Director's Open Meeting with Graduating students: Report

[IITD Notices]

Hello

The Director held a meeting with graduating students on April 15th, 2013. It was an event attended by many enthusiastic students who had enough faith in the system that they wanted to improve it, making their experience count. 

For the benefit of those who were not able to attend it, a summary of the report prepared by BSP is attached below. It is also available for download. 

The meeting may be over, the meeting may have been missed; SAC and CAIC will be discussing these issues and more for the entire year. And we would love to hear your suggestions. You can send in your suggestions to sacii...@gmail.com and we will make sure they count! Spread the word among your friends as well.

Open Meeting with the Director 2013: A Comprehensive Report

By Journalism Team, BSP

An open meeting and discussion was held for the 4^th and 5^th year undergraduate students with the Director, Prof. R. K. Shevgaonkar. The Director brought along his entire administrative team comprising the Deputy Directors, the Deans and Associate Deans to help him tackle with the questions the students posed.

 The event well exceeded its time limit and a lot of challenging questions were posed to the administration. The Director seemed open to criticism and kept an open ear to all constructive feedback. 

The agenda covered various aspects of student life; the academic experience, and interaction with different aspects of IIT like faculty, lab staff, projects, exchange program and registration and also the comforts of students’ lives (or lack thereof).

 Discussion started with the academic issues students faced. A lot of issues were brought up; the more general ones are covered here:

 ACADEMIC EXPERIENCES: 

·         Criteria for audit courses: The discretion lying with the professors who often have unrealistic criteria for auditing course.
 

Response: The Director said he would look into the matter, although it usually is solely dependent on the professor. Later the matter was comprehensively discussed in the CAIC where the Dean (Academics) explained that if professors are setting unreasonably high criteria for audit then it simply means that they do not wish their course to be audited. He further stressed on how professors have the right to decide policies for their course.
 

Measures taken: To facilitate the decision-making process of students it was decided that the deadline for audit and withdrawal would be extended to five/six weeks after Minor 1 from the next academic session. The resulting change in the next semester schedule will be notified soon.
 

·        The condition of labs and irrelevant syllabus: Lack of proper infrastructure, inadequacy of lab staff
 

Response: The Director said he was already looking into the matter of employing more lab staff, but there was unavailability of suitable candidates

·        Corrective action based on feedback for the professors: Many students are also apprehensive about the anonymity of the feedback.
 

Suggested Solution: If students see improvement or action in accordance to their feedback, they would be willing to fill it more seriously.
 

Response: Firstly, the Director guaranteed complete anonymity of the feedback. Then he mentioned that the faculty evaluation worked on a different model of evaluation. While he did not go into the details of the model, he said promotion was done on the basis of the person’s research work and teaching performance. He acknowledged the absence of follow-up evaluations for professors already at higher levels.
 

·        The high burden of exams due to the two-minor system.
 

Suggested Solution: Substitute it by a mid-semester examination system like in other colleges.
 

Response: The Dean UG mentioned that this issue was already being discussed in the CAIC.
 

·        Credit Requirement for batch entering 2013 onward: The CRC had fixed the credit limit at 140 for 2013 entry students. While passing through the Senate, 10 credits were automatically added to this. The students demanded an explanation.
 

Response: The Dean of Student Affairs said that the Senate deemed that fit and student consultation was taken at the proper stage and the student representative was present when the decision was taken.

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT EXPERIENCE

·        LAN ban from 1 AM to 6 AM:
 

Response: In the meet the Dean of Student Affairs was against the idea because he said it distracted students. In subsequent SAC meetings however he agreed with the removal in principle.
 

Measures taken: After plans to implement it during the majors were scrapped due to technical issues, SAC has kept it primary on their agenda for the first meeting next semester.
 

·        Very few core companies turn up for placements in the field of Textile and Biotechnology
 

Response: The Director said that the Training and Placement Cell was already a student body and they call the companies for placement. He said the lesser number of companies in these particular departments could be attributed to market forces that are beyond his control.
 

