SC Com­mis­sion blames IIM-I for stu­dent’s poor per­for­mance

SET­BACK Or­ders re­fund of full year’s fee to Sched­uled Caste stu­dent who did not per­form well in three semesters as she was ‘not pro­vided con­ducive at­mos­phere’ at In­dian In­sti­tute of Man­age­ment-In­dore WHY IIM-IN­DORE’S 5-YEAR COURSE IS IN THE DOCK

Hindustan Times (Delhi) - HT Education - - Front Page - Jee­van Prakash Sharma Gauri Kohli

The In­dian In­sti­tute of Man­age­ment, In­dore ( IIM- I) has been blamed by the Na­tional Com­mis­sion for Sched­uled Castes (NCSC) for fail­ing to pro­vide a ‘con­ducive at­mos­phere’ to its Sched­uled Caste (SC) stu­dent, Sak­shika Raghav.

Raghav had joined a five-year in­te­grated pro­gramme in man­age­ment (IPM) course of IIM-I in 2012. Her first-year CGPA (scores of all three semesters) had fallen short of the re­quired CGPA as she had done badly in non­man­age­ment sub­jects such as swim­ming, Bhag­wad Gita etc. She was asked to reap­pear or leave IIM-I and opted to quit.

Later, fil­ing a com­plaint with NCSC, Raghav blamed the in­sti­tute for her poor per­for­mance in three semesters of the first year. She had also al­leged that the IIM-I pro­gramme did not have the req­ui­site ap­provals as IIM- I didn’t have de­gree­grant­ing sta­tus. The in­sti­tute, how­ever, she al­leged, had not given her this in­for­ma­tion when ad­mit­ting her.

Agree­ing with Raghav, Raju Par­mar, NCSC mem­ber, in an or­der on June 23, 2015, af­ter hear­ing both the par­ties, said the fee for the full year paid by Raghav dur­ing ad­mis­sion had to be re­funded. The “rea­son was that Sak­shika was not pro­vided con­ducive at­mos­phere in the in­sti­tute re­sult­ing (in) bad per­for­mance by her in 1st se­mes­ter. I, there­fore, rec­om­mend for re­fund of full fees,” Par­mar said.

Sak­shika’s f a t h e r, T D Raghav, a re­tired sci­en­tist, al­leges that de­spite the NCSC or­der i ssued al­most eight months ago, IIM-I did not re­fund what he claimed was ₹ 3.8 lakh for the first year ( all three semesters). Money for the fourth se­mes­ter was taken in ad­vance. Ac­cord­ing to the course struc­ture, a stu­dent is sup­posed to pass three semesters in the first year (first, se­cond and third), three semesters in the se­cond (fourth, fifth and sixth) and the re­main­ing three semesters in the third year (sev­enth, eighth and ninth) to get a diploma. The other two years are for com­plet­ing a post­grad­u­ate diploma pro- gramme in man­age­ment and the full fee then was ₹ 23 lakh.

IIM- In­dore claims to have re­funded about ₹ 1,83,453 to Raghav ( i nclud­ing cau­tion money) for the fourth se­mes­ter which she had not at­tended. When c on­tacted, Prof Rishikesh T Kr­ish­nan, di­rec­tor, IIM-I, said that the NCSC rec­om­men­da­tion had been placed be­fore the B- school’s board of gov­er­nors (BoG). As per the board’s ad­vice ‘pro­por­tion­ate re­fund’ of charges paid by Raghav had to be re­funded for the du­ra­tion (of course) not at­tended.

“Ac­cord­ingly, the in­sti­tute has re­funded to her the en­tire tu­ition fees of the fourth term along with the pro-rata hos­tel charges, mess fee and cau­tion money amount­ing to ₹ 1,83,453 on Oc­to­ber 30, 2015. She has ac­knowl­edged re­ceipt of the same. This has been in­formed to the NCSC as well im­me­di­ately af­ter the pay­ment was made,” says Kr­ish­nan.

Re­spond­ing to NCSC’s or­der that says a “con­ducive at­mos­phere” for stud­ies was not pro­vided to Raghav, Kr­ish­nan said a com­mit­tee had been formed to as­cer­tain whether she had been sub­jected to men­tal stress, trauma and ha­rass­ment dur­ing her stay at IIM-I.

“I n spite of t he com­mit­tee’s best ef­forts, there was no re­sponse re­ceived from Ms Sak­shika. The com­mit­tee went through the avail­able records and in the ab­sence of any other in­puts, it was of the view that there were no in­stances which in­di­cated that Ms Sak­shika was sub­jected to men­tal stress, trauma and ha­rass­ment dur­ing the pe­riod of her stay in the in­sti­tute. The com­mit­tee rec­om­mended that the mat­ter be treated as closed,” he added.

Kr­ish­nan also said that the in­sti­tute was fully com­mit­ted to pro­vid­ing a con­ducive work en­vi­ron­ment to all its stu­dents and would not tol­er­ate any in­stances of ha­rass­ment on any grounds what­so­ever.”

