Foreign varsity Bill tabled in LS
All pending higher education reform Bills also moved
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20100504/nation.htm#1New Delhi, May 3
It was Human Resources Development Minister Kapil Sibal’s day in the Lok Sabha, where he successfully introduced the controversial Foreign Educational Institutions (Regulation of Entry and Operations) Bill 2010 along with three pending higher education reform legislation.
These include the Prohibition of Unfair Practices in Technical and Medical Educational Institutions and Universities Bill 2010 to penalise educational malpractices like disregard for prospectus promises by institutes and charging of capitation fee; the Educational Tribunals Bill 2010 to establish national and state educational tribunals to adjudicate complaints related to the sector and the National Accreditation Regulatory Authority for Higher Educational Institutions Bill 2010 to make accreditation for higher educational institutions mandatory through registered accreditation agencies.
Currently, less than one-fifth of the colleges and one-third of the universities in India are accredited.
DMK-engineered chaos over 2G Spectrum allocation came to Sibal’s advantage as he introduced the Bills, especially the foreign education providers’ Bill which the Opposition had vowed to stall. But today, the sole objection came from CPM’s Basudeb Acharia, who termed the Bill anti-national and commercial. The minister rejected the objection as invalid, saying it was not based on “legislative competence”.
Sibal, it is learnt, reached out to leaders of all opposition parties to enable the introduction of the Bill today. “I told the leaders that no special preference would be given to foreign education providers. Moreover, anyone who has an objection can raise it when the Bill goes to the standing committee,” Sibal told TNS. He has clarified that the quota regime would not apply to foreign providers, which would be on a par with “private unaided institutes” in India.
The Bill seeks to allow foreign education providers to establish campuses in India and award degrees/diplomas but not without being recognised and notified by the Centre. These providers would have to impart education in conformity with the standards laid down by the Indian statutory authority. They won’t be allowed to plough back profits to the home country and would have to maintain a corpus of Rs 50 crore. The Centre can refuse to notify an institution as foreign education provider if it feels the move is “not in the interest of sovereignty, integrity of India, security of state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency, morality or sensitivity of location of the said institution.” Violation of the Act can lead to withdrawal of recognition.
Also, anyone found making false claims of being a foreign education provider would be penalised with not less than Rs 10 lakh, extending up to Rs 50 lakh.
Sibal’s assurances
* No special preference to foreign education providers
* Quota not to apply to foreign providers
* Foreign providers to be on par with private unaided institutes
Hallmark Of Education Bills
The Educational Tribunals Bill 2010
* Provides for establishment of state, national educational tribunals for speedy redressal of complaints
* State tribunals to hear teachers' grievances, issues related to college's affiliation and unfair practices by institutions
* National Tribunal to hear disputes between institution and any statutory authority
* Upon completion of terms, chairpersons, members of tribunals can't be reemployed in higher education institute for five years
* Parties that don't comply with tribunal orders face imprisonment up to 3 years or fine up to 10 lakh or both
Prohibition of Unfair Practices in Technical, Medical Educational Institutions and Universities Bill, 2010
* Bans acceptance of admission fee/charges except those stated in prospectus; mandates issue of receipt against payments
* Bans admission without admission test when mandated by statutory authority; mandates prospectus publication and quality related disclosures
* Bans demand of capitation fee/withholding of degree of student who leaves institute
* Prescribes penalty up to 50 lakh for institutes disregarding prospectus promises; one lakh for seeking donation (made cognizable offence) or issuing misleading ads.
* Educational tribunals to hear complaints
The National Accreditation Regulatory Authority for Higher Education Institutions Bill 2010
* Mandates accreditation of every higher educational institution and its programme through registered accreditation agencies
* National Accreditation Regulatory Authority to be set up to register, monitor accreditation agencies, audit their accounts, evolve code of ethics
* Accreditation agency which violates the code to be penalized up to Rs 5 lakh
JEE Errors
Super 30 rejects IIT remedy, seeks re-exam
New Delhi, May 3
A day after the IITs made public the remedies they proposed to offer students affected by a slew of errors in the JEE question banks, Super 30 -- a reputed JEE training group based in Bihar -- today rejected the “compensation formula hence prescribed” as “futile”.
“If the IITs honestly review how their proposed remedies would work, they will know the remedies are useless. The only thing that will ensure justice to lakhs of students who have been disadvantaged due to the JEE errors is a re-conduct of the exam,” said Anand Kumar, founder of Super 30, which is known for handpicking poor students from Bihar and preparing them to crack the JEE.
It was Kumar’s intervention earlier that led to Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar writing a letter to HRD Minister Kapil Sibal, who then ordered the IITs to work on a remedial strategy.
But the strategy seems to be cutting little ice with those affected, as Kumar today said he would step up the agitation in the interest of lakhs of students who simply did not attempt the questions in the Hindi version or were misled by the mismatch between the maths and physics section of the paper and by the instructions that followed.
“The only option is a re-examination,” Kumar said, adding that he would again meet Nitish to hammer the point. The Hindi version of the JEE had major problems as it showed some questions carrying three marks each instead of eight, making students drop the section as it would anyway fetch low scores.
“When a student has not even attempted a question, how will the Joint Admission Board of IITs propose a remedy for him? He is invisible in that sense and all due to the IIT mistakes,” said Kumar.