III Questionnaire of University Reforms Committee and Written Evidence by Dr. Ambedkar

APPENDIX III UNIVERSITY REFORMS COMMITTEE

(Refer Chapter 7. page 48)

*QUESTIONNAIRE OF UNIVERSITY REFORM IN BOMBAY PRESIDENCY

(The Bombay Government appointed a Committee to look into the problem of reform of the Bombay University. This Committee consisted of 13 members with Sir Chimanlal H. Setalvad, Kt. as its Chairman. Dr. Ambedkar was not a member of this committee but he was one of the 321 persons to whom the committee sent its questionnaire of 54 questions. Dr. Ambedkar replied only some of the questions which he considered worth replying. The questions replied by Dr. Ambedkar are alone reproduced here to be followed by his evidence.—Editor.)

1. What in your opinion should be the aim and function of University education in the Bombay Presidency ? Do you consider that the existing system of University education in this Presidency affords the young Indians of this Presidency adequate opportunities of attaining this aim ? If not, in what main respects do you consider the existing system deficient ?

2. Do you consider that the defects pointed out by you mainly lie in or spring from (a) the spirit and methods of instructor or pupil ; (b) the conditions of education, antecedent to the students’ entrance of the University ; or ( c) the administrative or educational machinery of the University ?

3. How far in your opinion has the University promoted knowledge of, and mutual interest in and sympathy for, the history and culture of the different communities in this Presidency ? Can you suggest means by which this can be further promoted ?

II. Secondary and Intermediate Education (Questions 4-7)

4. Do you consider the training and attainments of students coming out of our High Schools sufficient preparation for entering upon University

*Report of the Committee on University Reform appointed by Government, 1925-26, pp. 226-31.

education ? If you consider this preparation inadequate, have you any suggestions for the improvement of the present conditions ?

5. Do you consider the creation in this Presidency of ( a) a new set of institutions in intermediate between High Schools and University ; ( b) a new Board of Secondary and Intermediate Education such as was proposed by the Calcutta University Commission necessary or desirable ? If so, how should such institutions and such a Board be constituted and financed ?

6. If you consider intermediate institutions, with or without an Intermediate Board, unnecessary or undesirable, how without them could the level, range and effectiveness of existing High School education in this Presidency be improved ?

7. How may the University best secure the maintenance of efficiency in the institutions that send students to it for admission ?

III. Functions of the University of Bombay (Questions 8-24)

(a) Teaching (Questions 8-13)

8. In what directions is it necessary and practicable as well as advisable, in your judgment, to extend the function of the University of Bombay so as to make it predominantly a teaching University ?

9. Do you consider that the University should, in addition to postgraduate teaching take any direct part in under-graduate teaching ? If so, how would you reconcile and co-ordinate the teaching functions of the University with those of the existing teaching institutions ?

10. If you do not consider the University should take any direct part in under-graduate teaching, how by proper co-ordination would you utilise to the best advantage the existing facilities for under-graduate study ? IV. Additional University in Bombay Presidency (Questions 25-30)

25. Is it desirable to constitute any additional Universities within the Bombay Presidency ? What Centres of higher education in the Presidency do you consider— (a) ripe for immediate expansion into Universities, (b) likely to be ripe in the near future, and on what grounds ?

28. How would the institution of additional Universities affect the existing University of Bombay ? How would you secure co-operation, co-ordination, and reciprocity between the University of Bombay and the new University ? What arrangement do you suggest for the period of transition ? VII. Constitution (Questions 36-40)

36. What defects do you find in the constitutional machinery of the University of Bombay ?

37. What should be the strength, composition, duration of office, method

of constituting and powers and functions of the Senate ? Who, if any, should be ex-officio, life, and nominated members of the Senate ? How does your method of constituting the Senate secure the representation of all interests and communities ?

38. Do you consider that it is necessary or desirable to decentralise the powers and functions hitherto exercised by the Syndicate of the Bombay University ? If so, what powers or functions would you remove from the Syndicate and to what new or existing bodies of the University would you assign them ? How should the Syndicate so reorganised and any new bodies you may propose be composed ?

39. What functions and powers would you assign to the Faculties and Boards of Studies ? How should these bodies be constituted and appointed ? III. Functions of the University of Bombay (Questions 8-24)

(c) Prescribing Courses and Examining (Questions 16-19)

16. How in your opinion has the University been discharging the functions of (a) conducting examinations, (b) prescribing courses of study, and (c) appointing text-books ? Would you suggest any modifications in the exercise of these functions ?

17. How far can University examinations be profitably replaced or supplemented by other means of testing proficiency, intelligence and competence ?

18. On what branches of study should the Bombay University undertake the teaching immediately and in the near future ?

19. In considering the extension of the teaching functions of the University of Bombay and bearing in mind the special requirements of the people of Bombay, would you suggest the institution of any more faculties e.g. of Fine Arts or Technology so as to make the scope of the University broader, more liberal and more comprehensive ?

(d) Post-Graduate Courses and Degrees (Questions 20-21)

20. When the Bombay University further develops its teaching functions, what should be the duration of studies for post-graduate degrees ? How would you award such degrees, whether by examination, thesis, original research or a combination of one or more of these ?

21. Do you wish to institute any new degrees honoris causa and, if so, on what grounds would you have them awarded ?

(e) Promoting Research (Questions 22-23)

22. How Can the University best encourage and guide independent investigation of Indian and especially Bombay’s problems, whether historical, economic, sociological, industrial, or other ?

