भारतीय शिक्षा
मनुष्य में जो संपूर्णता सुप्त रूप से विद्यमान है उसे प्रत्यक्ष करना ही शिक्षा का कार्य है। स्वामी विवेकानन्द                      There are no misfit Children, there are misfit schools, misfit test and studies and misfit examination. F.Burk                     शिक्षा का वास्तविक उद्देश्य आंतरिक शक्तियों को विकसित एवं अनुशासित करने का है। डॉ. राधा कृष्णन                      ज्ञान प्राप्ति का एक ही मार्ग है जिसका नाम है, एकाग्रता और शिक्षा का सार है मन को एकाग्र करना। श्री माँ

Welcome to Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas

शिक्षा संस्कृति उत्थान न्यास के वेबसाइट भारतिय शिक्षा.कॉम में  आपका स्वागत है

8 thoughts on “Welcome to Shiksha Sanskriti Utthan Nyas

  1. Mahendra Namdev

    wants to know about18-19 feb. Ahmedabad baithak.vennue,time schedule etc.for participating in the same.

  2. pravin Agrawal

    I have been delivering lectures about mutilation of Indian history,as well as reasons why Britishers did so.
    If any institute or organisation seriously willing to shear, I Won’t hesitate.
    Pravin Agrawal, Ahmadabad


    i wish to bring in notice that a deliberate effort is going on in NCTE to demolish the whole teacher education system of Country. One report of Poonam Batra committee is in public these days and it should be stopped other wise the whole lobby will be successful in their attempts.
    in regard to this report, my submission is as follows:
    Views/Comments/Observation on the Report of the Committee on revised regulations, Norms and Standards for select Teacher Education Programmes

    After going through the recommendations of the committee, I am of the opinion that:
    • The committee which is given the responsibility to decide the future of teacher education in terms of norms, regulations and standards, has not been constituted keeping in mind the academic discipline.
    • All the 9 members of the committee are not from teacher education background and they do not posses the academic orientation of teacher education, only few of them may be working in education departments.
    • The whole report has a number of contradictions which point towards a deliberate effort to damage the system of teacher education as a discipline and seems to be prepared to fulfill some pre-decided motive of a lobby which is trying to demolish the identity of teacher education discipline.
    • Not showing concurrence to Prof. Jangira Committee on academic qualifications of faculty members, of which chairman of this committee was also a member reflects that every thing was pre-decided and they are not ready to hear any voice against their prejudices.
    • When every one is crying on quality of intake in teacher education programme, reducing the % for admission in teacher education programmes from 55% to 50% is also not understandable.
    • Committee has proposed direct admission to M.ED. programme to candidates with PG in parent discipline with out BED or any other degree in teacher education, it is not understandable. It should be kept in mind that M.ED. is a professional degree and builds its foundations laid in B.ED….if some one directly enter in M.ED., how will he/she will be able to cope up with previous educational foundations as he/she has not been gone through that process. it will dilute the quality of teacher educators, which was actually a major concern of JVC.
    • Another recommendation of committee to enroll a candidate directly in M.ED., after Diploma in Elementary Education with graduation is also not a viable option.
    • Committee has not recommended anything on BABED and BScBED on which there is huge emphasis in central universities these days and these programmes are successfully running in regional institutes of education of NCERT.
    • The biggest attempt to turmoil the academic recognition of teacher education as a discipline is visible in proposed eligibility conditions of faculty members in teacher education programmes including D.El.Ed./B.El.Ed./B.Ed./M.Ed, etc.

    • It has been proposed that a master degree in teacher education may be a desirable condition but not essential.
    • Committee has failed to explain the logic behind proposing a candidates with masters in any discipline like psychology, philosophy, sociology or masters in science, commerce, mathematics, etc. can be appointed as assistant professor in teacher education programme with out any degree in teacher education discipline.
    • A person may be master of his/her own discipline but he/she can be presumed to be master of pedagogy and teacher training, this is really seems a deliberate effort to downplay the discipline of teacher education.
    • Will esteemed members of committee recommend a person with BEd/MED with a research publication in history of education to be appointed as assistant professor of history? Every discipline has corpus of knowledge and academic orientation, which may be interlinked or interdisciplinary but is doesn’t mean that it can be grabbed and destroyed by people with wasted interests.
    • if I know that I can be appointed as teacher educator after doing simple PG in my parent discipline, why should I go for another 4 years to do BED/MED? it will slowly force to closedown thousands of teacher education institutions and ultimately lead to end of the discipline…which is never accepted.
    • D.EL.ED. and B.EL.ED., both the courses are for elementary education and for both eligibility is 10+2, and job prospects are same for both courses. Will committee reflect that why for getting same job, one will go for 4 year course if he can get same job after 2 year course. B.El.ED. programme is of no relevance and first it should be closed, from where most people form “club of elites” belongs.

    In the view of above cited points, it is my humble request that deliberate effort to destroy the academic discipline of teacher education should be stopped immediately and focus should be shifted to strengthen the discipline and devising mechanism for quality in teacher education programme….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *