by Aditya Wadhawan
DELHI: The Academic Council (AC) of the University of Delhi (DU) has replaced the paper on ‘Economics of Discrimination’ with ‘Economic Thought of Ambedkar’ from the undergraduate Economics syllabus. This new paper will be introduced from the current academic session of 2023-24 and will become a part of the UG Economics syllabus of the university.
Yogesh Singh, Vice Chancellor, University of Delhi, had formed a six-member committee to revisit the syllabus of the Economics syllabus. Dissenting members of the AC have objected to the changes claiming this will bypass the democratic process of syllabus making.
Academicians claim that these revisions in the syllabus will make the teaching of Economics meaningless and the students will not be able to get a desired understanding of the subject due to the missing links. ‘Economics of Discrimination’ and ‘Economic Thought of Ambedkar’ must be taught jointly for better understanding, claims the professor.
Speaking to Education Times, Saumyajit Bhattacharya, associate professor of Economics, Kirori Mal College, DU, says, “The changes are not in the academic interest of students. The first paper on ‘Economy, State, and Society’ (ESS) has been made insignificant as it has been reduced massively. The subject will lose its relevance as they have mindlessly added new readings.”
“The third paper on ‘Economics of Discrimination’ has been replaced with ‘Economic Thought of Ambedkar’ which will cease the discussion on discrimination in the country. The ‘Economics of Discrimination’ discussed social issues like caste, gender, race, and disability. It also emphasised at the multiple dimensions and technical measures of discrimination, property rights, and land holdings which is a living reality in India. This paper also focussed on how one form of discrimination crisscrossed another through an economic methodological framework. Students need to have an understanding of these relevant issues that exist in the 21st century,” adds Bhattacharya.
Also, the paper on discrimination had a crucial section from Ambedkar’s writings, but it had a much wider focus and would have allowed the students to understand the essence of how discrimination is manifested in the current times, adds Bhattacharya.
Monami Sinha, associate professor of Economics at Kamla Nehru College and also one of the dissenting members of AC, says, “The first AC meeting had teachers who were from a non-economic background belonging to the National Democratic Teachers Front (NDTF), who objected to three papers of ‘Economics, State, and Society’, ‘Production, Relations and Globalisation’ and ‘Economics of Discrimination’.”
In the latest AC meeting, the decision to replace the ‘Economics of Discrimination’ paper with the Ambedkar paper was announced and a few minor changes have been introduced in the ‘Production, Relations and Globalisation’ paper. “The faculty welcomes the paper on Ambedkar, but it should not have replaced the ‘Economics of Discrimination’ paper. The Ambedkar paper should have been taught in the even semester and the ‘Economics of Discrimination’ paper in the odd semester. These two papers are complementary and cannot be substituted with each other,” adds Sinha.
DELHI: The Academic Council (AC) of the University of Delhi (DU) has replaced the paper on ‘Economics of Discrimination’ with ‘Economic Thought of Ambedkar’ from the undergraduate Economics syllabus. This new paper will be introduced from the current academic session of 2023-24 and will become a part of the UG Economics syllabus of the university.
Yogesh Singh, Vice Chancellor, University of Delhi, had formed a six-member committee to revisit the syllabus of the Economics syllabus. Dissenting members of the AC have objected to the changes claiming this will bypass the democratic process of syllabus making.
Academicians claim that these revisions in the syllabus will make the teaching of Economics meaningless and the students will not be able to get a desired understanding of the subject due to the missing links. ‘Economics of Discrimination’ and ‘Economic Thought of Ambedkar’ must be taught jointly for better understanding, claims the professor.
Speaking to Education Times, Saumyajit Bhattacharya, associate professor of Economics, Kirori Mal College, DU, says, “The changes are not in the academic interest of students. The first paper on ‘Economy, State, and Society’ (ESS) has been made insignificant as it has been reduced massively. The subject will lose its relevance as they have mindlessly added new readings.”
“The third paper on ‘Economics of Discrimination’ has been replaced with ‘Economic Thought of Ambedkar’ which will cease the discussion on discrimination in the country. The ‘Economics of Discrimination’ discussed social issues like caste, gender, race, and disability. It also emphasised at the multiple dimensions and technical measures of discrimination, property rights, and land holdings which is a living reality in India. This paper also focussed on how one form of discrimination crisscrossed another through an economic methodological framework. Students need to have an understanding of these relevant issues that exist in the 21st century,” adds Bhattacharya.
Also, the paper on discrimination had a crucial section from Ambedkar’s writings, but it had a much wider focus and would have allowed the students to understand the essence of how discrimination is manifested in the current times, adds Bhattacharya.
Monami Sinha, associate professor of Economics at Kamla Nehru College and also one of the dissenting members of AC, says, “The first AC meeting had teachers who were from a non-economic background belonging to the National Democratic Teachers Front (NDTF), who objected to three papers of ‘Economics, State, and Society’, ‘Production, Relations and Globalisation’ and ‘Economics of Discrimination’.”
In the latest AC meeting, the decision to replace the ‘Economics of Discrimination’ paper with the Ambedkar paper was announced and a few minor changes have been introduced in the ‘Production, Relations and Globalisation’ paper. “The faculty welcomes the paper on Ambedkar, but it should not have replaced the ‘Economics of Discrimination’ paper. The Ambedkar paper should have been taught in the even semester and the ‘Economics of Discrimination’ paper in the odd semester. These two papers are complementary and cannot be substituted with each other,” adds Sinha.
