The English Press Club attempted to gauge how student feedback is collected, processed, and used in academic decision-making and, to that end, secured an interview with Prof. Sachin U. Belgamwar of the Department of Mechanical Engineering, the current Associate Dean of the Academic-Undergraduate Studies Division (AUGSD).
Prof. Belgamwar explained that the August-December semester in 2025 was the first time end-of-semester feedback was collected via the ERP portal; previously, it was collected on physical forms. He elaborated that in the current system, the feedback shared is processed by a piece of software and rated based on a system of ‘points’, which are awarded on a scale of one to five. After the semester grades are released, a full analysis of the feedback and the numerical results is generated and shared with the respective faculty members. He stressed that there is absolutely no human intervention throughout the process and that the feedback shared is completely anonymous.
In addition to end-of-semester feedback, Prof. Belgamwar added that an anonymous 24/7 feedback portal is available to students, where feedback is sent directly to the concerned faculty members without any censorship. He remarked that he had personally received effective feedback via this medium in the past. When questioned about AUGSD’s role in this, the Associate Dean explained that a copy of the above feedback is also sent to them. In case of overwhelmingly poor feedback against a course instructor, AUGSD steps in and connects with the concerned faculty. This may result in major consequences such as the replacement of the faculty member in the given course, although this has only occurred in extreme cases. He asserted that student feedback accrued by a faculty member over the years also plays a vital role while considering them for promotions.
He went on to state that AUGSD also intervenes in case of grading-related feedback. Generally, grades are decided by the concerned faculty and then sent to the Departmental Committee on Academics (DCA), a department-level committee consisting of multiple faculty members, for moderation. Only a histogram of the course-takers’ grades is visible, while their names are not. These final grade boundaries are provided to another committee comprising the Director, Associate Deans for AUGSD and AGSRD, and two senior faculty members, among others.
If any modification to the structure of a course is necessary, it is taken up for debate by faculty in the DCA and then further discussed by the cross-campus DCA. It is then scrutinised by the Academic Governing Council (AGC), following which it is taken up for debate in the Senate.
When asked about AUGSD communicating with students regarding the results of their feedback, Prof. Belgamwar proclaimed that while AUGSD does not directly communicate with students about how the feedback collected has been used, this is because every single point of issue received for a given course is difficult to incorporate in subsequent semesters. Consequently, only those issues that are prevalent in most of the feedback are considered for major revisions. These issues are also brought up with the SFC (Student-Faculty Council), and the student representatives in the SFC are expected to relay the changes made to the students. ‘We would much rather have our actions speak for themselves,’ he stated emphatically.
Before concluding the interview, Prof. Belgamwar voiced some persistent concerns he had with the student body. Despite multiple avenues for feedback being available, such as the SFC, end-of-semester feedback, feedback to the director, and 24/7 feedback, the number of students who participate in the process is scant. He urged the students to proactively give constructive feedback, which will always be taken seriously.
Following the interview with Prof. Belgamwar, the English Press Club sat down with Prof. BK Sharma of the Department of Mathematics, who also serves as its DCA convener.
Prof. Sharma outlined how the student feedback is transformed from raw data into academic policy. While the AUGSD manages the initial compilation, the DCA, a nominated team of faculty members serving three-year terms, handles the granular departmental review. Beyond analysing ERP feedback, the DCA scrutinises course handouts, the fairness of question papers, and the relevance of electives.
A significant hurdle that he was concerned about was feedback fatigue. Given that students often have to fill out 15–20 forms per semester, the Convener expressed a desire to increase engagement. One proposed solution to bridge this gap involved dedicating class time to online feedback, ensuring that student voices remain a cornerstone of the Mathematics Department’s evolution.