De­ter­mined to fight back, TD Raghav al­leges his daugh­ter had been men­tally ha­rassed and that he would take the fight to the Delhi High Court. He also al­leged that the in­sti­tute had writ­ten to Mi­randa House where Ra ghav had been study­ing be­fore leav­ing the pro­gramme mid- way to join IIM-I.

IIM- I had asked Raghav’s for­mer in­sti­tute why she was pur­su­ing two de­gree cour­ses at one time (against rules) “Isn’t this ha­rass­ment? When IIM-I’s own pro­gramme is not a de­gree course, how can an in­sti­tute write about this to an­other col­lege? What’s the in­tent be­hind do­ing so?” he asked. As­pi­rants aim­ing for a qual­i­fi­ca­tion in char­tered ac­coun­tancy from the In­sti­tute of Char­tered Ac­coun­tants of In­dia (ICAI) may soon have to gear up for changes in the CA cur­ricu­lum. Cur­rently, the dif­fer­ent lev­els of the CA course are Com­mon Pro­fi­ciency Test (CPT), In­ter­me­di­ate (In­te­grated Pro­fes­sional Com­pe­tence) Course (IIPCC) and the fi­nal course.

The en­try-level test is named CPT and is cur­rently de­signed in the pat­tern of en­try-level tests for en­gi­neer­ing, med­i­cal and other pro­fes­sional cour­ses. Stu­dents who are in the fi­nal year of their grad­u­a­tion can also reg­is­ter for the IIPCC on pro­vi­sional ba­sis. The last leg of the CA course is the fi­nal course, de­signed to im­part ex­pert knowl­edge in fi­nan­cial re­port­ing, au­dit­ing and pro­fes­sional ethics, tax­a­tion, cor­po­rate laws, sys­tem con­trol, strate­gic fi­nance and ad­vanced man­age­ment ac­coun­tancy.

As per the pro­posed changes, the three lev­els would be called foun­da­tion, in­ter­me­di­ate and fi­nal. The weigh­tage given to some of the level 1 sub­jects will be changed. The pa­per on fun­da­men­tals of ac­count­ing, which is al­ready there at the CPT level car­ry­ing 60 marks, will be re­named as prin­ci­ples and prac­tices of ac­count­ing and will carry 100 marks as it is the core sub­ject for the CA pro­fes­sion.

Gen­eral English and busi­ness and com­mer­cial knowl­edge will also be added at the first level as new sub­jects, given their im­por­tance in the mod­ern busi­ness world and pre­par­ing the CAs for to­mor­row.

“This is to en­sure that en­try level be­comes some­what dif­fi­cult. Also, the foun­da­tion ex­am­i­na­tion will be partly de­scrip­tive and partly ob­jec­tive. The present MCQbased sys­tem en­cour­ages stu­dents to do a lot of guess­work. As a re­sult, even un­de­serv­ing stu­dents reach the next level. It af­fects the qual­ity of the pro­fes­sion,” says M De­varaja Reddy, pres­i­dent, ICAI. Since the foun­da­tion exam is likely to be partly de­scrip­tive in na­ture, the pass per­cent­age has been pro­posed at 50% ag­gre­gate and 40% sub­ject-wise, just like for other cour­ses (in­ter­me­di­ate and fi­nal). The foun­da­tion exam is likely to be con­ducted along with in­ter­me­di­ate and fi­nal in May and Novem­ber.

In an­other ex­pected change, stu­dents will have to ap­pear for eight pa­pers in level 2 (in­ter­me­di­ate) un­der the new scheme. At present, the se­cond stage is the IIPCC which re­quires a stu­dent to clear seven pa­pers. The pa­pers on busi­ness laws (60 marks), com­mu­ni­ca­tion (20 marks) and ethics (20 marks) in level 2 may be changed to cor­po­rate laws and other laws (100 marks). Cost ac­count­ing may carry 100 marks (in­stead of 50). A new pa­per on busi­ness eco­nomic en­vi­ron­ment (40 marks) may be added.

“A new sub­ject called fi­nan­cial and cap­i­tal mar­ket ser­vices has been pro­posed in the fi­nal level to make pro­fes­sion­als more com­pet­i­tive in fi­nance-re­lated ar­eas. In­ter­na­tional tax­a­tion for 30 marks may also be added in view of in­creas­ing im­por­tance of the sub­ject in the present glob­alised world,” adds Reddy.

ICAI is now in the process of pre­par­ing a syl­labus for each sub­ject. Once syl­labi are pre­pared, the new study ma­te­rial based on this syl­labi will be pre­pared. The govern­ment-ap­proved scheme will be no­ti­fied in the Gazette of In­dia for invit­ing com­ments for 45 days. The mod­i­fied scheme will be sent to the min­istry of cor­po­rate affairs for fi­nal ap­proval. The in­sti­tute is ex­pect­ing the changes to be im­ple­mented by Novem­ber 2016.

HT Education had re­ported on IIM-I’s un­ap­proved course and stu­dents’ prob­lems on April 29, 2015

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.