The Hindu : Kerala / Thiruvananthapuram News : Re-accreditation measures begin

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Oct 22, 2007
ePaper

Kerala

Kerala - Thiruvananthapuram

Re-accreditation measures begin

G. Mahadevan

University to submit self-assessment report

The first of the reports was to be sent in 2004
The university got a B++ grade in 2003

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: After a delay of three years, the University of Kerala is readying to submit the first of its annual self-assessment reports to the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), an autonomous bo dy under the University Gra nts Commission. The reports will be crucial to the re-accre ditation of the university by the council, due in early 2008.

Sources in the university said the report for the year 2003-04 would be sent by the end of October. “The data for the reports of 2004-05 and 2005-06 are also ready. We have to input this data in the format prescribed by the NAAC,” a university official associated with the compilation of the data said here.

These reports will provide information about the teaching and non-teaching staff of the university, its academic programmes, research activities and extension programmes. When the peer team of the NAAC arrives for the re-accreditation process, it will cross-check the claims made by the university in such reports. The reports will also reveal to the NAAC the steps initiated by the university to rectify the defects in its functioning pointed out by the peer team that did the original accreditation.

Vice-Chancellor M.K. Ramachandran Nair said that after all the annual reports were compiled and sent, a high-power committee of the university would tour all the teaching departments to cross-check the data given by them for the annual report and to find out what more needed to be done in each department on the teaching, research, and extension fronts. “We will go to each department so that everybody has the time and privacy to air problems, point out shortcomings in various areas and to suggest remedial action,” he said.

In 2003, the university had received a B++ grade from the NAAC.

The next year, the council wrote to all accredited universities asking them to send annual reports detailing steps taken to shore up the quality in teaching and learning, research and extension activities.

The NAAC also asked all universities to set up an internal quality assurance cell to monitor the activities of its teaching departments. The university finally constituted the cell in 2006.

The first of the annual reports should have been sent by the university in 2004. However, even by January 2007, 14 teaching departments were yet to submit self-evaluation reports and blueprints for quality assurance as mandated by the varsity. For many months, the internal quality assurance cell was without a head. Recently, the responsibility was given to the Director, Planning and Development, of the university.

Poor functioning

One of the prime reasons why the university got only a B++ grade in 2003 was the poor functioning of a majority of its teaching departments. In fact, the NAAC team noted that only 15 departments were functioning in a satisfactory manner. Top officials of the university said additional teacher appointments made since 2003 and the fact that funds under the special assistance programme had come to five departments would be among the university’s strong points during the re-accreditation process.

Given that the university has not really stretched itself to improve the quality of teaching, learning, research and extension activities since 2003, it remains to be seen whether such late-in-the-day ‘high-power’ activities will serve to improve the varsity’s grade.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Kerala