23. Is there any need for the creation of a University Press and Publication Department ? How might such Department be organised and financed ? (f) Appointing University Teachers (Question 24)

24. In a Bombay Teaching University what should be the method of

selecting and appointing University Professors, Readers, Lecturers etc. ? What qualifications are requisite in them ? What range of salaries do they require ? What should be the conditions regulating their appointment and tenure of office ?

IV. Additional Universities in Bombay Presidency (Questions 25-30)

30. What principles or policy should be followed by ( a) the Bombay University, (b) any new University within this Presidency in permitting the opening of any new College or Institution, constituent or affiliated ? V. Relation of the University and the Public (Questions 31-34)

31. How far do you consider the curricula of the Bombay University satisfy the needs of Agricultural, Industrial, Professional and Public-life in the Presidency, and especially in the City of Bombay ?

32. Can you suggest method of promoting cordial relation and cooperation between the University and other public bodies whether industrial, commercial, professional, municipal or Government ?

33. What measures should be taken to bring the University and its working into closer relation with the industrial and commercial life and interests of the City ?

34. What should be the extent and purpose of the University’s contribution to the education of the adult non-collegiate population ? How should the University organise extension lectures, vacation terms and other measures to this end ?

VI. Relation of University and Government (Question 35)

35. What should be the relation of the Government of India and of the Government of Bombay to the University of Bombay and to any new Universities that may be created ? What modifications, if any, do you think necessary in the existing powers of the Chancellor and of Government to control University finance, legislation, appointments of University Officers and Teachers and membership of University bodies ? What should be the relation, if any, of the Director of Public Instruction and the Minister in charge of Education to the University ?

VIII. Curricula (Questions 41-44)

41. Are you generally satisfied with the subject and curricula at present prescribed for the various University Examinations ? If not, can you indicate the changes you desire ?

42. Are you in favour of establishing ( a) an absolute or ( b) a greater differenciation of the pass and honours courses ? How would such differenciation affect the Colleges and Students ?

43. Would you approve of an absolute exclusion of science from the Arts Courses ? Do you approve of the present dissociation of Literature and Arts from the study of science ?

44. Do you consider the existing courses for the Bachelor’s and Master’s degree provide a sufficient variety of options and satisfactory combinations and correlations of Courses of Study ?

IX. Use of the Vernacular (Questions 45-46)

45. To what stage and to what extent do you consider the vernacular, can and should be used to replace English as the medium of instruction and examination (a) in Bombay, (b) in any newly constituted University ? What safeguards do you suggest to secure that the standard of English required by students does not suffer from such replacement ?

46. What do you consider the best method of promoting the scientific study of the Vernaculars of this Presidency and for encouraging the production of good vernacular literature of all kinds ?

XIII. Special Communities (Question 52)

52. Do you consider any special measures are required for the promotion of University education in any particular community ?

*WRITTEN EVIDENCE BY D R. B. R. AMBEDKAR

Question 1: I agree with the Inspectors of the Board of Education in England that the aim and functions of University Education should be to see that the teaching carried on there is suited to adults ; that it is scientific, detached and impartial in character; that it aims not so much at filling the mind of the student with fact or theories as at calling forth his own individuality, and stimulating him to mental effort; that it accustoms him to the critical study of the leading authorities, with perhaps, occasional reference to first hand sources of information, and that it implants in his mind a standard of thoroughness, and gives him a sense of the difficulty as well as the value of reaching at truth. The student so trained should learn to distinguish between what may fairly be called matter of fact and what is certainly mere matter of opinion. He should be accustomed to distinguish issues, and to look at separate questions each on its own merits and without an eye to their bearing on some cherished theory. He should learn to state fairly, and even sympathetically, the position of those to whose practical conclusions he is most stoutly opposed. He should become able to examine a suggested idea, and see what comes of it, before accepting it or rejecting it. Without necessarily becoming an original student he should gain an insight into the conditions under which original research is carried on. He

*University Reforms Committee-Written Evidence No. 103, pp. 1-17, dated 15th August 1924.

should be able to weigh evidence, to follow and criticise argument and put his own value on authorities.

I see no reason why the aim and functions of the University Education in the Bombay Presidency should be different. Judged by the quality of the students it turns out it must be said that the existing system of University Education in this Presidency has totally failed to realize the aim and functions of University Education.

Question 2 : It is possible that this failure springs partly from the spirit and methods of the instructor, partly of the pupils and partly from the conditions of education antecedent to the students’ entrance to the University. In my opinion, however, the failure springs mainly from the administrative and educational machinery of the University. Before a University can be in a position to fulfil the aims and functions of University Education it must be so organized that it becomes essentially a place of learning, where a Corporation of Scholars labour in comradeship for the training of men and the advancement and diffusion of knowledge. In the light of these remarks it will be obvious that the Bombay University in the first place is no true University. It is not a Corporation of Scholars. It does not undertake the training of men and it is not directly interested in the advancement and diffusion of knowledge. On the other hand, the Bombay University in respect of its administration and educational machinery is what a University ought not to be. It is a Corporation of Administrators. It is only concerned with the examination of candidates while the advancement and diffusion of knowledge is outside the ambit of its interests.

