Mangaluru, Apr 13, 2018: A decision by department of pre-university education to advance the start of the academic year 2018-19 from May 2 for II PU and May 14 for I PU, has caused consternation among academic circles.
Flagging this issue, Ganesh Karnik, chief whip of the opposition in the legislative council demanded that the department rescind this order, which he termed illogical, and one that did no justice to students and teachers alike.
In a statement released on April 12, Thursday, MLC Karnik, who represents the teachers’ constituency in the council, said he is bewildered after seeing the dates for the start of the academic year for both I PUand II PU. Noting that at a time when supplementary examination, revaluation and other related processes are still in the pipeline, and processes relating to CET are still pending, it makes no sense to start the academic year early.
“The department has also not factored in the assembly elections for which services of teachers will be availed. The harsh realities of summer too has not been factored in this decision,” Karnik said, demanding that the department withdraw the order forthwith, and reissue a fresh time-table.
However, defending the academic time-table, C Shika, director, department of PU education, said in view of assembly elections this year, I PU and II PU exams were held early. While I PU exams were over on February 21, students would have availed vacation of 69 days when their classes begin on May 2. The II PU exams got over on March 17 and summer vacation was declared from March 18 to May 1, and the lecturers in the process will get vacation of 45 days.
Noting that PU teachers’ association requested that since they were on evaluation duty till April 11, that classes therefore should not start on May 2, Shikha said evaluation is part of their duty. “Since they do it during vacations, they are paid a special honorarium of Rs 768 per day,” she said. “The association requested that lecturers be treated as non-vacation post,” Shikha said, adding the department could look into this issue raised by them, once the model code of conduct is lifted.