The first-semester syllabi of the four-year undergraduate programmes (FYUP) at Delhi University were approved by the academic council on Wednesday based on the recently adopted Under Graduate Curriculum Framework (UGCF).
There were seven council members that disagreed with the resolution. The executive council, the DU’s main decision-making body, will now be notified of the situation for approval. “FYUP syllabi of all courses on agenda have been passed by the academic council. Seven members of the council issued dissent note,” a council member told the media.
The revised curriculum will be used from academic year 2022–2023. An Undergraduate Curriculum Framework for 2022 (UGCF-2022), developed by a National Education Policy cell, had been authorised by the executive council in February.
Over 100 undergraduate course syllabi that had been approved by a standing committee were laid out for discussion during the meeting. BA (Hons) in Business Economics, BA (Hons) Multi-Media and Mass Communication, BSc in Electronic Science, and BSc (Hons) in Microbiology are a few of the courses discussed. The course committees have created the syllabi, which have been approved by a standing committee. Five academics, two from the relevant department and three from other universities, make up a course committee.
The dissenting academic council members claimed that over 70,000 students would suffer due to the “un-academic hurried exercise” through which the DU was trying to claim implementation of the FYUP. Some of the dissenting members are Mithuraaj Dhusiya, Rajesh Kumar, Dr Megh Raj and Naveen Gaur.
“To adopt courses and admit students on the basis of syllabi of first semester papers is extremely unacademic. It is only when all the framework, coursework, syllabi and scheme of evaluation is known that the value of the degree can be understood,” the members noted.
They also drew attention to the fact that many departments collaborated with a small group of teachers to develop these courses and syllabi, in violation of democratic conventions that call for having meetings of all teachers (general bodies) and using subcommittees for large-scale projects. The participants claimed that several departments had neglected the feedback from undergraduate instructors.
“The common feeling of all teachers (even those who have participated) is that the decrease in credits for papers is resulting in a huge dilution of core discipline,” they said.