AICTE’s curtain raiser to a smoke screen

In fact, MIT requires only one unit of physics, chemistry, biology and maths at school level.
For representational purposes
For representational purposes

When the winds of change blow hard, the best build windmills while the rest build shelters. With the Covidian wind blowing very hard, top engineering schools in North America like Stanford or Cornell waived the mandatory ACT or SAT scores. They still managed to attract some of the best minds to pursue engineering degree programmes at the undergraduate level. Can we think of such a sweeping policy decision to make JEE (Advanced) optional? Definitely not, as there are policy firewalls sheltering the JEE(Advanced) to prove a non-existent hyper-competency amongst high school kids. Does that mean post-Covidian policymaking in undergraduate engineering admissions has not kick-started since the announcement of NEP 2020? The answer is NO.

The All India Council for Technical Education’s (AICTE) recent move to make maths and physics optional subjects for engineering admissions at the undergraduate level is a windmill change. This policy response shall decelerate the humanoid race that schools are preparing their students for. Thanks to JEE (Advanced) and their likes, such children miss the skilling and immersive learning at high school levels that requires a fine blend of science, history, social studies, culture, etc. The absence of such a wholesome schooling is tellingly visible in the outcome of engineering graduates, who are sandwiched between a failed schooling and an aspirational industry.

AICTE’s decision must be seen in the light of the NEP’s path-breaking school education reforms, which have provided the much needed multi-disciplinary approach through the 5+3+3+4 modularity. With such a progressive school reform in the anvil, global experience has shown that higher educational institutions adapting to such reforms in school education have managed to attract quality students piercing the regimental policy armoury. AICTE’s recent policy is aligned with such global adaptation and requires structural adjustments. Let us see how.

The Mecca of engineering education, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), accepts General Educational Development Test (GED) as equivalent to high school passing. So do Columbia, New York, Michigan, Penn State and other leading universities in North America. Cornell Engineering School requires maths and physics but at optimal measure—four and one units respectively prior to high school graduation (one unit is one year).

In fact, MIT requires only one unit of physics, chemistry, biology and maths at school level. That requirement is also recommendative and not mandatory (learning for the IITs)! Many renowned engineering schools globally ensure basic math that covers algebra, geometry, trigonometry and introductory calculus. Even GED covers only these and other concepts of sciences, social studies and reasoning. On one hand, we have students satisfying these requirements joining premier engineering schools and graduating with flying colours and on the other, students with mathematics running in their school curriculum upto Class XII are still failing in maths in their first semester of engineering course. This anomaly needs to be addressed.

Many progressive foreign universities use the Art of Problem Solving (AoPS) as a bridging mechanism that provides college-level exposure to intermediate and advanced maths to make good the high school math-deficit. Similar varieties of AoPS like Stanford’s EPGY, Johns Hopkins CTY Online, VHS or Khan Academy are available to cater to the appetite of high school graduates and first-year college students to make good their perceived loss.

On the contrary, bundling Olympiad-level maths into our high school eco-system creates exam-cracking than concept-loving kids. Various cognitive neuropsychological studies have clearly demonstrated the success of learning methodologies that are multi-disciplinary and concept-driven than exam-driven. AICTE’s recent decision addresses this important feature that provides a platform for students to feast on a buffet of choices at the Class IX-XII level and make good their deficit on maths and physics through desi varieties of AoPS.

As an abundant caution, maths and physics must be made compulsory till Class X. The long time gap between Class XII results and engineering college admission may be utilised well to complete such bridge/curative courses in maths and physics that may run up to the first semester of the college year. Such courses can be offered in phygital modes to make these specially endowed students ‘engineering study ready’. Care must also be taken to ensure that high school teaching concentrates on applicative maths and physics while teaching other subjects in higher secondary level to reinforce quantitative and scientific temper.

AICTE’s maths-physics optional decision may have rattled the stereotypes (I was also rattled) but has in it the disruptive potential to change the status quo. It may also raise questions on the validity of engineering degrees already issued by universities that admitted students without maths in Class XII. AICTE cannot retrospectively make them valid but the Supreme Court’s decision in the Orissa Lift case provides them a solution pathway.

On this ‘April Fool’s’ day, we need to wake up to the global realities and respond to the ‘May Day May Day’ signal in the troubled waters of higher education and see the picturesque global education landscape through the curtains hitherto blinded by artificial smoke screens. AICTE’s recent policy is a curtain raiser to the smoke screen. 

S Vaidhyasubramaniam

Vice-Chancellor of SASTRA Deemed University. Views are personal

(vaidhya@sastra.edu)

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com