✌✌✌✌ THE HINDU ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ Back to Class X Board exams ✌✌
The excellence of a school education system must be assessed by the creative individuals it produces. That principle can be the only meaningful guide for the Central Board of Secondary Education, as it once again tweaks its testing system to make the Class X Board examination compulsory for all students from 2018. It is wrong to believe that students in the CBSE system are not being assessed with sufficient rigour: the Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) method that it follows is aimed at identifying learning difficulties periodically and instituting remedial measures, rather than raising stress with a make-or-break public examination at the secondary level. This philosophy helps students master various topics and discover their aptitude in the course of a year, eliminating the chances of a single rote-learning test that could produce an aberrant result. The gains of such a system should not be thrown away in the quest to bring about ‘uniformity’ in the Class X education pattern across the country. If anything, it is learning outcomes and creative brilliance assessed through non-ritualistic aptitude tests that should rate the capacity of an educational board. Such an approach would also encourage teachers to innovate conceptually, rather than drill students to face an examination.
The argument in favour of a compulsory Class X Board examination made by Union Human Resource Development Minister Prakash Javadekar is that its absence discriminates against candidates of State boards. In fact, the Minister announced his intent of returning to a compulsory Board examination well before the CBSE governing body formally announced it. The logic, however, is flawed. Uniformity militates against creative educational methods, and a test that is no more than a straitjacket crushes the initiative of teacher and student. The CBSE would, therefore, do well to avoid homogenisation, and retain sufficient scope for true learning. This can be done by giving the CCE system — which the Board calls a balance between incessant tests and a single annual assessment — equal weightage, even if all students take a Board examination for Class X. As the CBSE puts it, over-dependence on a single examination deprives the learner of motivation and opportunities for reflection on his or her work. It also does not find favour with the National Curriculum Framework 2005 that emphasised greater flexibility for teachers to decide on how to train students in concepts and help them learn at their own pace. What India needs is a school-level assessment method to identify actual learning that would remove barriers to students freely migrating across State boards.
✌✌ Well spun by Ashwin ✌✌
Ashwin has never been one to hide his ambition. When his international career was still young, Ashwin said in an interview that he wanted to dominate the game. There was no hint of braggadocio, just an unnerving earnestness. On Thursday, the realisation of this dream was formally recognised. Ashwin became the first spinner to win cricket’s biggest individual prize, the Sir Garfield Sobers Trophy, since the award was instituted 12 years ago. He is just the third bowler, after Dale Steyn and Mitchell Johnson, to be named ICC Cricketer of the Year. He was also adjudged Test Cricketer of the Year, only the second Indian after Rahul Dravid to sweep both awards. Indeed, the voting period — September 14, 2015 to September 20, 2016 — does not fully describe his phenomenal ascent to the top. In that time, he took 48 wickets at 15.39 and made 336 runs at 42 from eight Tests. He has added another 55 wickets (24.12) and 377 runs (37.70) in the eight Tests since. His influence was not limited to one format; in the voting period, Ashwin had 27 T20I wickets in 19 games. By any measure, Ashwin stands alone, an extraordinary comeback after being dropped for the Adelaide Test in early 2015.
Ashwin’s success has been instrumental in India becoming the premier Test side this year. There has been a perceptible change in culture and intent. Virat Kohli announced it when he acknowledged that bowlers were “the bosses” in Test cricket. He has backed it up, leading the batting group in shaping contests and empowering his bowlers to win them. There was a minor storm on social media when Kohli did not make the ICC’s Test Team of the Year. But his exclusion was easily explained: his magnificent run with the bat did not coincide completely with the voting period. He certainly stepped up a level against England, lifting his career average from the mid-40s to the high-water mark of 50. The context in which the runs came was more impressive than the volume: every time a game needed seizing or settling, Kohli attended to it. Teams tend to form themselves in the image of their captains — so, perhaps, it was not entirely surprising that India found a hero equal to nearly any task. The experienced cricketers pulled their weight. Those of more recent vintage — K.L. Rahul, Jayant Yadav and Karun Nair — appeared to make the transition without missing a beat. The side had to deal with injuries, which did not permit a settled playing eleven. But the momentum was unaffected. India will face stiffer challenges, especially overseas, as it seeks to build a legacy as a world-beater. For now, 2016 has been a good launch pad.
✌✌✌✌ THE ECONOMIC TIMES ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ Kudos, Election Commission! These parties just had to go ✌✌
The Election Commission (EC) has done well to delist 200-odd political parties that have not contested any elections since 2005. Some parties are floated mainly to launder money. They can be used both to avoid tax — make a contribution by cheque, the amount being tax-deductible for the donor and receive it back in cash, political parties not being amenable to scrutiny as to how precisely they spent their money — and to convert black money into white — give a party money in cash, it will pay you by cheque for some fictitious service.
There are 1,786 registered, unrecognised parties now, besides seven national political parties and 58 state parties. Uttar Pradesh, Delhi and Tamil Nadu house the bulk. Only a quarter of the registered parties participated in the 2009 and 2014 general elections. So, the case for delisting parties that exist merely on paper and withdrawing their incometax exemptions is compelling. However, delisting alone will not halt the practice of all political parties mopping up huge amounts of poll funds through unaccounted contributions that, in turn, drives businesses to generate black money. Fund mobilisation and spending of political parties must be made transparent. Registered parties are supposed to file their returns along with their audited accounts, but compliance to tax laws alone will not suffice. Every political party must mandatorily reveal its spending and sources of financing those expenses.
Declaring their monthly expenses and showing their sources of income — disaggregated and combined is the way to go. Other political parties and watchdog bodies must be free to challenge the figure — from the local to the national level. The EC must do the last leg of scrutiny to finalise the spending, and quiz political parties for their source of finance.
