4,400 dropouts in 3 years at IITs and NITs





As many as 2,060 students dropped out of the 16 IITs over 2012-15, HRD minister Smriti Irani told Lok Sabha on Wednesday , listing inability to cope with academic stress as one of the reasons. At NITs, 2,352 dropped out in the same period.The IIT dropout count was highest in 2014-15, with Roorkee accounting for 228 students and Delhi for 169.
Irani said the institutes were taking remedial measures, including counselling and additional coaching for weaker students. HRD ministry has told Joint Seat Allocation Authority (JoSAA) that carried out joint counselling for admission to IITsNITsISM and IIITs to return bulk of non-refundable acceptance fee tuition fee to students who haven't joined courses and also told them to take necessary steps to fill up 3,200 vacant seats expeditiously .
After a meeting on Tuesday attended by top officials and minister Smriti Irani, HRD ministry on Wednesday told JoSAA the practice of “refund of acceptance fee in cases of candidates who have not joined the courses or have withdrawn after joining the course is found to be not in accordance with various judicial pronouncements on the subject. Ministry said in order to “ensure that a uniform policy is adopted by all the higher educational institutions“ JoSAA should follow the new procedure.
Directive to JoSAA says that if a student withdrew before the course starts, the fee collected from the student, after a deduction of the processing fee of not over Rs 1,000 may be refunded and returned by the institution to the student who has withdrawn.

Source: Aug 06 2015 : The Times of Indi

International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences (ICHSS 2015)

Event Serial -10115

Website   http://www.istdst.org/HSS

Contact Person - Secretariat Event Enquiries Email Address - info@istdst.org

Deadline For Abstracts/Proposals: 2015-11-01

Organized By: ISTDST

Venue: Agra,   Uttar Pradesh,  India

About Event http://www.istdst.org/HSS

Everyday, 60 Indian cities churn out 3,500 tonnes of plastic waste

Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Ahmedabad and Hyderabad generating the most.

60 major cities in India together churn out over 3,500 tonnes of plastic waste everyday, Lok Sabha was informed today.

Environment Minister Prakash Javadekar said as per available information, consumption of plastic in the country was 11 million tonness in 2013—14. “The total quantum of plastic waste generated in the country from 60 major cities is estimated to be 3,501 tonnes per day," he said during question hour.

Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Ahmedabad and Hyderabad generating the most plastic waste. Mr. Javadekar said the environmental impact of plastic waste has been examined by various committees in recent years, such as the task force constituted to formulate a strategy and action programme for management of plastic waste.

Plastic bags

The reports of these committees indicate that plastic bags, if not collected systematically and choke the drainage system. Animals also ingested plastic bags that are discarded with food leading to their illness and sometimes death. Recycled plastic bags and containers also contaminated packaged food, Mr. Javadekar said.

Source: The Hindu, 4 August

Breakthrough in Nagaland

Good beginnings are no guarantee to good outcomes. India has taken a big step forward in ending the protracted Naga insurgency by signing a framework agreement with the largest and most prominent of the armed Naga groups, the Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland (Isak-Muivah). However, not all the major issues stand sorted out with this agreement, and some smaller groups have not been part of the decisive phases of the peace process. While the Khole-Kitovi and the Reformation factions, which are not party to the present accord, have signed a ceasefire agreement with the government, the Khaplang faction of the NSCN, active in the eastern areas of Nagaland and with bases across the border in Myanmar, remains hostile to the engagement with the Isak-Muivah faction. The NSCN (Khaplang) is known to have carried out a deadly ambush on Army personnel in Manipur in June 2015 as a way of communicating its opposition to the evolving accord with the I-M faction, and demonstrating its capabilities. The NSCN (K) seems to have forged an alliance with other disgruntled splinter groups that are in opposition to the course taken by the I-M faction. Thus, while the agreement with the NSCN (I-M) is a breakthrough in the decades-long peace process, the Government of India will have to bear in mind that many of the players of the insurgency are still not on board, and several issues do not have a settled look yet.

To make matters worse for groups that are not part of the agreement, and that feel left out of the process, details of the accord have not been made public yet. There is no clarity on the controversial “sovereignty” demand that was central to the I-M group’s negotiations strategy, or on the demand for the creation of a Nagalim or Greater Nagaland that is tied to claims on the territories of the neighbouring States of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. Issues relating to sovereignty and territories of other States offer no easy solution. For this agreement to hold, and to be built upon, the government needs to involve all the stakeholders, including other groups and members of Naga civil society, and representatives of the neighbouring States. Otherwise, the present agreement, which is no doubt a landmark event in the decades-long history of the insurgency, could falter in the months ahead. To recognise the Naga sense of identity without acceding to claims on the territories of other States, to allow the people of Nagaland greater autonomy in deciding their own lives and future without allowing concessions on the sovereignty of India: these are the challenges before the government. The agreement provides a basis for pushing ahead on these aspects, and is a hard-earned opportunity that should not be lost.

