The Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) have finally had their way. The Union government and the IITs have unanimously agreed to the new format suggested by the Joint Admission Board (JAB) last week. Implementation will be from next year.
Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal, however, skipped the IIT council meeting in this regard, chaired by M N Sharma, chairman of the board of governors of IIT, Madras. The council decided that admission to the IITs would now involve a screening criterion, wherein, those from the top 20th percentile from school board examination results would get to try for entry in the IITs.
"The meeting was successful and a unanimous decision to proceed with the decision taken by the JAB has been accepted," said M Anandakrishnan, chairman, board of governors, IIT Kanpur. who attended the meeting.
NEW BLUEPRINT
|
First, he explained, the main Joint Entrance Examination would be held. After four to six weeks, there would be an advanced examination. "This time gap has been considered so that the board examination results could be out," he said.
The top 150,000 candidates from the main exam would be allowed to appear for the advanced exam. For the final selection, the advanced exam rank would be considered. This, however, would be subject to the condition that selected candidates are in the top 20th percentile (that is, 80 per cent of those taking the exam should have scored less than this category) of successful candidates of their Boards.
So, in a change from Sibal's original idea, Class XII board marks would not be added to the advanced test marks, but would be an eligibility criterion.
Also Read
"We are happy with the resolution. They have accepted all our demands. This, however, will need the IITs' Senates' approval (which, in this case, is a formality)," said a member from the All India IIT Faculty Federation.
The government had earlier proposed a common entrance examination, rejected by IIT-Delhi and IIT-Kanpur on the ground that this was "academically unsound and procedurally untenable".