy and traditions. The purpose of the sex in Europe was for reproduction only and not for creation or entertainment.
Firstly, Indian culture, pre-colonial era, does not have any indication that same sex relationship is offensive or people should be punished for having homosexual urg. In fact, it has been shown in Khajuraho and some south India temple exlicitly. If it was so offensive then it would have not found place in those art works. Not only that, there is mention of same-sex love (Krishna and Arjun) and gender change (e.g. Shikhandi in Mahabharta and Narayan during Samundra manthan). Though this love might not mean physical relationship but it is clear that these behaviour were acceptable though not glorified.
Secondly, Indian culture has been a plural society. It has accepted and respected people of different believes and non-believes. There is not question for Indian society to reject some people who want to live with people of same-sex.
Bigger questions are the marriage between same-sex partners and right to adopt children. As marriage is mainly an act to protect the rights of partners and property so if the law allow this even without marriage (through a will or power of authority) that can work in a similar fashion as marriage. (Marriage in the court is also a contract anyway). They are consenting "adults" who have right to live as they wish to but they should not be allowed to impose their will on some children by adopting them or by producing through surrogate mothers and sperm donation. As the same-sex partners have right to liberty and live, they should allow others the same rights and freedom.
Friday, July 03, 2009
Mamta's rail budget misses the inter-linked problems of train
Rail minister Mamta benerjee presented her populist rail budget and she made it clear that running rail network is not only for economic consideration but also social benefit. She has been successful in announcing some schemes that will help the poor and frequent travellers in earning some 'Izzat' (dignity) but it will not solve their problem. A large number of 'daily' passengers travel without ticket or they use monthly pass. Monthly pass cost around 4-6 times of this new scheme. A large number of the passengers can afford that. Anyway any concession is welcomed by the passengers.
Passengers will appreciate this for sometime and they will very soon critics the rail department for their real problems - over crowded trains, dirty toilets, lack of drinking water and low frequency. When we know that there are so many people who need cheap travel pass then why not we think of providing enough trains. If there are not enough trains then the trains will remain crowded and the other schemes - sanitation and security - will not be effective. When in a compartment of seating capacity 96 there are almost 300 passengers travelling then there is no practical way to provide clean toilets. When everyone rubbing and pushing body of 3-4 other fellow passengers then how come we imagine that the women will be able keep their modesty? TTC (ticket collector) can not move in a compartment, its anyone guess how the security persons will patrol the train or the doctor will reach the much needed passengers?
In over sixty years, Indian railway has been unsuccessful in providing clean toilets on the train stations. The rail ministry should accept this weakness and invite the private operators or NGOs (e.g. Sulabh) to operate toilets on the train stations in big and medium cities. Of course, it will not be free but the free systems had not worked. If the ministry wants they can still continue to operate some free toilets but there should be enough clean toilets on the stations or rather platforms considering the mammoth size of train station in India. It takes almost 20 minutes to come out and go back to station in Delhi. Special attention need to be given to toilets for women and kids. At large number of places, there is no facility for women toilets. This is appalling.
Though she (as did Lalu for five years) has tried to address these problems by creating 50 world class train stations. These are in planning stage only and will take over 20 years to complete if ever completed given the size of the task. In the end, they will be started with Delhi, Kolkata and Mumbai only. These are big cities and the station renovation tasks will takes years and lots of money. ministers will come and go and will keep proposing changes to plans. In my view this project should be started from a smaller station in the list of 50 stations. The pilot project will be short and will give rail authorities to learn from the experiment quickly.
Other announcement of running double Decker coaches to increase the capacity looks very nice on paper but in practical it is not feasible. Technically it is feasible but the problem with implementation is of the height of the bridges in route. All the bridges that the train crosses are not under rail department, a large number of them comes under surface transport department of state governments. Most of the state governments run in deficit and they are, in general, very keen in building new bridges for the rail. The rail department does not want to build bridges for the surface department either and the projects stop in negotiation for years for each bridge. Other technical solution can be to build underground rail lines near the Bridges but they are too expensive to build and manage. So this proposal will hardly ever get green light.
At the moment, capacity building is the main task for the rail department as the department is running lot behind the young population , that is very mobile, increase.
Passengers will appreciate this for sometime and they will very soon critics the rail department for their real problems - over crowded trains, dirty toilets, lack of drinking water and low frequency. When we know that there are so many people who need cheap travel pass then why not we think of providing enough trains. If there are not enough trains then the trains will remain crowded and the other schemes - sanitation and security - will not be effective. When in a compartment of seating capacity 96 there are almost 300 passengers travelling then there is no practical way to provide clean toilets. When everyone rubbing and pushing body of 3-4 other fellow passengers then how come we imagine that the women will be able keep their modesty? TTC (ticket collector) can not move in a compartment, its anyone guess how the security persons will patrol the train or the doctor will reach the much needed passengers?
In over sixty years, Indian railway has been unsuccessful in providing clean toilets on the train stations. The rail ministry should accept this weakness and invite the private operators or NGOs (e.g. Sulabh) to operate toilets on the train stations in big and medium cities. Of course, it will not be free but the free systems had not worked. If the ministry wants they can still continue to operate some free toilets but there should be enough clean toilets on the stations or rather platforms considering the mammoth size of train station in India. It takes almost 20 minutes to come out and go back to station in Delhi. Special attention need to be given to toilets for women and kids. At large number of places, there is no facility for women toilets. This is appalling.
