After the conclusion of the day’s classes on the 22nd of August, a sizeable chunk of the Institute faculty as well as a few students filtered into the NAB Auditorium, ostensibly to discuss the expectations the students’ have of their instructors and vice versa. The open forum also included a discussion of a comprehensive survey sent to the student body asking for opinions on teaching methodology and course structure.
The event was kicked off by Professor Rajeev Sakhuja and Professor Somdatta Bhattacharya who listed TLC’s many successes, including its newsletter and the many initiatives taken to increase teacher student interaction. To no one’s surprise, the dismal in-class attendance of BITS Pilani students was the first and primary concern brought up by the faculty. Before any student could even bring up the 0% attendance criteria, Prof. Bhattacharya reminded the audience that students had been under no compulsion to attend entrance exam tutorials either and yet those classes rarely went empty. They stated that poor attendance wouldn’t be so large a concern if students studied through other sources but the majority’s lack of awareness of even the course handout suggested otherwise. Another common student complaint of lacklustre teaching was pre-emptively answered by citing the lack of students in class and the general disinterest of those in it as a demotivating factor and the primary reasons for uninspired teaching.
The student body, despite shoddy turnout, was the more vocal of the two groups. Everything from outdated course work to bureaucratic red-tape in Institute procedures was listed. Core course structure in particular came under heavy criticism, with the lack of industry driven courses forcing students to take up alternate job profiles. Several suggestions were made to remedy the current scenario, including uploading lectures online and hands on involvement in on-campus construction.
In between this heated debate, the results of the student survey were displayed. The student responses were mixed when it came to pedagogy but the faculty itself got a positive review. While it was difficult to conclude anything concrete from the questionnaire, the genuine effort to take feedback and improve by the teaching body was a heartening sign. The talk winded down with a few words by the Director, Professor A.K Sarkar, who acknowledged the concerns aired but at the same time put the onus to improve firmly on the students.