PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2012 ID-52604
.
16.3.12.
Upcoming AC Meeting: March Ahead for Students'.
Rights and Facilities Broader Inclusion and Democratisation.... .
Indefinite Day 2.
.
Ravi Prakash, Gen Secy JNUSU, Firoz, Joint Secy JNUSU, Om Prasad, Convener SSS, Aardra, Coundlor SSS, Tabrez, Councilo~ SL,.
Sarfaraz, Councilor SL, Lenin, Councilor SIS, Anagha, Anand, Arindan, Baljeet, Balu, Chintu, Dibya Shikha, lmran, lshan, Jitendra.
Kumar, Kanhaia, Mahendra, Martand, Nilmani, Nishant, Nitisha, Pavan, Piyush, Praveen, Priyadarshini, Rohan, Ruchira, Shabbir,.
~~~ .
Relay Day 2 I.
Prakash, Convener, SC&JS, Prince, Councilor, SLL&CS,Akbar, Akhila, Amar, Anirban, Aqsa, Azram, Bansi,Buddhadeb, Debashish, Garima, Geeta, Gogol, Kalpana, lokesh, Manoj, Monu, Niharika, Nitesh, Priyanka, Rahul, Rahul Kumar, Rahul.
Maurya, Ravi Ranjan, Ritika, Sarfaraz Rafi, Shahdev, Shephalika, Tufail Lone,Wasim, Zia-ul-haque.
In the context of the upcorT)ing Academic Council (AC) meeting on March 19th 2012, student community of JNU is presently in the.
midst of a crucial struggle. The newly elected JNUSU, through council meeting, series of School GBMs and ongoing protest actions.
have highlighted a range of issues which are central to the ·socially-inclusive character of JNU. At the upcoming AC meeting, it is.
urgently required that several long-pending issues related to democratisation of JNU's admission process and its inclusive.
character are addressed. .
One of the most key issues is the reduction in the weightage of viva in JNU's entrance exam. For a long time now, thestudent community has been persistently raising the demand with all logic and facts. This issue had already been raised during theprevious AC meeting held in October 2011.The JNU administration had then promised to consult the concerned decision-makingbodies and come to a positive decision. However, this time around, the ateoory studrmts.
:sct5TIOBC paint a different picture. .
l he majority of SC/ST/OBC students get very poor marks clustered around 0-5 in viva. Forexample, in ORG out of 12 SC/ST students, one student has got 20, one has 4 marks, one has 3 marks, one has 2 marks and theremaining eight has 1 mark). In pract.
ical terms, it ensures that many don't reach the required minimum cut-off of say 30% or 36% of.
overall marks even if they have reasonable marks in written exam..:. At another level, even with a very good performance in written.
exam, which in the normal course would guarantee a general category seat, the student is pushed down to occupy a reserved seat.blocking other potential candidates in the category. .
I.
Nobody is claiming that there should always be a strong correlation between viva and written exam rnarks for each individual student. However. when a whole set of students (reserved) get very poor viva marks in spite of good and average performance inwritten exams, there is a strong indication of bias. .
·We therefore demand that JNU administration immediately gives duo consideration to the distortion that has crept into the selectionprocess and accept the legitimate of demand of the students to reduce t11e weightage of the viva-voce as por the directives of the.
Supreme Court to 10-15%. Tf1is crucial step will go a long way in ensuring a more level playing field for diSiJdvantaged studentsand reduce space for subjective anomalies to affect the outcome for all the candidates. .
[iiE .
1 .
.
PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2012 ID-52604
.
16.3.12.
Upcoming AC Meeting: March Ahead for Students'.
Rights and Facilities Broader Inclusion and Democratisation.... .
Indefinite Day 2.
.
Ravi Prakash, Gen Secy JNUSU, Firoz, Joint Secy JNUSU, Om Prasad, Convener SSS, Aardra, Coundlor SSS, Tabrez, Councilo~ SL,.
Sarfaraz, Councilor SL, Lenin, Councilor SIS, Anagha, Anand, Arindan, Baljeet, Balu, Chintu, Dibya Shikha, lmran, lshan, Jitendra.
Kumar, Kanhaia, Mahendra, Martand, Nilmani, Nishant, Nitisha, Pavan, Piyush, Praveen, Priyadarshini, Rohan, Ruchira, Shabbir,.
~~~ .
Relay Day 2 I.
Prakash, Convener, SC&JS, Prince, Councilor, SLL&CS,Akbar, Akhila, Amar, Anirban, Aqsa, Azram, Bansi,Buddhadeb, Debashish, Garima, Geeta, Gogol, Kalpana, lokesh, Manoj, Monu, Niharika, Nitesh, Priyanka, Rahul, Rahul Kumar, Rahul.
Maurya, Ravi Ranjan, Ritika, Sarfaraz Rafi, Shahdev, Shephalika, Tufail Lone,Wasim, Zia-ul-haque.
In the context of the upcorT)ing Academic Council (AC) meeting on March 19th 2012, student community of JNU is presently in the.
midst of a crucial struggle. The newly elected JNUSU, through council meeting, series of School GBMs and ongoing protest actions.
have highlighted a range of issues which are central to the ·socially-inclusive character of JNU. At the upcoming AC meeting, it is.
urgently required that several long-pending issues related to democratisation of JNU's admission process and its inclusive.
character are addressed. .
One of the most key issues is the reduction in the weightage of viva in JNU's entrance exam. For a long time now, thestudent community has been persistently raising the demand with all logic and facts. This issue had already been raised during theprevious AC meeting held in October 2011.The JNU administration had then promised to consult the concerned decision-makingbodies and come to a positive decision. However, this time around, the ateoory studrmts.
:sct5TIOBC paint a different picture. .
l he majority of SC/ST/OBC students get very poor marks clustered around 0-5 in viva. Forexample, in ORG out of 12 SC/ST students, one student has got 20, one has 4 marks, one has 3 marks, one has 2 marks and theremaining eight has 1 mark). In pract.
ical terms, it ensures that many don't reach the required minimum cut-off of say 30% or 36% of.
overall marks even if they have reasonable marks in written exam..:. At another level, even with a very good performance in written.
exam, which in the normal course would guarantee a general category seat, the student is pushed down to occupy a reserved seat.blocking other potential candidates in the category. .
I.
Nobody is claiming that there should always be a strong correlation between viva and written exam rnarks for each individual student. However. when a whole set of students (reserved) get very poor viva marks in spite of good and average performance inwritten exams, there is a strong indication of bias. .
·We therefore demand that JNU administration immediately gives duo consideration to the distortion that has crept into the selectionprocess and accept the legitimate of demand of the students to reduce t11e weightage of the viva-voce as por the directives of the.
Supreme Court to 10-15%. Tf1is crucial step will go a long way in ensuring a more level playing field for diSiJdvantaged studentsand reduce space for subjective anomalies to affect the outcome for all the candidates. .
[iiE .
1 .
.