·        CGPA criterion for programs like foreign exchange and SURA: Grades of just three semesters are considered out of which 2 are of the first year, are an unfair means of judging a person’s caliber
 

Response: Prof. Shevgaonkar said that whenever the number of seats is much lesser than the interested candidates, some parameter has to be used to filter out students. He agreed a student’s CGPA is not a very good criterion, but it is the only quantitative criterion that exists.
 

·        Student representation in the Senate: Request to increase it

 

Response: The administration thought that one student in the Senate who represented the views of the entire student community suffices the requirement.
 

·        Timing of the Convocation: to be shifted from October to July
 

Response: The Director was open to the idea of keeping the Convocation in July if the students agreed to have it off campus, due to logistical issues. He asked the concerned student to collect the views of her peers and get back to him.
 

Measures taken: The concerned student made efforts in the direction ad approached SAC. However the Convocation Committee had already had a meeting to finalise the timing and Chief Guest for the convocation before SAC approached him. Since the Chief Guest needs to be informed more than 2 months in advance and the Committee would not be meeting until July, the issue cannot be resolved for the convocation this year. The issue will be picked up in July itself for timely action next year.
 

·        Finances of the Institute: Releasing it on a public forum.
 

Response: The Director was willing to share them and announced that it was an open document. If the students wanted it online, it could easily be done. Some parts already exist online.

·        Lack of adequate interaction between students and teachers: Inadequacy of forums like STIC and House Days to provide a suitable platform for the same.
 

Suggested Solution: Provision of a non-academic setting where informal discussions between concerned parties could also take place; and a system where course advisors and students could be handpicked.
 

Response: The administration dodged the issue just stating how professors are always available after class and discussions are always encouraged.

CAMPUS LIFE EXPERIENCE: 

·        The issue of WiFi connectivity in the academic area:
 

Response: The Director said he also faced the issue in his office as well. He also proposed that we could have connectivity in the open spaces in the academic area as well.

·        Lack of seating spaces in academic area, especially at night:
 

Response: The Director took this opportunity to introduce the eNewletter of IIT Delhi and announced that two modern student lounges have been created on the third floor of Block VII and two more would be coming up in Block II. He also confirmed the rumours about a Café Coffee Day outlet coming up in Ex-Hall.

·        The swimming pool has not been functional for the last three years:
 

Response: The Director explained that the architect had been coming up with a new design for the swimming pool, which needed MCD approval. The construction is expected to be complete by the end of the summers of 2014.

·        Opening the Central Library 24*7:
 

Response: The Director was willing to do it on a trial basis and make it permanent if the response was encouraging.
 

Measures taken: This was tried out during the majors of 2^nd Semester 2012-2013 and was received well by the student community.

·        Interaction between male and female students: Boys not allowed beyond Himadri Circle after 11 PM at night when Capt. Yadav was not aware of such a rule
 

Response: The Deans and Director were also unaware of such a rule, though Prof. S. K. Gupta agreed with the rule in principle. After a heated debate on the issue, a student went to Capt. Yadav to get to the crux of the issue and got it resolved.
 

Measures taken: Notices were put up within a week informing students of the absence of any such rule.

Another major issue of debate was the plagiarism practiced by both professors and students. The students suggested that serious intolerance on the part of the professors would discourage everyone to indulge in the act. The administration, however, had a more ethical stance to take; they believed that all of us were responsible adults and should refrain from such acts because they are morally incorrect, not because heavy punishment would be imposed otherwise. The students argued that this contradicted rules that took certain basic freedom from us, like LAN ban and independence to choose credit distribution within the curriculum.
 

The event ended with only a slight bridge of the gap existing between the students and administration. With the administration often replying to questions with disconnected ethics and stances, there was certainly still a lot of angst among the students. Many issues discussed however were of relevance to the students and the administration promised to look into them in the near future.