In India, for almost everything you do (or rather don't, in this case) you have an out. For a student who does not do well at an exam and fails it, there is always the ATKT system. Or the re-examination situation. A sort of second chance for those who could not make the most of their first. Should educators be against it? I am not sure. It depends, and I have not checked any research or analysis to claim either way.
Am I against it? Big time. And I talk here merely from my own experience in the classes that I teach. Since I teach at autonomous and private institutions, for once, the University cannot be blamed. Except of course for allowing the ATKT system to thrive, since all the other institutes follow a similar pattern. There was a moment, a couple of months ago when I wanted to punch someone. Of course, I didn't. It was when I was informed that I had to set a paper for the ATKT exam. I stood there, shocked.
Let me explain. I do not teach a theory paper. I teach classes on skills - communication and presentation, among others. I also teach editing to postgrad journalism students. And none of these subjects can be tested in the purview of an exam! How am I going to test a student's body language in a written paper? And his or her ability to cross check facts when editing a written piece?
Finally, I was able to explain the programme heads and course coordinators that an exam was not possible, I never conduct one even in my regular classes. I try and adopt a constructivist approach to my class, and have set up a continuous evaluation process based on a mix of take-home, group, individual and in-class assignments. These are based on real life situations and encourage the students to think.
Even then, I had to do something about giving those students another chance, who had failed in my class in the first semester. So I did. I set another assignment. It was not the extra work that bothered me. It was not the fact that it was just expected that a second chance would be given without a valid reason, though these were and remain major concerns.
It was the fact that you could have it so easy when it is an ATKT. The students in question had failed for a reason. Not attending class. Not submitting assignments on time. Not paying attention to the details (which is an absolute must in many cases). And most of all, not working at all on the assignments at hand and turning in extremely shoddy work. And in one stroke, just like that, they had another chance, working on which was much easier than the first. One assignment, hundred marks. So much easier that their peers who worked hard on multiple projects.
That's not even the worst part. The students made the same mistakes again. Neither of the ATKT students submitted work that was good enough to pass. But pass they will. Why? Another feature - called 'grace marks'. The deficit between what you need to pass and what you have. Just donated to you. And with this grace they will go home with a diploma. What is it's worth? Only the industry will tell. I am just concerned with a very short-term and straight forward thought. How can I even compare the 50/100 scored by these ATKT students to another sincere student's 64/100? More importantly, how do I live with it?
Am I against it? Big time. And I talk here merely from my own experience in the classes that I teach. Since I teach at autonomous and private institutions, for once, the University cannot be blamed. Except of course for allowing the ATKT system to thrive, since all the other institutes follow a similar pattern. There was a moment, a couple of months ago when I wanted to punch someone. Of course, I didn't. It was when I was informed that I had to set a paper for the ATKT exam. I stood there, shocked.
Let me explain. I do not teach a theory paper. I teach classes on skills - communication and presentation, among others. I also teach editing to postgrad journalism students. And none of these subjects can be tested in the purview of an exam! How am I going to test a student's body language in a written paper? And his or her ability to cross check facts when editing a written piece?
Finally, I was able to explain the programme heads and course coordinators that an exam was not possible, I never conduct one even in my regular classes. I try and adopt a constructivist approach to my class, and have set up a continuous evaluation process based on a mix of take-home, group, individual and in-class assignments. These are based on real life situations and encourage the students to think.
Even then, I had to do something about giving those students another chance, who had failed in my class in the first semester. So I did. I set another assignment. It was not the extra work that bothered me. It was not the fact that it was just expected that a second chance would be given without a valid reason, though these were and remain major concerns.
It was the fact that you could have it so easy when it is an ATKT. The students in question had failed for a reason. Not attending class. Not submitting assignments on time. Not paying attention to the details (which is an absolute must in many cases). And most of all, not working at all on the assignments at hand and turning in extremely shoddy work. And in one stroke, just like that, they had another chance, working on which was much easier than the first. One assignment, hundred marks. So much easier that their peers who worked hard on multiple projects.
That's not even the worst part. The students made the same mistakes again. Neither of the ATKT students submitted work that was good enough to pass. But pass they will. Why? Another feature - called 'grace marks'. The deficit between what you need to pass and what you have. Just donated to you. And with this grace they will go home with a diploma. What is it's worth? Only the industry will tell. I am just concerned with a very short-term and straight forward thought. How can I even compare the 50/100 scored by these ATKT students to another sincere student's 64/100? More importantly, how do I live with it?
