Thats the group the creamy layer exclusion clause will help.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
Thats what all the politicians are trying to stop.
Printable View
Thats the group the creamy layer exclusion clause will help.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
Thats what all the politicians are trying to stop.
Thanks joe for the stats. People from outside like me believed this 'mAyai' until you came out with the stats. Now I'm getting a clearer picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
Punnaimaran
i have my own personal experience which will clearly show the difference..........but i think, its pretty dangerous to be on "anti-reservation" group here in HUB......theres a grave danger of being stereotyped and generalised.........Quote:
Originally Posted by Roshan
ennathha pesi enna panna - law is already there - pongappa poi pulla kuttingala padikka veinga (mudinja) :wave:
No. I was just demonstrating that there was indeed a case for reservation even at the higher education level because graduation did not make all equal. While at it, I wanted to point out a case where graduation cannot imply equality. This is why I pointed out the rural-urban divide. I shouldn't have left it with just that.Quote:
Originally Posted by thamizhvaanan
To a certain extent caste based reservation does proxy for the rural-urban quality gap. But even beyond that a first generation graduate needs (even in urban centres) may need that extra bit of push to gain exposure in post-graduate institutions. New unopen doors should be shown to those who have had less opportunity thus far.
My dream system would be something like this: If someone gets a reservation for an undergrad degree, then his son/daughter would ineligible for undergrad reservation. However, they would be eligible for postgrad reservation - because they are trying to scale greater heights.
The creamy layer implementation is crucial to this.
Thanks for stats Joe.
I am reminded of a beautiful line from Shashi Tharoor's book "India:Midnight to Millenium".: "Communalism thrives in the absence of specifics"
When discussing communal issues, he says,most of the problems are because people people operate on anecdotal evidence, impressions etc. There is very little supply of (and I must also say, very little demand for) exact precise information. With such 'specific' information, the noise made about 'merit being throttled' etc. should fade.
No. I completely disagree with this. This is the similar to the kind of argument that is made by advocates of "permanent reservation".Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe
Reservation policy should be aimed at including newer and newer people into mainstream and bringing about equality of opportunity. It should not be based on a prejudice - and condescencion - that certain groups are bound to underperform and need perpetual assistance.
A reservation for rural students will perpetuate the urban-rural quality divide in education. Every rural area will have an incentive to continue to be backward. I can even see students from urban backgrounds registering with a rural school to write their board exams just so that they can reap the 'backward' benefits. The real rural students who need the help won't benefit. All the problems affecting our current reservation system will affect this one.
The major parties in the UPA have decided to fight the exclusion of the creamy layer :x :curse:
From TN, PMK was saying till now. Yesterday, DMK has also explicitly stated so. Congress & Co. will now pass the law without this exclusion - as if it is something peripheral to be toyed with. :angry2: To top it all, they will have the audacity to claim that it is a victory for social justice :banghead:
Much to chew on in your post, Prabhu Ram.
As someone who considers himself an ignoramus (yes, apart from being ostentatiously equanimous) by default when it comes to politics, I'm interested to know what's your take on reservations based on economic status. I read an interesting take in an openly right-wing blog. The author says, "if economic criteria were to be the basis for Reservations then we would be locked into Reservations for eternity because there will always be poverty, there will always be economic disparity." Not that I actually disapprove of a "socialistic" approach myself (needless to say, nor do I support it), but, the way I see it, the current Reservations system isn't really meant to achieve economic equality.
A few days ago, my friend was expressing his dissatisfaction on how both anti-reservations and pro-reservations people place themselves in this matter. His point, in a gist was, while pro-reservations people seem to stick to a merit-above-anything-else position, the anti-reservations people seem to have only scant regard for the "creamy layer" clause. I added that, I myself have found many anti-reservations people suggesting that one should adopt an approach better than the existing one, probably based on the economic status of candidates. This alternate viewpoint about having an approach based on economic status is often made, but isn't really seriously supported/rebutted. It's like one of those noble visions that nobody wants to disrupt, but (or, should I say, hence?) neither take seriously!
That also got me thinking as to what Reservations actually mean. A fair reading, I think, would be thus: The system is opening special gates of opportunities to those people who were denied the entry to those gates on some grounds in the past. Inherently, the idea is to only privilege some, not to achieve economic equality.
Good posts Podalai..
Prabhuram,
Nice writeup.
Punnaimaran
Prabhu :thumbsup:
Very interesting and balanced view ,PR :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Prabhu Ram
Thanks Joe,Punnaimaran and Roshan.
