To, PRM Coordinator, IRMA Dear Sir, One of the most important lessons taught to us at IRMA is the importance

of participatory approach. The failure of a policy is more or less guaranteed if the primary stakeholders are kept out of the decision making process. Yet, we the participants, as the faculty likes to call us have been unilaterally told which elective one can or cannot take as an audit. If we dont have a say in choosing the subjects that we want to study as a credit/audit subject, then does it not indicate that the term participant is just that, a term and nothing more. I would like to bring to your attention the constraints that we have had to face while choosing the electives. The first constraint, which I must add is quite justified, is that we have choose among so many important subjects in a way that the sum total of credits taken in credit and audits doesnt exceed three. This condition alone forces the students to leave out subjects, which ideally they would like to study. But the flipside is that we think long and hard before choosing a particular subject. The other constraints are: Some subjects such have been linked to a course in term V, i.e. that unless one takes up a particular subject in term IV, one would not be allowed to take up the other in term V. There could be an argument that it should be left to the student after consulting the respective faculty, to see and judge the link between the subjects. If he/she feels that there is a strong link between the two and he would struggle with the subject in term V, then he should be smart enough to realise it and go for another option. However, if he still feels that he can catch up then he could possibly be given a chance. Regardless of the merits of this argument, the PRM committee could check if there is indeed such a strong connection between the subjects and if there isnt then maybe the faculty could be requested to reconsider his/her rule.

The second constraint which has led to students making their decisions regarding with one hand virtually tied behind their backs is the decision taken by certain faculty that their subjects cannot be taken as an audit.

The reasons given by teachers/understood by students are: Students who would take the course as an audit wouldnt be serious: This assumption is inherently flawed. Firstly, this is being assumed on the basis of past experience which might be a good indicator most of the time but is still too flimsy to deny someone an opportunity to study a course. After all, if all professors took this line then what will happen to the audit courses? Further, even if someone has taken the course as audit then he/she has done so by choosing it over other great courses, that in itself is a sign of seriousness. Secondly, just by taking the course as a credit course doesnt necessarily guarantee seriousness towards it, the lack of the same would most likely result in poor grades but then so would it in the case of an audit course and its obvious that no one wants poor grades, simply because it will show on the mark sheet regardless if it is added to the final CGPA or not. Lastly, if the students who are to be managers cannot be trusted with being serious in a subject that they have chosen, then it is a sad reflection of the trust that the faculty reposes in us.

Teachers prefer smaller classes: We agree that personal attention that one can get in a small class is very helpful but the fact of the matter is that the batch size is 108 and

some subjects are more popular than others due to various reasons, their perceived importance in terms of value addition, final placements, the respect for faculty etc. and therefore they would get sizeable number of students. The decision to disallow students simply because he/she could accommodate it only as his audit course quite unfair. The notion that students take up courses worth two credits and one/two more just to fill up their audit quota is wrong. The case with majority of the students is that they pick the subjects according to their interest/ perceived importance. Surely, it should be left to the students to choose among the electives; after all it is our career at stake. The addition of such conditions to the elective defeats the purpose of having them in the first place. To conclude we admit, there were instances when the batch had let the faculty down last year. But sir, the faculty gets a fresh start every time he/she walks into the class to deliver the lecture never mind with new batches. We implore you to give us a fresh start as well, if someone doesnt do well then it wont be due to a lack of effort. But we request you to try and convince your colleagues to not apply conditions on the electives which can have a detrimental effect on our careers. On behalf of PRM 31 Thanking you, Academic Committee PRM 31