Question 3 : The University of Bombay has not promoted knowledge of and mutual interest in and sympathy for the history and culture of the different communities in this Presidency. A purely examining University that does not concern itself with inculcating the love of learning cannot achieve this object. And it seems to me that the only way of success along this line is first of all to convert the University into a Teaching University. Questions 4-7 : I do not feel I am competent to answer these questions satisfactorily. I agree that a great deal depends upon what kind of “stuff” the University gets from the high schools. How to get the right kind of stuff is a problem with every University. But I cannot understand why a University should be required to enter upon the control of high schools in order to compel them to produce the required kind of stuff. I know of no University that has undertaken this responsibility. All that the Universities do is to hold their own entrance examination whereby they select the kind of stuff they want by their test papers. I do not see why the Bombay University should be called upon to do more.

Questions 8-10 : There are in my opinion two distinct problems that must arise in any attempt that may be made for converting the University of Bombay into a Teaching University. They are ( i) how to convert it into a Teaching University and ( ii) how to organize its teaching. With the first

problem I will deal when I come to questions 36-40. Here I will deal with the second problem. In the Incorporation Act of 1857 no provision was made for allowing the University to undertake teaching functions. The Act of 1904 for the first time described the University as being incorporated for the purpose (among others) of “making provision for the instruction of students”, a phrase which might seem to have been intended to include undergraduates in putting into practice this clause all the older Universities have followed the University Commission which recommended that the Universities might justify their existence as teaching bodies by making further provision for advanced courses of study. As a result of this we find today that the undergraduate teaching has been separated from the postgraduate teaching, the former being taken up by the University and the latter left to the colleges.

I am totally opposed to any such sharp division between post-graduate and undergraduate training. My reasons are as follows : — (1) The separation of post-graduate work from undergraduate work means the separation of teaching from research. But it is obvious that that where research is divorced from teaching research must suffer. As has been well observed by the Commissioners of 1911 on University Education in London. “69. Teaching will, of course, predominate in the earlier work, and research will predominate in the advance work ; but it is in the best interests of the University that the most distinguished of its professors should take part in the teaching of the undergraduates from the beginning of their University career. It is only by coming into contact with the junior students that a teacher can direct their minds to his own conception of his subject, and train them in his own methods and hence obtain the double advantage of selecting the best men for research, and getting the best work out of them. Again it is the personal influence of the man doing original work in his subject which inspires belief in it, awakens enthusiasm, gains disciples. His personality is the selective power by which those who are fittest for his special work are voluntarily enlisted in its services and his individual influence is reproduced and extended by the spirit which actuates his staff. Neither is it the few alone who gain ; all honest students gain inestimably from association with teachers who show them something of the working of the thought of independent and original minds. ‘Any one’, says Helmholtz, who has once come into contact with one or more men of the first rank must have had his whole mental standard altered for the rest of his life’. Lectures have not lost their use and books can never fully take the place of the living spoken word. Still less can they take the place of the more intimate teaching in laboratory and seminar, which ought not to be beyond the range of the ordinary course of a university education, and in which the student learns, not only conclusions and the reasons supporting them, all of which he might get from books but the actual process of developing thought, the working of the highly trained and original mind.”

“70. If it is thus to be desired that the highest university teachers should take their part in undergraduate work and that their spirit dominate it all, it follows for the same reasons that they should not be deprived of the best of their students when they reach the stage of post-graduate work. This work should not be separated from the rest of the work of the University, and conducted by different teachers in separate institutions. As far as the teacher is concerned it is necessary that he should have post-graduate students under, him. He must be doing original work himself, and he often obtains material assistance from the co-operation of advanced students. Their very difficulties are full of suggestions, and their faith and enthusiasm are a pay source of refreshment and strength. He escapes the flagging spirit and and the moods of lethargy which are apt to overtake the solitary worker. There can be no question of a higher class of teachers than the professors of the University, or the whole position of the University will be degraded. On the other hand, a university teacher of the highest rank will naturally desire to have as his post-graduate students those students whom he has already begun to train in his own methods, though his laboratory or seminar will, of course, be open to students who come from other universities, and to some perhaps who come from no university at all, as well as to some who come from other teachers of the University of London. There must be a great deal of give and take, and students may often gain by studying under more than one teacher of the same subject ; but that is an entirely different thing from separating the higher work from the lower. We do not think it would be possible to get the best men for University Professorship it they were in any way restricted from doing the highest work or prevented from spreading their net wide to catch the best students.”

“71. It is also a great disadvantage to the undergraduate students of the University that post-graduate students should be removed to separate institutions. They ought to be in constant contact with those who are doing more advanced work than themselves, and who are not too far beyond them, but stimulate and encourage them by the familiar presence of an attainable ideal.”

The disastrous consequences which follow to advanced research work where it is separated from teaching have become patent at least to me. It is a notorious fact that many Indian students who have returned with post-graduate degrees from the University of London and other universities have been failures in the sense that they have failed to master their subjects although some of them occupy the highest posts in the educational line. The reason for this is to be found in the fact that their under-graduate training was utterly insufficient for advanced research work. The Committee will remember that post-graduate training is very modern in its origin and conception. There were men at Cambridge and Oxford who did a great deal of excellent work although those universities did not have post-graduate departments. Even now the men at the head of post-graduate departments

