Mailbox

With reference to your cover story, the Knowledge Commission is undoubtedly a big and high-potential idea. But I have doubts whether it will achieve its goal of sparking a knowledge revolution within the country. That’s because it has to work with government ministries which are notorious for bureaucratic sloth and inertia. Unless the Knowledge Commission is empowered to take punitive action against ministry bureaucrats, its grand plans are unlikely to work.

But having said that, as you have rightly remarked, Sam Pitroda is the man behind India’s astonishing telecom revolution. I must confess that in the mid-1980s when Pitroda was given charge of C-Dot and the Telecom Commission I was a sceptic. Not in my wildest imagination could I have forecast that the number of telecom connections in India would ever cross 100 million.

Adrian Fernandes
Mangalore

Congratulations on producing an extraordinary sixth anniversary issue (November). The choice of Sam Pitroda — the prime mover of India’s telecom revolution and now head of the pioneer National Knowledge Commission — on the cover of EducationWorld’s anniversary issue was apposite and pertinent. Pitroda who is acknowledged as a leader and visionary par excellence is the right man to head the think-tank whose mission is to transform India into a knowledge society in the next decade. Unless the UPA government is voted out of power before Pitroda can implement his strategy, I’m sure that he will spark India’s overdue knowledge revolution.

I also enjoyed your special anniversary columns written by some of the country’s top education experts and economists. In particular Glenn Christo’s case for encouraging education entrepreneurs to set up private universities was compelling. The feedback from EW readers who include Anil Wilson, principal of St. Stephen’s College and Ashish Rajpal, CEO of iDiscoveri was revealing.

Sarita Rai
Mumbai

I have read your cover story ‘Professional education freedom verdict sparks constitutional crisis’ (EW October). On pages 32-33 you have written, "Likewise Dr. C. Rathnasa-bapathy, principal of Velammal Engineering College, Chennai and member of the Consortium of Self- Financing Professional Arts and Science Colleges, Tamil Nadu who famously ridiculed the threat of the state’s imperious chief minister J. Jayalalithaa to nationalise professional colleges by pointing out that the state government is almost bankrupt..."

I would like to clearly clarify that what I meant was that it may not be realistically feasible for the state government to nationalise all the private institutions considering the enormous amount of money that is needed to execute the above mentioned plan. I never in my interview stated the term "ridiculed the threat of the state’s imperious chief minister, J. Jayalalithaa". If the above statement is the opinion of the editor I am not responsible for such a strong statement.

I request you to publish a corrige-ndum preferably in the editorial section that this particular statement is purely yours and that it is not the personal opinion of Dr. C. Rathnasabapathy. Moreover I have also not an any occasion mentioned that "the state government is almost bankrupt".

I would appreciate if you could publish a correction and clear my name. I do not wish to be entangled in any sort of political imbroglio pertaining to the above statements in contention.

Dr. C. Rathnasabapathy
Vellammal Engineering College
Chennai

The impugned comment is of the author/ editor formed after observing Dr. Rathnasabapathy’s interview on television — Editor

The CBSE’s proposal to relax spelling errors in science and liberal arts subjects (including literature) is a move fraught with dangerous consequences.

While it’s possible that this relaxation/ leniency may have been proposed after sound and deep homework by CBSE which is studded with eminent educationists and a plethora of poly-maths, it is quite likely its repercussions will be severe. That’s why the proposal has not been palatable to most educationists, academics and others. It will lead to the very root of weakening proficiency in the English language which will ultimately affect the quality of education in general.

It is a truism that adulteration is a very contagious disease, and with its sinister design can reach the very marrow of any subject. Therefore it is dangerous to even entertain the idea of letting it enter the domain of education. Our children will have to face fierce and cut-throat competition in the emerging global market where survival of only the fittest and fastest is possible. I shudder to imagine the plight of teachers assigned the work of evaluating the answer books of students already prone to commit spelling mistakes who will now have licence to bring tears to the eyes of evaluators. This relaxation will have appalling effects in other faculties where dubious and nefarious elements would demand similar concessions.

C.P. Mehta
Bhuj (Gujarat)