PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 1996 ID-39829
.
STUDENTs FEDERATION OF INDIA Date 08/08/96.
.
Friends, .
demandinQ more transparency.
.
of the SL students~ There.
The strike .
in their adission orocedure, entered its f ourth day today . .
also b~en i~stances in CSSS and CPS~ where the transparency .
have feel that this aQitation $hould be .
.
of the systea is warranted. · We.
extenstve manner..
.
carried out in an .
for transparency in .
1. Ho~ever, we think th~ the JNUSU demand limited to merely.
s~ould not be.
the adml~sion procedure.
the marks break-up beins_made public, since thls asking for long-term solu~ion. Rather, an enquiry .
alone cannot offer a to enquire.
level sh.:>ufd be set up,.
comtnittee at the school Its powers should be.
victimizat i on-. ..
into all cases of . even ··the review of answerand should include (centre-.
extensive pre..sence of SFCs.
sheets of the theory pap.e~. The a~so be ensured. In fact, .
.
the case may be) should.
wise, as for SFCs to be present in the .
before 1983, it was mandatory, of the.
This. progressive element.
for admissions. li.
vlv8. voce .~ relntroduc.ed..
old admission policy should b:., .~sain highlights theagitation of th~ students Thi$.
2. The present ~~esent admis~lon policy. .
need for F review of the 'empts to disallovt policy is marked by its eliti~ .: and lt~' a:tthigher education..
opportunity to s~ek th~.
deprived itudents an 1983 was ·,· .converted into.
policy c ' ..
The new admission adding s~~e~aeprivation points present admission policy by ~lably and ~egionally.
~rom ~.
fo~ student~.
(up t o 10 points) Ho'Wever, · thls remains an eye'-la.ah,backsrounds. · gain admission.
back'-la!'d deprlved sections d~ .not.
since etudents f~om ' .
.
characteri~ed the pre~1983 years. Uith .
in the numbers whi~h well, we find that a .
r~ga~d to SC and ST students, aaH.A. and 21 centers i n5 centers in fulfilcenter~ in B.A., the university have failed to.
H.Phll/Ph.D., across their SC/ST quotas . has been removed.
of economic d~privation.
The element Committee Report (1983-84) and till since the Lipan Chandra part of theno sincere effort on the.
date, there is.
administration to reintroduce it, a.lthoush there are so man~ .
.
through which income groups can be .
existing crite~la, Income criteria ~hich cove~a .
p~actlcally identified (Fo~ eg. SFCs c an be 'Widened to the PDS net). The functions of the fo~ regional.
well. The indicators chosen.
include this as be reconsider~d, to make · l't more dep!'ivation. should also ~eallty. A p~ogressive admission.
the objective.
~eflective .
~ policy should also Include: .
.. A ~emedial course to maintain academic excellence. .
1. .
2. Pr~visional admission facilities. policy is.
r~osreesive admission.
unless a of.
Ue believ u that J f accele!'atlng th~ process fo~mulated, JNU's objective .
social change through Its stud~nts cannot be fulfilled. .
Con't'd ...2 .
.
PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 1996 ID-39829
.
STUDENTs FEDERATION OF INDIA Date 08/08/96.
.
Friends, .
demandinQ more transparency.
.
of the SL students~ There.
The strike .
in their adission orocedure, entered its f ourth day today . .
also b~en i~stances in CSSS and CPS~ where the transparency .
have feel that this aQitation $hould be .
.
of the systea is warranted. · We.
extenstve manner..
.
carried out in an .
for transparency in .
1. Ho~ever, we think th~ the JNUSU demand limited to merely.
s~ould not be.
the adml~sion procedure.
the marks break-up beins_made public, since thls asking for long-term solu~ion. Rather, an enquiry .
alone cannot offer a to enquire.
level sh.:>ufd be set up,.
comtnittee at the school Its powers should be.
victimizat i on-. ..
into all cases of . even ··the review of answerand should include (centre-.
extensive pre..sence of SFCs.
sheets of the theory pap.e~. The a~so be ensured. In fact, .
.
the case may be) should.
wise, as for SFCs to be present in the .
before 1983, it was mandatory, of the.
This. progressive element.
for admissions. li.
vlv8. voce .~ relntroduc.ed..
old admission policy should b:., .~sain highlights theagitation of th~ students Thi$.
2. The present ~~esent admis~lon policy. .
need for F review of the 'empts to disallovt policy is marked by its eliti~ .: and lt~' a:tthigher education..
opportunity to s~ek th~.
deprived itudents an 1983 was ·,· .converted into.
policy c ' ..
The new admission adding s~~e~aeprivation points present admission policy by ~lably and ~egionally.
~rom ~.
fo~ student~.
(up t o 10 points) Ho'Wever, · thls remains an eye'-la.ah,backsrounds. · gain admission.
back'-la!'d deprlved sections d~ .not.
since etudents f~om ' .
.
characteri~ed the pre~1983 years. Uith .
in the numbers whi~h well, we find that a .
r~ga~d to SC and ST students, aaH.A. and 21 centers i n5 centers in fulfilcenter~ in B.A., the university have failed to.
H.Phll/Ph.D., across their SC/ST quotas . has been removed.
of economic d~privation.
The element Committee Report (1983-84) and till since the Lipan Chandra part of theno sincere effort on the.
date, there is.
administration to reintroduce it, a.lthoush there are so man~ .
.
through which income groups can be .
existing crite~la, Income criteria ~hich cove~a .
p~actlcally identified (Fo~ eg. SFCs c an be 'Widened to the PDS net). The functions of the fo~ regional.
well. The indicators chosen.
include this as be reconsider~d, to make · l't more dep!'ivation. should also ~eallty. A p~ogressive admission.
the objective.
~eflective .
~ policy should also Include: .
.. A ~emedial course to maintain academic excellence. .
1. .
2. Pr~visional admission facilities. policy is.
r~osreesive admission.
unless a of.
Ue believ u that J f accele!'atlng th~ process fo~mulated, JNU's objective .
social change through Its stud~nts cannot be fulfilled. .
Con't'd ...2 .
.