at Oxford, Cambridge and London are only graduates and yet they are doing their work of directing post-graduate research remarkably well so as to attract students from all parts of the world. The reason is that their undergraduate training was of a high order. I am, therefore, bound to emphasise that the University must undertake the training of the undergraduates if it intends to rear a structure of a sound system of post-graduate work. (2) Secondly, the assumption by the University of direct responsibility for teaching in the post-graduate sphere by its own staff which is regarded as a great reform tends to produce the unhappy effect of placing the university staff in antithesis and in opposition to the college staff which feels that its status is unreasonably reduced by the formal and practically permanent limitation of the colleges to an inferior sphere of work. (3) Thirdly, the establishment of a distinct University Professoriate for post-graduate work is a sheer waste of the resources of the University and can be easily avoided by a proper husbanding of the resources of the colleges. In our system of University education the colleges are the only places of learning. But they are at present the property of separate bodies and the management of each college is vested in a separate governing body. The income derive from a college goes to its own fund. If there is any surplus after the necessary expenses it only serves to swell this fund. Each college teaches the same subjects as the rest and is so to say a ‘pocket’ university obliged to maintain a competent staff to teach all the subjects and to provide separate libraries and laboratories for their own use. Autonomous as these colleges are none of them is financially a wealthy institution to be able to engage a first class and adequate staff and to provide a first class and adequate equipment in the form of libraries and laboratories. Owing to their slender resources the college staff is handicapped and overburdened. Being obliged to teach too many subjects specialization becomes impossible and a college professor under these circumstances has neither the inducement nor the opportunity to become the master of a small branch of a great-subject. As an inevitable result of this system of autonomous self-sufficing colleges we have scattered here and there poor professoriates, poor libraries and poor laboratories. But because the existing resources seem insufficient when looked upon as attached to or dissipated among the different colleges it does not follow that the resources of the colleges in the aggregate are not great enough to cope with the teaching of the post-graduate and undergraduate work of the Bombay University. Take for instance the resources of the colleges situated in the City of Bombay for the purpose of teaching economics. We have in the City of Bombay the following colleges providing training in Economics for the B.A. Course of the Bombay University :—(1) Elphinstone College, (2) Wilson College, (3) St. Xavier’s College and (4) Sydenham College, There are two men teaching economics at the Elphinstone, two at the Wilson, two at the St. Xavier’s and some six or so at the Sydenham

College. Together there are about 12 men in the City of Bombay engaged in the teaching of economics. I know of no university in the world which has such a large number of men engaged in the teaching of one subject and yet all this plethora of professors is running to waste merely for the want of a better organization. And the University instead of attempting to stop, this waste had added to it by the appointing of two more professors of its own to the existing lot.

It is however obvious that if these colleges could be induced to pool their teaching and library resources it would not only produce a strong specialized professoriate but it will produce a professoriate adequate to deal with both undergraduate and post-graduate work and thus obviate the waste of university resources on the two university chairs of economics. To bring this about one has only to arrange that these twelve men do combine together to distribute among themselves the work of carrying out the economics curriculum of the University and agree to lecture to all students taking that course irrespective of the colleges in which they are enrolled. The same plan could be easily adopted in organizing the teaching of other subjects in the colleges in the City of Bombay. The only difficulty probably in the way of this plan is of the students having to run from college to college to attend these lectures. This difficulty can be easily met. I should say that all lectures on Political Science shall be delivered at the Sydenham College. All lectures on Philosophy and Psychology shall be delivered at the Wilson College and all lectures on Literature and languages shall be delivered at the Elphinstone College. By this arrangement the frequent run of students between colleges will be entirely obviated. The colleges should be declared to be halls of lectures on a particular subject and the lectures while remaining on the foundations of their respective colleges will coalesce together so as to form a homogeneous group and will have rooms at the college which is assigned for the subject they will be dealing with, and which will contain the portions of the libraries of the colleges on that particular subject. I agree that University should be a centralized institution and if the plan of a new University were to be laid down ab integro it would be better to rule out the type in which a university was to be composed of affiliated colleges. But it must be recognized that universities cannot be sown broadcast and that where a number of institutions of collegiate status have come into being they cannot be lightly abolished in order to promote the success of centralizing institution. Under the plan I have outlined neither the standard of university education nor the independence of colleges is sacrificed. Administratively the colleges remain independent. Educationally they become integral parts of the University. In short the position becomes somewhat like the position at Oxford and Cambridge where the university is the colleges and the colleges form the university. Such an organization makes the most of the existing colleges and eliminates the waste.

Question 25 : My scheme of organizing University Education applies only

to those centres where the colleges are situated in close proximity. If this scheme is to be utilized on a large scale the first thing to do is to control the location of colleges so that they shall be established in close proximity. In other words it is necessary to prevent adventurous educationists from opening individual autonomous colleges in all sorts of unseemly and unpromising towns. When one recalls the waste, duplication and dissipation of resources involved in the existence of such separate and scattered colleges one is surprised to see that such anarchical situation should have been tolerated so far. I regard it a great piece of good fortune for the Bombay Presidency that the growth of these isolated colleges has not as yet become so rank and wild as in Bengal. But steps must be taken at once to counteract the establishment of scattered colleges at random if the standard of University Education is to be maintained. For this purpose I should lay down the centres of University Education in this Presidency and should not allow any college to be started at any other place. In my opinion the following places should be marked as actual or potential centres of University Education : — I—Bombay. VI—Hyderabad (potential).

II—Poona. VII—Dharwar (potential).

III—Ahmedabad. VIII—Sangli (potential).

IV—Surat (potential). IX—Nasik (potential).

V—Karachi X—Amalner (potential).