Source: The Hindu, 5 August, 2015

the speaking tree - The Need to Understand

RADHEY SHYAM KAUSHAL





About 250 years ago, German philosopher Immanuel Kant advocated a fine description of objective component of ultimate reality in nature in terms of its space-time structure and in society in terms of moral values. Such thinking did begun with Descartes and Galileo but Kant was the first one to become conscious of these things.This kind of stock taking of knowledge was a criticism and Kant called his great books as critiques: the `Critique of Pure Reason', the `Critique of Practical Reason' and the `Critique of Judgment'. He called his philosophy as the `critical philosophy' or `critical idealism'.
As far as the actions of an individual and their execution in the day-to-day life are concerned, the same appear in Kant's philosophy through the principle of morality that he has advocated in his later `critiques'.Kant regarded human actions as `phenomenal' when looked at them from an anthropological point of view. As a result, these actions are subject to the law of cause and effect.
According to Kant, we are born and grow with different natures, which, in turn, lead to different likes and dislikes, inclination and disinclination, temptations, temperaments and abilities to perform an act.The differences are attributed to different external environments to which an individual is subjected and responds differently in accordance with the principle of causality .
Human actions, thus, are considered as the result of interaction of character and environment and are not to be praised or blamed but understood.

Aug 05 2015 : The Economic Times (Delhi)

Another Step in a Naga March to Peace





It is welcome that New Delhi has signed a peace accord with a major faction of Naga insurgency that has been active since August 1947. While the exact contours of the agreement are yet not known, forcing major leaders in the states neighbouring Nagaland to hold their judgement rather than join the celebrations underway at the Centre, some principles that underlie the pact are welcome. One is a fair degree of autonomy for the Nagas in and outside the state of Nagaland (the Greater Nagalim claimed by the Naga insurgency is more than seven times as large as Nagaland itself, and includes parts of Myanmar, besides of Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Assam).Another is exercise of this autonomy without breaking up existing states. Autonomous regions within a state are a common feature in the northeast. The readiness of the Nagas to accept this principle and of the government at the Centre to grant it holds out promise, for future demands for autonomy in other parts of the country . A third welcome feature of the accord is the non partisan continuity of policy on the part of the government of India that sees the fruition of efforts overseen by prime ministers P V Narasimha Rao, H D Deve Gowda, A B Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh. Yet, all this does not quite guarantee peace.
The Kaplang faction of the Naga insurgency is not on board, as are not an alphabet soup of other militant groups in the region. The areas of autonomy granted to Nagas include those where Kukis live and any arrangement that subordinates them to the Nagas will invite grim resistance. Unlike Rajiv Gandhi's Assam accord or the peace deal with Laldenga ending the Mizo rebellion, the present accord does not have a single, wholly representative champion of the rebellion as a party. Risks remain, in other words.

the speaking tree - Are You Someone Who Can Never Say `No'?

Marguerite Theophil





A precious teaching came from a woman i recently met, who told me she had learnt never to say `yes' unless she could say it wholeheartedly. I found this such a good lesson to pass on, as there are so many who find it almost impossible to say `no'.It's not that these are always loving and compassionate types; they do agree and say `yes' to everything at first, but then often end up fiercely resenting those who asked, and resenting themselves even more! There is nothing wrong ­ actually there is everything right ­ with saying `yes' to what you need, like, or care about. Sometimes `yes' involves a bit of sacrifice ­ but you are willing to accept that.
We are talking here of those who just can't bring themselves to say `no' ­ ever ­ and end up with an inordinate load of other people's wishes and needs to fulfil. If they don't say `yes' at once, often the other person will come up with highly persuasive reasons which make them feel they are selfish, uncaring, ungrateful, mean, illogical, irresponsible or whatever. They don't want to feel any of these things, so say they `yes' ­ and regret that later! As time goes by, it can cause them to backtrack, make excuses, and even lie ­ bringing on those unwelcome feelings of guilt and shame. In the long run, unfortunately, they get a reputation for being unreliable or uncaring, labels that they were avoiding in the first place! If this mode of behaviour describes you ­ a simple way through all the guilt and manipulation is to have a clear personal rule that you will only say `yes' under these circumstances: when you can say it sincerely , out of your own interest, according to your own wishes, understanding clearly what is involved, if you genuinely wish to be of help to others, or to get involved in what will bring you learning or joy .
When you say `no' to something, you often mean `yes' to something else.
Think about it. Saying `no' to commitments that you know you can't manage is saying `yes' to handling well whatever you are currently committed to. Saying `no' to things you are really not interested in is a `yes' for giving time to those that interest you. Saying `no' to lethargy is saying `yes' to more energy in your life.
Saying `yes' or `no' needs you to reflect.
In no way am i offering you a cop-out, where you say `no' to everything. Sometimes you may not initially want to or be able to acquiesce to a request ­ but on reflection, may feel you can or should. After examining the issue, summon the wholehearted `yes'.
Saying `yes' calls for discernment; there is no rule that fits every situation.
For instance if someone calls you and asks if you could be on some committee, or to give a talk or to join a group ­ when faced with any such decision, ask yourself: “Could i do this wholeheartedly?“ Now be aware of your self-talk which might go: I really don't want to but somehow feel that i ought to; maybe i'd be letting the other person down; maybe they will think less of me. Or it might be: I don't think i have the skills; i am afraid; maybe i'm not capable.
In the first scenario, you just know it is not and will never be a wholehearted `yes'. But in the second case, you might like to find the courage to say an initial hesitant `yes' that could well develop into a wholehearted `yes'.