✌✌ Back to Class X Board exams ✌✌
The excellence of a school education system must be assessed by the creative individuals it produces. That principle can be the only meaningful guide for the Central Board of Secondary Education, as it once again tweaks its testing system to make the Class X Board examination compulsory for all students from 2018. It is wrong to believe that students in the CBSE system are not being assessed with sufficient rigour: the Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (CCE) method that it follows is aimed at identifying learning difficulties periodically and instituting remedial measures, rather than raising stress with a make-or-break public examination at the secondary level. This philosophy helps students master various topics and discover their aptitude in the course of a year, eliminating the chances of a single rote-learning test that could produce an aberrant result. The gains of such a system should not be thrown away in the quest to bring about ‘uniformity’ in the Class X education pattern across the country. If anything, it is learning outcomes and creative brilliance assessed through non-ritualistic aptitude tests that should rate the capacity of an educational board. Such an approach would also encourage teachers to innovate conceptually, rather than drill students to face an examination.
The argument in favour of a compulsory Class X Board examination made by Union Human Resource Development Minister Prakash Javadekar is that its absence discriminates against candidates of State boards. In fact, the Minister announced his intent of returning to a compulsory Board examination well before the CBSE governing body formally announced it. The logic, however, is flawed. Uniformity militates against creative educational methods, and a test that is no more than a straitjacket crushes the initiative of teacher and student. The CBSE would, therefore, do well to avoid homogenisation, and retain sufficient scope for true learning. This can be done by giving the CCE system — which the Board calls a balance between incessant tests and a single annual assessment — equal weightage, even if all students take a Board examination for Class X. As the CBSE puts it, over-dependence on a single examination deprives the learner of motivation and opportunities for reflection on his or her work. It also does not find favour with the National Curriculum Framework 2005 that emphasised greater flexibility for teachers to decide on how to train students in concepts and help them learn at their own pace. What India needs is a school-level assessment method to identify actual learning that would remove barriers to students freely migrating across State boards.
✌✌ Well spun by Ashwin ✌✌
Ashwin has never been one to hide his ambition. When his international career was still young, Ashwin said in an interview that he wanted to dominate the game. There was no hint of braggadocio, just an unnerving earnestness. On Thursday, the realisation of this dream was formally recognised. Ashwin became the first spinner to win cricket’s biggest individual prize, the Sir Garfield Sobers Trophy, since the award was instituted 12 years ago. He is just the third bowler, after Dale Steyn and Mitchell Johnson, to be named ICC Cricketer of the Year. He was also adjudged Test Cricketer of the Year, only the second Indian after Rahul Dravid to sweep both awards. Indeed, the voting period — September 14, 2015 to September 20, 2016 — does not fully describe his phenomenal ascent to the top. In that time, he took 48 wickets at 15.39 and made 336 runs at 42 from eight Tests. He has added another 55 wickets (24.12) and 377 runs (37.70) in the eight Tests since. His influence was not limited to one format; in the voting period, Ashwin had 27 T20I wickets in 19 games. By any measure, Ashwin stands alone, an extraordinary comeback after being dropped for the Adelaide Test in early 2015.
Ashwin’s success has been instrumental in India becoming the premier Test side this year. There has been a perceptible change in culture and intent. Virat Kohli announced it when he acknowledged that bowlers were “the bosses” in Test cricket. He has backed it up, leading the batting group in shaping contests and empowering his bowlers to win them. There was a minor storm on social media when Kohli did not make the ICC’s Test Team of the Year. But his exclusion was easily explained: his magnificent run with the bat did not coincide completely with the voting period. He certainly stepped up a level against England, lifting his career average from the mid-40s to the high-water mark of 50. The context in which the runs came was more impressive than the volume: every time a game needed seizing or settling, Kohli attended to it. Teams tend to form themselves in the image of their captains — so, perhaps, it was not entirely surprising that India found a hero equal to nearly any task. The experienced cricketers pulled their weight. Those of more recent vintage — K.L. Rahul, Jayant Yadav and Karun Nair — appeared to make the transition without missing a beat. The side had to deal with injuries, which did not permit a settled playing eleven. But the momentum was unaffected. India will face stiffer challenges, especially overseas, as it seeks to build a legacy as a world-beater. For now, 2016 has been a good launch pad.
✌✌✌✌ THE ECONOMIC TIMES ✌✌✌✌
✌✌ Kudos, Election Commission! These parties just had to go ✌✌
The Election Commission (EC) has done well to delist 200-odd political parties that have not contested any elections since 2005. Some parties are floated mainly to launder money. They can be used both to avoid tax — make a contribution by cheque, the amount being tax-deductible for the donor and receive it back in cash, political parties not being amenable to scrutiny as to how precisely they spent their money — and to convert black money into white — give a party money in cash, it will pay you by cheque for some fictitious service.
There are 1,786 registered, unrecognised parties now, besides seven national political parties and 58 state parties. Uttar Pradesh, Delhi and Tamil Nadu house the bulk. Only a quarter of the registered parties participated in the 2009 and 2014 general elections. So, the case for delisting parties that exist merely on paper and withdrawing their incometax exemptions is compelling. However, delisting alone will not halt the practice of all political parties mopping up huge amounts of poll funds through unaccounted contributions that, in turn, drives businesses to generate black money. Fund mobilisation and spending of political parties must be made transparent. Registered parties are supposed to file their returns along with their audited accounts, but compliance to tax laws alone will not suffice. Every political party must mandatorily reveal its spending and sources of financing those expenses.
Declaring their monthly expenses and showing their sources of income — disaggregated and combined is the way to go. Other political parties and watchdog bodies must be free to challenge the figure — from the local to the national level. The EC must do the last leg of scrutiny to finalise the spending, and quiz political parties for their source of finance.
No comments:
Post a Comment