Having defined the centres of University education the next thing to do is to organize the teaching at those places. At most of the above University centres there is as yet only a single college providing education in Arts. Only in Bombay and Poona are there groups of colleges in close proximity. There the problem of University teaching can be easily solved by permutation and combination of the various college staffs into departments. At those centres where there are as yet only a single isolated college the problem of providing education of the university type can be solved in two ways (1) by allowing the foundation of new colleges in close proximity of the existing ones for the purpose of teaching one particular subject or (2) by recognizing the existing college as a university and to allow it to expand by starting new departments of study. The former plan seems to be easier of success. But the latter would be better from the standpoint of efficiency. By adopting this policy, instead of having a number of colleges scattered through the different parts of the Presidency to meet the educational demands in those parts of the Presidency we would be able to have other universities in other parts of the Presidency to meet the educational demands in those parts. By this we may not have achieved the ideal of a centralized university. But we may at least be achieving the next best, of having all the colleges which are affiliated to a university situated in the university town in close proximity of one another to combine together in intellectual co-operation and make the university so to say a living personality.

Question 28 : Bombay and Poona are the only places ripe for immediate expansion into universities and I suggest that these be at once incorporated into separate universities. Ahmedabad is likely to be ripe in the near future. It has already an Arts College and a Science Institute and may be converted into a University.

Pending the establishment of universities in the centres marked above the three universities of Bombay, Poona and Ahmedabad should have an external side like the University of London whereby arrangements could be made to grant degrees to students of the other colleges appearing at their examinations.

If the future universities to be established in this Presidency shape themselves into centralized institutions then the problems raised in these questions will not arise. For, then, the university will be in full control of its staff and teaching arrangements. But I will assume that our future universities will be a cluster or constituent colleges independent in their organization. At any rate it will be so of the new universities of Bombay and Poona. Under the scheme of having constituent colleges, the colleges will still continue to be places licensed by the university to provide University education. The plan of inter-collegiate teaching will remove the waste duplication and dissipation of resources by the constituent colleges. But will that arrangements be sufficient to ensure that the standard of university education will be maintained at a high level. That depends upon the standing of the teaching staff engaged in imparting University education. At present the teachers are attached to the colleges and their pay and status are regulated by the authorities governing the colleges. But the colleges do not seem to be making the appointments solely from the sense of obtaining the most qualified persons nor regulating their grades, tenure, pay and promotion in such a manner as to open a career to the best and most qualified member of the staff. The whole educational work carried on by Government is entrusted to the educational services in the three grades of which are included all the administrative and inspecting officers, and all the teachers in Government colleges and schools from the most responsible to the most junior. As in all services the principle of seniority is so deeply rooted that it has become a sacred convention that all superior posts should go by seniority. The principal drawback of this system so far as the work of University education is concerned is that rewards are regulated not by depth of scholarship but by the length of service. Teachers of a college who are subject to be transferred from place to place as is the case with the members of the Government service cannot but feel that the body corporate which claims their loyalty and obedience is not the college but the service and more often than not their ambition is directed to securing service promotions than that of creating a school of learning with which their names will be identified. The invidious distinction drawn between the I.E.S.

and P.E.S. is another weakness of the service system in that it tempts even the very junior members of the former to regard themselves as the superior of the most senior and distinguished members of the latter. This introduces an element of friction among the members of the college staff rendering difficult that free and friendly co-operation which is so indispensable to promote the intellectual life of any educational institution. Last but by no means the least in importance is the fact that under the present circumstances the professors in the Government colleges by reason of their being servants of the Government have lost the confidence of their students. The students instead of regarding their professors as their intelectual leaders regard them as the agents of Government and the professors receiving no response from their students drudge on without kindling their interest and winning their allegiance. In the colleges maintained by Missionary bodies the leading members of the staff are European Missionaries. The rest of the staff consists of Indian teachers. The distinction between the I.E.S. and P.E.S. is reproduced there on a small scale though it is not quite so emphasized as to produce open friction. In the private colleges maintained by Societies, such as the Deccan Education Society all the members of the staff are the members of the Society. The staff here is therefore more homogeneous and has nothing in its organization to lead to any cleavage. But the constitution of these colleges restricts them to the appointment of men who care to become life members of the Societies which control them. I cannot speak very definitely about the prospects offered by these private colleges but it is certain that they are very poor even when compared with the lowest grades in the Government colleges and indeed they are so poor that they cannot attract men of moderate attainments unless the same can afford to maintain a large margin of disinterestedness. But it is not the private colleges alone that fail to procure proper persons to fill their vacant posts. Even Government colleges with the best of prospects seldom succeed in hitting upon the right sort of a person. The reason is that neither have any proper machinery for making a judicious selection. In the case of Government colleges it is the Director of Public Instruction or the Secretary to Government that makes the choice. But as a matter of fact they are the most inexpert people for this task. Similarly the appointments in the private colleges are mostly in the hands of the heads of the colleges and they too are incapable of making proper choices. The fault lies in not recognizing that to assess the merits of a person one must belong to his kind. It will take an economist to judge an economist.

Quite apart however from these difficulties and drawback there is no possible means of bringing a University staff thus recruited by the different colleges into a due relation, as regards either its members or its distribution, to University needs. The University might find itself supplied with half a dozen professors of one subject and without a single in another equally

important branch of knowledge. University organization cannot proceed on these lines, and the difficulties described above can be removed only by placing the appointments of all teachers of the University in the hands of the University itself acting through the Academic Council ( see constitution of the new University) or at least by giving the University an effective voice in their appointment.

I therefore propose that the collegiate branch of the Educational Service should be separated from the Administrative branch and should be placed under the University with proper safeguards. In other words the teachers’ posts at the different colleges should be converted into chairs attached to and supported by certain foundations in the present case by the private colleges and Government. But the appointments to these chairs should be controlled by the University.

