The recent data compiled from a series of Right to Information (RTI) applications pertaining to five older Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) reveals a concerning trend. The acceptance rate, defined as the number of students selected for every 100 applicants, is significantly lower for students from Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC). In contrast, the General Category (GC) students have a substantially higher acceptance rate.
Acceptance Rate Disparity
According to the information acquired through the RTI applications, the acceptance rate for GC students stood at 4%. However, this figure drops to 2.7% for students in the OBC category and declines even further to just 2.16% for SCs and 2.2% for STs. Strikingly, these figures come in the wake of the Education Ministry’s data submitted to Parliament in 2020 that displayed the IITs’ failure to fill Ph.D. seats according to reservation guidelines. Per the government’s reservation policy, 15% of seats should be reserved for SC students, 7.5% for ST students, and 27% for OBC students.
Significance of Data Findings
The common explanation given by IITs for their skewed admission rates is a lack of applicants from marginalized communities. However, the RTI data contradicts this assertion. The statistics show that the percentage of GC students admitted was consistently higher than their percentage among the applicants. For SC, ST, and OBC candidates, the opposite was true.
Educational Ministry’s Data on Reservation Implementation
Data from 2015 to 2019 reveals that only 9.1% of total admissions went to SC students, 2.1% to ST students, and a slightly higher 23.2% to OBC students. The remaining 65.6%, or about two-thirds of all seats, were occupied by GC applicants.
Reasons for Falling Acceptance Rates among SC, ST, and OBC Students
Several reasons have been cited by IITs for the low acceptance rates among marginalized communities. These include eligibility issues, economic considerations, and the argument of ‘merit.’ Regarding eligibility, some IITs argue that they couldn’t fill even the GC seats due to a shortage of suitable candidates. On economic grounds, it’s believed that qualified students prefer industry jobs over PhD programs, which offer lower income levels.
Unjust Intervention or Protecting Merit?
There is a long-standing opposition amongst IIT administrators and faculty members to reservations, viewed as an unfair government intrusion into their meritocratic institutions. Furthermore, a recent report by an Education Ministry-appointed committee recommended ending reservation in faculty recruitment primarily on the grounds of preserving academic excellence at IITs.
A Systematic Problem & Potential Solutions
The problem extends beyond mere acceptance rates. It is also linked with access to quality school education, leading to poor base. One way forward is policy intervention at an early stage in school education to equalize opportunities. Addressing negative attitudes and stereotypes can also make a significant difference.
The Benefits of Reservation Policy
The reservation policy can be an effective tool in bridging societal inequalities. It allows underprivileged communities access to quality education, promotes diversity, and helps correct historical wrongs. IITs, as nationally important institutions, should take a lead in implementing these policies, setting an example for other institutions, and encouraging research and innovation amongst marginalized communities.
Urgent policy intervention is needed to address the imbalance in Ph.D. acceptance rates at IITs. Promoting diversity and equal opportunities should be at the forefront of these efforts.
