Straight from the Gut

It was a warm spring morning when I was having tea with the family. In came the newspaper with results of my MA final examination. We were all very elated. Later in the day a phone call came from the department. My course tutor wanted to know when I would get back to Dhaka. Naturally, I rushed back the next day. I was given an ad hoc appointment as Lecturer in the Department. In those days, the head of the department could temporarily appoint the top graduate bypassing the formal process. The practice has been discontinued.
There have been many such changes at the university since then, such as rotation of the position of head of the department. The idea has been to give everyone an opportunity at the leadership role. This process of equal opportunity has not necessarily produced the best results. Not everyone has the mindset of being a manager. Further, individual priorities may vary from obsession with research to external engagement affecting ability to run the department. Yet, to my knowledge, very few declined the option. This process of equal opportunity has been extended to all senior positions at the university. The benefit of this approach has never been formally assessed even if the overall quality of university education has declined. Is it possible that the olden days were better! The prime premise in the olden system was trust and ability as per set guidelines.
In our days there was a course titled Rapid Reader at the college equivalent to the HSC level today. The book consisted of short stories by well-known authors. One story still fresh in my mind is 'Slip Under the Microscope' by H G Wells. This is about the travail of a student as he took a test. He had to identify the content of a slide placed under the microscope. Accidentally the slide fell out and the student could see the details. He wrote the answer. The story is about his agony from this unintentional cheating. Compare that to the Chemistry examination at the college. I had to identify a salt. We all paid a certain amount of money to the demonstrator to know the name. That was the norm.
Education has gone through much changes in our life time. Imagine my reaction when I had to take an open-book examination for a taught course in the UK. That was the most difficult examination I have ever taken. The books and notes were there but of no use except availability. That spared one from the requirement to some memorization such as the formulae, but it is the ability to use the formula that did matter. Lo behold! There was no invigilator in the exam hall as the exam started. I do not know whether it is trust or a challenge to dare like the open aisles in the supermarket. This would have been a field day for Mr Beans, but the ordinary mortal. Sorry Mr Beans! In a similar fashion there were courses with take-home examination that required submission of assignment done in the confine of dorm or library.
There have been many such changes in the taught courses, at the undergrad and graduate level. One significant change at the undergrad education is the change in the programme duration from three to four years. This eliminates the necessity of attending the Master's program should one desired to leave. Comparatively, the changes in the graduate programmes have been enormous, both in design and pedagogy. Newer programmes such as eMBA have been introduced to attract professionals who did not want to leave the job. DBA is another such programme as close to the PhD sans the privilege of the title Dr. Hence, there is much interest in the PhD programme these days from the professionals. They want the title that DBA does not permit. This can be done through an alternative ePhD programme. Some requirement may be relaxed such as the residency but not the rigour of the thesis and subsequent defence. Why not? Afterall, in Italy every graduate is a Dottore.
Change reflects forward thinking. But change for the sake of change can be a recipe for disaster. As one may debate on the relevance there will be clashes with the tenet of morality and ethics. I remember a chance meeting with Amartya Sen as I was on a casual tour of Santiniketan. He was there in relation to publication of his book 'The Idea of Justice'. He invited me to his house and we had a long chat. In his terms, justice is contextual with respect to the recipient. Each alternative has its own justification, applicable as much at individual level as at group.
I remember another such chance meeting with Prof Salam at the Imperial College as I queued at the bank on the ground floor of the building where I had an office. He was in front of me. We talked about his centre at Trieste where many faculty of Dhaka University have worked, a very ordinary conversation and yet so meaningful for me. Later I had an opportunity to visit Trieste, a wonderful place in a beautiful city. Among the discussions I had with friends at the centre, one was on the delayed award of the Nobel prize to Prof. Salam. He deserved it earlier. I am not a Physicist and hence cannot comment.