I attach the greatest importance to the control of the University over the appointment of its teaching staff. Hitherto the University of Bombay has attempted to maintain the standard of University education by means of its power to test it by a rigid system of examination. The result has been a gradual lowering of the calibre of its graduates. This is principally to be attributed to the egregious error committed by the fathers of our University education in not at all recognizing that the only means of maintaining the standard of University education are the rigid exclusion of students who are unfit for University studies and the existence of a body of highly qualified and productive teachers, organized in departments adequately equipped. In other words they attempted to maintain the standard of the University degrees without attempting to maintain the standard of the teachers and the taught. When events are moving us in the direction of making the University of Bombay a teaching University, it must be clearly realized that “the power to control teaching is of more importance than the power to test it by granting degrees”. A University cannot become a teaching University unless its academic affairs, i.e., teaching and examination are left to the uncontrolled discretion of those engaged in teaching. But it will be fatal to the standard of a University degree if the University reposed such a large trust in a body of teachers in whose calibre it has no confidence. I therefore propose that the University should have the power of purse over the colleges. All Government grants to the colleges should be made through the University, so that the University will have a voice in the appointment of the staff of teachers and their equipment in the matter of libraries and laboratories.

Questions 36-39 : If a University as a corporation of learning is to serve the community, then its constitution must provide ( a) for a body which will keep it in touch with all varied requirements of the community ; ( b) for a body which will give the University a statesman-like guidance in the provision and also in accommodation of means to ends so as to bring about

a working comprise between the possible misconceptions of the public and the possibly too narrow outlook of the scholar ; and ( c) for a body of scholars engaged in the work of teaching to give an authoritative direction to the academic business of the University.

I want to impress upon the Committee that a University does not become a teaching University merely by engaging in the work of teaching through the agency of its own staff. That is not the criterion of a teaching University. A University may undertake teaching and yet may not be a teaching University. Whether or not a University is a teaching University depends upon whether or not the scholars engaged in the work of teaching have the authoritative direction of the academic business of the University in their hands. If it is in their hands then the University is a teaching University. If it is not in their hands then the University is not) a teaching University. A teaching University is a teachers’ University.

I am led to make these preliminary remarks because I feel that the Committee in inviting answers to its questions on the constitution is motivated by the desire to obtain such suggestions as will help to make the University of Bombay a teaching University. The existing constitution of the University of Bombay does not provide in any adequate or clear cut manner any of the three bodies I have said to be necessary for a University to function properly. The Senate of the University is not sufficiently representative of the life and interests of Bombay. The Syndicate has not the responsibilities and powers which should devolve upon the Executive Council of a great University and often has devolved upon it duties which it is absolutely unfit to perform. While the teaching staff which is really the heart of the University has practically no voice, let alone authoritative direction, in the academic affairs of the University.

To make the University of Bombay a teaching University I would first of all proceed to the constitution of faculties. For this purpose I will take it that my scheme of inter-collegiate teaching between the colleges situated in the City of Bombay is adopted. Under that scheme the several studies pursued in the colleges will naturally have to be grouped into Departments, e.g., Economics. History, Politics, Administration, Law, Literature, Languages, Chemistry, Physics, etc. It will be admitted that students are receiving at a University their final systematic preparation for one or other of the several occupations of life for which a University education is necessary at any rate, the most advantageous preliminary.

To succeed in this it is necessary to group together certain branches of knowledge which students pursue. Not only do the needs of students require such a grouping but the needs of the teachers point in the same direction, for it is obvious that certain studies have a closer relation between them and there is a greater similarity in the point of view from which they are approached. These forces emanating from the teachers and the taught have

led everywhere the grouping of the several departments of study into what are called Faculties. I suggest therefore that the Departments in the new University of Bombay should be grouped into Faculties and the Faculties should be made the basis of the University organisation if our University is to be a teaching University. A faculty should consist, either wholly or mainly of the Professors and Assistant Professors of the subjects comprised within the Faculty ; and of such other teachers and officers appointed by the University as the Faculty may co-opt. The Vice-Chancellor should exofficio be a member of every faculty. A Faculty should have the power to make Regulations— (i) to appoint Committees consisting of the Faculty together with other persons to act as Board of Studies and for other purposes ; (ii) to determine generally the conditions for the award of degrees, diplomas, and other distinctions within the purview of the Faculty ; (iii) to determine generally the course of study to be pursued by students of the University in the subjects within the purview of the Faculty ; (iv) to determine generally the method and manner of teaching and examination with regard to the subjects within the purview of the Faculty. I must say again that if the Faculties are to be entrusted with the powers set out above and the teachers are to be freed from the restrictions imposed by a common syllabus of instruction and a general quasi-external examination, it is necessary to make sure that the teachers are worthy of the trust imposed in them.

The Faculties should be the constituent bodies of the University. Having constituted our Faculties to take charge of the academic and educational work of the University, we must constitute a Central Governing Body to take charge of the administrative work of the University. This body should correspond to the existing Senate of the Bombay University but should be entirely different in character and composition. In my opinion the Senate as a supreme governing body should be comparatively a large body mainly non-professional in character but including representatives of graduates and the teachers. The advantages of such a mode of government are obvious. By mean of a large Senate a number of influential citizens, chosen because of their individual capacity, and of representatives of the great interests of the town, municipal, administrative, commercial, legal, scientific, etc., and of members of Legislative Council, the Assembly and the Council of State are brought into touch with the University and serve as channels between the University and the community as a whole. Such a Senate will be able to ask for support to the University with greater authority and success and the whole city will feel interested in the success of the University. But the Universities Commission of 1902 regarded it as a fault of the system and reported that the Senates of the Universities were too bulky in

