Advocating for Rights, Consulting for Growth & Networking for Empowerment
The recent introduction of the "as-is-where-is" basis by the All-India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for the approval of Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA) and Bachelor of Computer Applications (BCA) courses has sparked controversy and raised questions about the professionalism and transparency of the regulatory body. This new term signifies a significant departure from established quality assurance practices, suggesting that colleges offering these courses may be approved without undergoing the necessary quality checks prescribed by AICTE.
Lack of Scrutiny and Due Process:
The inclusion of BBA/BCA colleges under the ambit of AICTE seems to be characterized by a lack of planning and foresight. AICTE's approach of approving colleges on an "as-is-where-is" basis raises concerns about the integrity of the approval process. By bypassing crucial steps such as Scrutiny Committee (SC) meetings and Expert Visiting Committee (EVC) meetings, AICTE risks compromising the quality and standards of education imparted by these institutions.
Unplanned Modifications and Circulars:
The regulatory landscape surrounding BBA/BCA course approval appears to be constantly evolving, with AICTE issuing circulars and notices in quick succession. However, the lack of clarity and coherence in these modifications only adds to the confusion and uncertainty among stakeholders. AICTE's rationale for these changes remains unclear, leaving many to question the motives behind such hasty decisions.
Self-Disclosure vs. Quality Assurance:
Perhaps the most concerning aspect of AICTE's approach is its reliance on "self-disclosure" and data provided by the applicant institutions for approval. This self-assessment model raises serious doubts about the credibility and accuracy of the information submitted, as well as the effectiveness of AICTE's oversight mechanisms. Without independent scrutiny and verification, there is a risk that substandard institutions may slip through the cracks, compromising the overall quality of education.
Demand for Transparency and Accountability:
In light of these developments, there is a pressing need for greater transparency and accountability in AICTE's approval process for BBA/BCA courses. Stakeholders, including colleges, students, and advocacy groups, must demand clarity regarding the criteria and rationale behind AICTE's decisions. Additionally, there should be mechanisms in place to ensure that colleges adhere to minimum quality standards and undergo rigorous evaluation before approval.
Conclusion:
The introduction of the "as-is-where-is" basis for BBA/BCA course approval by AICTE raises serious concerns about the integrity and effectiveness of the regulatory process. It is imperative that AICTE reevaluates its approach and prioritizes transparency, accountability, and quality assurance in its dealings with educational institutions. Only through concerted efforts and meaningful reforms can we safeguard the integrity of India's education system and ensure that all students receive the quality education they deserve.
