Yet another college admission season in Delhi University (DU) is set to wind up. We saw the usual news stories about insanely high cutoffs. This time Ram Lal College, rarely in the news for its academics, hit the headlines with a 100% cutoff in Computer Science (note: this is the lowest a student needs to score). DU officials came on TV and talked about how there are still some seats available in random courses. Weekend supplements carried articles on how to reduce stress on the child and the family as a whole, and how failure doesn’t really matter (even though newspapers celebrate success all year long). Soon, we saw the customary second, third and fourth lists, and the gates closed.
A tiny fraction of students who scored near perfect scores in their board examinations made it inside the DU fortress. The rest twiddled their thumbs or settled for one of the many private colleges that spend more money on television ads than on real research and academics. As soon as the season ends, we will go back to our stories of scams and communal politics. Even though, the cycle is sure to be repeated next year. For now, we have chosen our best students and future leaders.
Or, have we? It doesn’t take a PhD scholar to tell you a student who scores 96% is unlikely to be much worse than a 98% student who gets the seat. In fact, the 96% student may well be better, as the scores are for one exam conducted for a limited range of topics. The more insane the cut-offs become, the less the difference between the students who are selected and rejected. And yet, we continue with this practice, ignoring a child’s talent, personality, communication skills, his or her ability to work in teams, motivation, dreams, vision, imagination, creativity, values, convictions and opinions.
Anyone with substantial life experience would point out that board marks are hardly the major determinant of future success. When admission comes down to minor differences in marks, it becomes almost irrelevant.
Let us take two examples. Say Student A is the head of a debating society, volunteers at an NGO several hours a week, can play a musical instrument, and has fought a difficult family situation to educate herself. She scores 87%. Student B has never done any extra-curriculars, finds it difficult to speak in groups and has spent most of his life poring over text-books. Student B scores 94%.
Hence, student B will get the seat in DU, but student A won’t. Does this seem fair? Are we not being too reductionist in our approach to evaluating our best? Are we not incentivizing our students to shun developing a personality and other interests? Aren’t we turning them into a mad, possessed herd focused only scoring the maximum marks? Is it any surprise that most corporates complain that new recruits lack all-round personality and communication skills? Who will change this? Shouldn’t DU take the lead?
The US for instance, has an elaborate admissions process for its top colleges. The selection is based on academics, essays, extra-curriculars, recommendations and achievements outside the classroom. It is no less draconian, mind you. And this write-up is not to make a case to lower standards. It is merely to redefine what those standards are, especially at the top colleges. This impacts not only the students who finally get in, but also influences the rest who aspire to get there. How our best colleges choose will influence how the next-tier chooses, and so on and so forth.
Until we go ahead with these reforms, all this talk of ‘there is more to life than marks’ will ring hollow. If there is indeed more to life, change the admissions process. Make it more all-round, more subjective and choose people who deserve to be leaders in society.
A word of caution here, with respect to the word ‘subjective’. The moment anything is made subjective in India, nepotism creeps in. The brutal cut-offs may have many flaws, but the ‘highest marks gets in’ criterion reduces the scope of manipulation. Given how our country works, it is quite likely nephews, nieces and neighbours of admission committee officials will be seen as extraordinary allround candidates. Any reform must ensure the new admission process is just as accountable, even though subjective. The Army does it, the UPSC does it and MBA schools also have multiple criteria. There is no reason DU cannot do it, perhaps with the help of independent advisors.
An expansion of DU should also be on the cards. A DU-II and DU-III campus in Gurgaon and Greater Noida would be perfect. The number of students applying has multiplied, while reputed colleges have not. The IITs have tripled their seats in the last decade, so why not DU?
A strong talent identification and promotion system is essential for a progressive society. We’ve not focused on it enough, leading to a warped education system. Let not another admission season go to waste.