numbers (in 1900 the Senate of the Bombay University consisted of 305 fellows) and incapable of exercising proper control in educational matters. That Commission did not understand that the proper function of the Senate was not to control the education but to keep the University in touch with all the varied requirements of the community. That being the function of the Senate it must necessarily be large and varied in its composition. I propose that the Senate of the University of Bombay should be composed of 150 members. One of the most important changes effected under the Universities Act of 1904 was the provision that two-fifths of the Ordinary Fellows should be associated with the profession of teaching. As a preventive of the system in which Fellowships were bestowed by way of compliment without due regard to the qualifications of the recipient this proviso was a salutary proviso. But in view of the proposal I advocate of giving greatly increased statutory powers to the Faculties, I do not think that the teachers in the University need more representation on the Senate than is sufficient to enable each of the Faculties to have a spokesman. I, therefore, propose to restrict the representation of the teachers to the Deans of the Faculties. The rest of the Senate should be composed of persons in the political or commercial world and interest in education may be able to render the University substantial service.

The chief function of the Senate would be legislation— (1) to make statutes affecting the Government of the University and pass resolutions, (2) to confer all honorary degrees, (3) to approve of the admission of constituent colleges or University departments, (4) to institute any new degree, diploma, or certificate, (5) to decide disputes between Faculties.

Having provided for the two bodies one to look after the Government of the University and the other to take charge of the academic business of the University, we have now to provide for third body charged with the provision and also the accommodation of means to ends. In other words there must be a Central Executive of the University. This body should correspond to the existing Syndicate of the Bombay University but should be entirely different in character and composition. The Syndicate appears, both as to its composition and the conditions of its work, the least satisfactory of all the University bodies. As a supreme executive the Syndicate should have the custody and use of the Common Seal, the management of the whole revenue and property of the University and (except as otherwise provided) the conduct of all the affairs of the University. But instead of this the work of the Syndicate has been extended over a wide field of business much of which might be conveniently entrusted to other and more appropriate bodies. The existing system concentrates in a so-called executive

the work rather of discussion than of deliberate decision. I, therefore, propose to abolish the Board of Accounts and transfer its functions to the Syndicate which shall have power to determine— (1) The finance, investments and accounts of the University. (2) The amount and payment of fees to be exacted within the University, or in relation to the enjoyment of privileges therefrom. (3) The terms and mode of appointment, tenure of and removal from office, duties, emoluments, allowances, salaries and superannuation allowances of the officers of the University, including its professors, teachers, registrars, librarians and permanent servants.

(4) The tenure of office and terms and manner of appointment and the duties of the Assessors, Examiners and Examining Board. (5) The provisions and tenure of fellowships, scholarships, prizes, rewards, and pecuniary and other aids.

(6) The provision, maintenance, and supervision of halls, hostels or other premises for the residence of students.

(7) The admission of students as under-graduates of the University. (8) To deal with the real and personal property of the University. (9) To provide buildings, premises, furniture and apparatus and other means needed for carrying on the work of the University.

(10) To borrow money for the University and to mortgage University property if necessary.

(11) To enter into, vary, carry out and cancel contracts on behalf of the University.

(12) To entertain, adjudicate upon and if thought fit redress any grievances of the officers of the University, the professors, the teaching staff, the graduates, under-graduates and the University servants who may feel aggrieved otherwise than by an act of the Senate.

(13) To regulate the Government grants to the constituent colleges. These three bodies, the Senate, the Syndicate and the Faculties should be constituted by the Act of Incorporation and together they are enough to supply all the necessary organs of a great teaching University. But there seems to be a want for one more body for the new University of Bombay, particularly for the transition period that is bound to be very long before the mother colleges at the centre of University education ripen into Universities pending which they must remain affiliated to one or other of the newly organized teaching Universities in this Presidency. But even if this problem of making provision for the transition period was not there, the need for a fourth body in the management of a great teaching University would be felt nonetheless. The plan of organization I have proposed is based more or less on the principle of separation of powers. The centre of legislative power is the Senate. The centre of executive power is the Syndicate and the centre of

academic power is the Faculty. But if these separate powers are exercised independently and without any co-ordination, the result is bound to be injurious to the best interest of the University. A Faculty is here taken as the basis of University organization and is given complete autonomy in prescribing courses of study and arranging the teaching of and the examining work. But provision must be made for the control of all matters not expressly assigned to the Faculties, the settlement of matters affecting more than one Faculty, and for a final decision when differences arise between one Faculty and another. There is not only a need for a body for co-ordinating the Faculties but there is also a need for a body for co-ordinating the Faculties and the Syndicate, otherwise the Syndicate by the exercise of its executive powers may seriously interfere in the academic freedom of the Faculties. The control of the purse must ultimately mean the control of all else and it is therefore necessary to ensure that the Syndicate shall not take any action having a direct educational bearing on the University as a whole without consultation with a body representative of the teaching staff as a whole. Thus whether as a feature of the transition period or as a permanent feature of University organization there is a clear necessity for the establishment of a fourth body in the act of incorporation. That body I propose to call the Academic Council. Its functions will be partly advisory and partly executive. Its executive functions would include the determination by regulation or otherwise of all matters relating to— (1) The quorum to be required at meetings of the Faculties or at meetings of any Committees appointed by the Faculties.

(2) The duties and powers of Advisory and other Boards, including Boards and Committees to be appointed by the University jointly with any other University or Body touching any educational matter.

