2) I fully support the goverments policy for allowing any one of 15
years to write SSLC because it represents freedom why should someone
study in oppressive schools afterall.
3) The access of people with Diploma to the second year of the
engineering courses. similarly Nurses should be given entrance to the
Second year of MBBS course.
4) Why is that those who study the science courses at the degree level
have access to history and commerce courses at the post graduate
level. And not History and Commerce and law students cant join the
Science courses at the Postgraduate level. This is pure injustice the
social science students should not be treated as second class citizen.
Actually there should not be any social science or Science degree
people should be study any combination of subjects they wish to study
whether they beleong to the science non-science engineerining or even
medicine.
And now there is little meaning in implementing these things because
only the rich can even hope to study.The government has left education
into the hands of "investors" who have created a skewed eduation
system.
I fail to understand your argument. It is only logical that one must
have certain minimum qualification (prerequisite) to get admission a
postgraduate degree program. For example, in chemistry, you must
have knowledge of chemistry at the graduate level. Proof of
graduation (eg. a degree) is the right way of letting the University
know that you have achieved a minimum scholastic level to pursue
further study in the subject. I believe the entrance examination is
to select the best students out of thousands students who apply. The
entrance examination became necessary because there are too many
applicants and too few seats available. Even to write entrance
examination one must meet certain minimum requirements. I don't think
anyone becomes eligible to write entrance examination without first
passing SSLC/metric etc. or am I wrong?
>
> 2) I fully support the goverments policy for allowing any one of 15
> years to write SSLC because it represents freedom why should someone
> study in oppressive schools afterall.
Depends on your point of view. I believe school atmosphere does
provide more than mere meeting the requirements of curricula. It
plays (or it should) a very important part in the development of
personality and social skills of the students. Those who don't think
they need such an atmosphere have now, as you say, an alternative.
>
> 3) The access of people with Diploma to the second year of the
> engineering courses. similarly Nurses should be given entrance to the
> Second year of MBBS course.
That is a very good point you are raising. Many students because of
their circumstances chose to do diploma in technical institutes (for
example, polytechnics) instead going to university and acquired some
practical knowledge and experience. If those students want to upgrade
their education they should be allowed to do so, and enough credits
should be given for the courses they have already successfully
completed. As you say a diploma holder should have access to degree
courses to engineering, more so than mere high school graduates.
Nurses with experience should be given preference to MBBS programs
over raw high school graduates and sufficient credits should be given
for the related subjects they have already studied. Western countries
allow such "self improvements". I know some medical doctors who
started out their lives as nurses.
>
> 4) Why is that those who study the science courses at the degree level
> have access to history and commerce courses at the post graduate
> level. And not History and Commerce and law students cant join the
> Science courses at the Postgraduate level. This is pure injustice the
> social science students should not be treated as second class citizen.
> Actually there should not be any social science or Science degree
> people should be study any combination of subjects they wish to study
> whether they beleong to the science non-science engineerining or even
> medicine.
Yes, I have seen this happening. Some of my classmates after taking
their degree in science joined postgraduate-degree program in English.
It is a fact that English was not the major subject for the degree,
but they did cover English to some extent. Even in western countries
you could get into MBA programs if you have a degree in something. I
know some entrants to MBA programs had engineering degrees, some
commerce degrees and some law degrees. You can say it is not fair.
One reason for not admitting arts graduates to science postgraduate
programs is that they do not have laboratory experience and it is very
unlikely they will manage and survive the rigors of advanced science
training. If some one wants to challenge this "discriminatory
practice" he/she should be allowed to do so.
>
> And now there is little meaning in implementing these things because
> only the rich can even hope to study.The government has left education
> into the hands of "investors" who have created a skewed eduation
> system.
Sadly, this is happening!