Though she (as did Lalu for five years) has tried to address these problems by creating 50 world class train stations. These are in planning stage only and will take over 20 years to complete if ever completed given the size of the task. In the end, they will be started with Delhi, Kolkata and Mumbai only. These are big cities and the station renovation tasks will takes years and lots of money. ministers will come and go and will keep proposing changes to plans. In my view this project should be started from a smaller station in the list of 50 stations. The pilot project will be short and will give rail authorities to learn from the experiment quickly.
Other announcement of running double Decker coaches to increase the capacity looks very nice on paper but in practical it is not feasible. Technically it is feasible but the problem with implementation is of the height of the bridges in route. All the bridges that the train crosses are not under rail department, a large number of them comes under surface transport department of state governments. Most of the state governments run in deficit and they are, in general, very keen in building new bridges for the rail. The rail department does not want to build bridges for the surface department either and the projects stop in negotiation for years for each bridge. Other technical solution can be to build underground rail lines near the Bridges but they are too expensive to build and manage. So this proposal will hardly ever get green light.
At the moment, capacity building is the main task for the rail department as the department is running lot behind the young population , that is very mobile, increase.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Is India ready for exam-less education?
HRD minister Mr Sibal plans to scrap the class 10 board exams citing pressure and trauma students have to bear. It is true that it puts lot of pressure on the student when s/he enter the class 10. It is like do it now or never. Even the parents are in panic mode when their kids start board examination preparation. Media ran emotional video footage of parents crying after their kids commit suicide fearing to fail the exams. But, will scraping the exam solve the problem? and if yes, at what level. see some recent headlines in media
BSc student commit suicide after failing in exams in Kanpur,
Failing to get job, IIT student commit suicide,
Student fails class 12 exams, commits suicide,
16-year old student commits suicide fearing board exams.
This shows that the fear of exam is at every level of education and career. It is something that will continue to haunt anyone who wants to succeed or compete. If we analyse any of these case, we will find that students or their parents were not afraid of the exam itself but the results and consequences later on. When someone fails at any level s/he has to wait for another year to clear the exam again. In some cases, the student has to attend all the classes and subjects again. Even the courses one has passed. This is ridiculous and put extra burden on student to study same things again for another year. Yes, there are some boards who allow the students to take exams for only the course they have failed but the process is too slow. It still takes another year or 10 months. As a result, student can not go to next step without being late for one year.
We can not devalue our education system. It may be tough on students and difficult to compete but it is what that gives our nation strength to become knowledge center for world's leading companies. IT sector we are proud of is result of our tough education standards. It is so tough but productive that US president Obama wants US kids to match up with the kids in India and China. In the era of knowledge economy this is what nations can assert their supremacy.
We need to find a system that keeps the intrinsic value of our education system without putting undue pressure on the students, particularly who can/do not want to compete. One of solutions, I recently found is on-demand examination. Everyone who fails should have opportunity to register for on-demand exams for any subject on any date. It will take the burden of failing and missing the race from students off. Result of these exams should come within a week time so that these students do not miss any opportunity.
Off course, everything can not wait for someone who fails 10 or 20 times in these on-demand exams but it gives an opportunity to cover the losses to them who failed. For example a student who has over 90% marks in science and mathematics course but failed in language course may be given temporary admission in next class assuming that s/he will get at least minimum passing marks (33% or 40%) in the on-demand exam of that subject. This assumption will bring the overall percentage down for the moment but it is still helpful for the student to study further without missing anything.
No doubt there will be some students who will cheat the system and do not spend any time preparing for their least favourite subject and pass later on through on-demand scheme. But they can be differentiated or we may allow this cheating for greater good.
BSc student commit suicide after failing in exams in Kanpur,
Failing to get job, IIT student commit suicide,
Student fails class 12 exams, commits suicide,
16-year old student commits suicide fearing board exams.
This shows that the fear of exam is at every level of education and career. It is something that will continue to haunt anyone who wants to succeed or compete. If we analyse any of these case, we will find that students or their parents were not afraid of the exam itself but the results and consequences later on. When someone fails at any level s/he has to wait for another year to clear the exam again. In some cases, the student has to attend all the classes and subjects again. Even the courses one has passed. This is ridiculous and put extra burden on student to study same things again for another year. Yes, there are some boards who allow the students to take exams for only the course they have failed but the process is too slow. It still takes another year or 10 months. As a result, student can not go to next step without being late for one year.
We can not devalue our education system. It may be tough on students and difficult to compete but it is what that gives our nation strength to become knowledge center for world's leading companies. IT sector we are proud of is result of our tough education standards. It is so tough but productive that US president Obama wants US kids to match up with the kids in India and China. In the era of knowledge economy this is what nations can assert their supremacy.
We need to find a system that keeps the intrinsic value of our education system without putting undue pressure on the students, particularly who can/do not want to compete. One of solutions, I recently found is on-demand examination. Everyone who fails should have opportunity to register for on-demand exams for any subject on any date. It will take the burden of failing and missing the race from students off. Result of these exams should come within a week time so that these students do not miss any opportunity.
Off course, everything can not wait for someone who fails 10 or 20 times in these on-demand exams but it gives an opportunity to cover the losses to them who failed. For example a student who has over 90% marks in science and mathematics course but failed in language course may be given temporary admission in next class assuming that s/he will get at least minimum passing marks (33% or 40%) in the on-demand exam of that subject. This assumption will bring the overall percentage down for the moment but it is still helpful for the student to study further without missing anything.
No doubt there will be some students who will cheat the system and do not spend any time preparing for their least favourite subject and pass later on through on-demand scheme. But they can be differentiated or we may allow this cheating for greater good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)