(3) The qualifications for honorary degrees and distinctions to be awarded by the University and the means and steps to be taken relative to the granting of the same.

(4) The visitation of affiliated colleges.

(5) The affiliation and disaffiliation of colleges.

(6) The tenure of fellowships, scholarships, exhibitions and pecuniary and other aids.

(7) The discipline to be enforced in regard to the graduates and undergraduates in so far as they come within the jurisdiction of the University. (8) The removal from membership of the University of graduates and under-graduates and the withdrawal of degrees, diplomas, certificates and distinctions, subject to an appeal to the Senate. The advisory functions of the Academic Council shall be as follows :

(i) The Syndicate shall not make any decision in regard to any matter relating to the organisation, improvement, and extension of University

education, both under-graduate and post-graduate without first inviting and receiving a report thereon from the Academic Council.

(ii) The Syndicate shall not issue general directions to the Faculties, or review any act of any Faculty or of any Committee or Board of a Faculty, other than the election of an officer or representative of such body, upon the appeal of any other Faculty or give directions for their future action without first inviting and receiving a report thereon from the Academic Council. (iii) The Syndicate shall not make any appointment to the teaching staff without first inviting and receiving a report from the Academic Council. The composition and strength of the Senate, the Syndicate and the Academic Council should be the same as proposed by the Calcutta University Commission for the new Calcutta University. I think it might be better to change as well the nomenclature and call the Senate, the Court and the Syndicate the State of the new University. I also propose that the Viceroy should be the Visitor of the University.

Question 16 : The University of Bombay may have been discharging the functions of ( a) conducting examinations, ( b) prescribing course of study, and (c) appointing text-books very well. But the University never seems to have paid attention to the pernicious effect of all this on the teacher and the taught. How to secure freedom for the University teacher to teach as he thinks best and not to restrict him by a hard and fast syllabus is a problem which should be in the forefront of the problems to be solved by this Committee. If freedom for the teacher can be obtained then freedom for the learner will follow. For this purpose the teachers of the University ought under proper safeguards to have entire control of the education and examination of their students and the University ought to be so constituted as to make this possible.

Question 17 : Besides examination, students’ work in colleges ought to be taken into account. For the higher degrees there should be thesis and oral examinations.

Questions 18 and 19 : The University of Bombay should have the Faculties of Engineering, Agriculture, Fine Arts, Technology and Music to make it a complete University.

Question 20 : The duration of studies for post-graduate degrees should be four years (I am speaking only for social sciences). There should be two stages of two years each. At the end of the first stage the candidate should be entitled to the M.A. degree. He should specialize in one subject only which should be the subject of his major interest. The test should consist of a written examination accompanied by an essay of some 75 typewritten pages showing his familiarity with the art of using original sources and commenting upon them. At the end of the second stage the candidate should be entitled to the Ph.D. degree. There the test would include an oral

examination and a thesis of a respectable size fit for publication. The thesis will embody the investigations of the candidate in a particular field lying within the scope of the subject he had taken at the M.A. as being of major interest to him. Beside this the candidate will present himself for an oral examination in two subjects to be known as subjects of minor interest which will be allied to the subjects of his major interest. This arrangement will allow specialization with a broad base.

Question 21 : It may be well to have a few such degrees. Question 22 : By means of subventions, studentships and fellowships. Question 23 : Most essential to have a University press and publication department. Without this the post-graduate work will be considerably hampered.

Question 24 : See answer to questions Nos. 11-13.

Question 30 : Bombay University should confine itself to Bombay. New Universities should open their own departments. But if the new University is to be composed of colleges, then each college must confine itself to the teaching of one subject only.

Questions 31-33 : See answer to questions Nos. 36-39.

Question 34 : Spread of education should be a proper function of the University. But this cannot be achieved unless the University adopts vernacular as the medium of instruction which in the present circumstances is a far cry.

Question 35 : Government should have no control over the academic affairs of the University which must be entirely entrusted to the Faculties. But Government should have some control over the legislative and administrative affairs of the University. This they should have by means of nominations to the Court and the Senate of the University.

Questions 41-44 : I should leave these questions to the newly constituted Faculties. My opinion is that the curriculum even of the Honours Course provides a poor fare to the students.

Questions 45-46 : I hold a very strong affirmative view on the use of vernacular as a medium of instruction. But I feel that the problem cannot be solved unless Indian public opinion decides which vernacular it selects for common intercourse.

Question 52 : I think special measures are required for the promotion of University education among the Backward Classes and particularly the Depressed Classes.

Before closing my replies to the questionnaire I beg to express my surprise at the absolute disregard the Committee has shown in the matter of organizing a good Library. I cannot see how any University can function without a first rate library attached to it.

15th August 1924.

zz

PART II Dr. Ambedkar

with the Simon Commission (Indian Statutory Commission)

(This page has no text — it may be blank or an image.)

A REPORT ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF BOMBAY PRESIDENCY PREFACE I regret that I have not been able to agree in the tenor of the report prepared by my colleagues on the committee or to accept the more important of the conclusions on the matters falling within the scope of our inquiry. I have therefore submitted this separate report containing my own views and recommendations. The bulk of my report has exceeded that of my colleagues. It might perhaps have been possible, by including in my report nothing more than formal answers to the questions raised to limit its bulk. But I felt there was a question to which an answer could be given without some general explanation of the principles on which the answer was based or also the report could not be properly understood. I have therefore set aside all considerations of brevity which would have exposed me to the criticism that the recommendations in the report were not supported by a sufficient amount of reasons and arguments and have allowed the report to grow to the size it has reached.