We have seen how the forceful and mindless implementation of the Four Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUP) at Delhi University in 2013 turned out to be disastrous for the students. Thousands of teachers and students participated in numerous protests since the day it was unilaterally implemented. Then, AISA organised a Students’ Referendum on FYUP, where out of 11,556 students 10,519 students (91.02%) voted against the FYUP. It was clear that if FYUP is allowed to stay and spread then it will completely ruin the higher education system of our country. And no country can build a secure future without securing the quality of its universities and the future of its students. But this time it comes to us in a well-packed box of horror called the National Education Policy.
The Union Education Ministry wants to start the implementation of a 4-year undergraduate course (FYUP) in all the universities of the country, especially in the central universities. NEP 2020 talks of choice based credit system with a multiple entry/exit four year undergraduate programme. On the face of it, it seems that the FYUP will provide options to students where the student can exit after studying first year or second or third with a certificate or a diploma depending on level of exit. However, in reality the “choice to exit” is a well planned strategy to force students belonging to middle and lower classes to drop out early from higher educational institutes. The ‘multiple exits’ options are nothing but attempts to cover-up ‘dropouts’. The fourth year is also an extra financial burden which most of us cannot bear. The FYUP enhances the existing inequality of our society as students from underprivileged sections, being burdened with useless courses, will be forced to drop-out in between with ‘drop-out’ degrees. In spite of having spent both time and money on an extra year, it provides no meaningful academic content and the students will have less knowledge of their core discipline than earlier students who had acquired an Honours Degree in three years.
In 2021, the University of Lucknow became the first university in Uttar Pradesh to implement FYUP. AISA conducted a survey among the first year students of Lucknow University with respect to the implementation of NEP at various levels. It was found out that many classes in co-curricular and vocational courses (introduced to the LU syllabus of all courses under FYUP) aren’t conducted at all. Many students said that classes of core subjects were either happening irregularly or not happening at all. The survey also found how ill-equipped LU is to handle the changes being brought in due to FYUP. The NEP requires multidisciplinary teaching and research with emphasis on the all-round development of students. But a total of 180 permanent posts are lying vacant at the institute for the past 5 years (as per Times of India, 2022). The crisis has not only increased the burden on existing teachers but has also affected the academic activities. The students are, therefore, questioning why such unnecessary courses that have no benefit to their particular discipline are being introduced at the cost of the core papers. In Lucknow University, many students will feel the pressure from families to drop out of their education whenever there is a problematic financial situation, and it is almost unlikely that at a later stage, they will enter the field of education again.
The student from FYUP who exits after 2 years and 3 years with Diploma and Bachelor degree respectively will have an incomplete degree where s/he will only complete a certain number of courses of the entire 4 year programme. The biggest fallout will be in terms of the employability of the Diploma and Bachelor degree students because they will be considered as students who failed to complete the entire 4 year
programme. FYUP aims to change the higher education model of 3+2 to 4+1 to correspond with the American and other Western forms of educational systems, opening up the Indian education system for global capital. It is high time we see beyond the rosy dreams and false claims of “employability”, flexibility” and “multidisciplinary approach” and make an honest factual assessment of the dark reality lurking behind the false claims made by the FYUP because it is the students who will suffer from these changes in the University.