You've asked for it Am going to go on one of my tangents. Please assume some relevance.Quote:
Originally Posted by equanimus
Flemish poetry, Polynesian history and number theory enthusiasts notwithstanding, attaining economic prosperity is why people learn.
So it is only natural that reservation should reach those in need.
However, using it as the lone criteria it is nonsense. As the right wing blogger you quote seems to say, "economic inequality is here to stay". So we will end up making reservations permanent.
Even in the ideal scenario there will be economic inequality. We need to strive to reach equality of opportunity. However, I admit that it is tough - most times near impossible - to separate these two out.
As you rightly mentioned the grounds on which education was denied is crucial here. And again, the point is not retribution. The marked underexposure over generation makes the door-opening challenging. While door-opening, horizons broadening are all very good, education is an immediate means to economic progress. So it is essential to exclude those who have already achieved a fair level of progress.
With the creamy layer clause it will be all about achieving economic progress. In socialist vocabulary I guess it would fall under the polite umbrealla 'social mobility' - with its hazardous ambiguity around the direction of mobility ! Well, ambiguity is better than suggesting something like 'being rich' can be good for the conscience.Quote:
Originally Posted by equanimus
Just in case there is any lingering doubt, I am not a great fan of the phrase economic equality. To insist on basic standards, that too dynamically improving standards for everyone is something no-one can possibly disagree with. But economic equality is not a synonym for that.
Thanks to the din our politicians have made over the years we have become numb to these differences. In a phrase that marks the philosophical transition of the socialist conscience (!), Deng Xiao Peng once said: " to be rich is glorious !". While the sentiment is universal in its appeal, I don't think any politician will have the guts to say that on stage yet.
Other way round, isn't it. Regarding the scant respect for the "creamy layer" clause, I share the opinion, anxiety and annoyance.Quote:
while pro-reservations people seem to stick to a merit-above-anything-else position, the anti-reservations people seem to have only scants regard for the "creamy layer" clause.
Yes, I meant the other way round.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prabhu Ram
The general idea in bringing in this point to the discussion was to put certain things in perspective. One keeps hearing about how education must reach the poor and so on, without examining the actual merits (!) of such a reservation strategy. And, in such cases, it's better to ask the right (no pun intended!) questions, and let someone else elaborate, you see. :)
joe,Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
MBBS preparation has a lot to do with mugging and vomiting..
engg and MBA entrance exams are more analytical.. here, u can see a big diff between the OC and other categories..
why do we come across lower cutoffs for reserved categories?????
that only shows their backwardness.. infact, it justifies the case of reservation IMHO..
but, 27% is too much for OBCs..
i wud give
5% to STs and 10% each to SCs and OBCs.. the remaining 5% can be PC and other quotas..
IMHO the percentage of reserved seats shudnt exceed 30...
I have already posted the link for EnggQuote:
Originally Posted by Devar Magan
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2006/06/12...1202710300.htm
again, this is wrt TN only.. on the national stage like the IITs and the IIMs, its completely different..Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
For premier institutes like the IITs the competition will be much more intense. So the cutoffs are likely be just as close, if not closer.
Joe, another myth to confront is the pass percentage for the various categories. It is usually claimed that many (implying most) students who make it to institutes like the IITs through reserved seats, struggle to match the standards. This is also a widely distributed theory with hordes of anecdotal 'evidence' but little statistical support.
இந்தியாவில் தமிழகம் சமூக நீதியை முன்னெடுத்துச் செல்லும் முதல் மாநிலம் என்று ஒத்துகொண்டதற்க்கு நன்றி!Quote:
Originally Posted by Devar Magan
அதற்கு யார் காரணம் என்று புரிய வேண்டியவர்களுக்கு புரிந்தால் சரி! :)
yes.. i agree with u.. TN had used reservation well so far..Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
TN students are going to fill the majority of the OBC seats in IITs and IIMs.. i have no doubts on this..
Gnani article in kumudam on 'kirumi'
http://www.kumudam.com/magazine/Kumu...05-07/pg15.php
i got a OC call from IIM-I.. now, after the implementation of the OBC quota, they asked me for family income details.. i did give them the real details, since i am not that interested in joining.... i cud have cheated them easily.. now i am in OC waiting list..
i have serious doubts on how they will take the fake non-creamy layer people..
New Delhi:The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday stayed the implementation of the 27.5 per cent quota for Other Backward Castes in post-graduate courses.
The court was hearing a plea challenging OBC quotas in post-graduate courses by a student who is to appear for an interview for admission to the Indian Institute of Management-Calcutta.
Following the stay all admission procedures in IIM-Calcutta have been put on hold.
The High Court also stayed the interviews slated for Friday for admission of OBC candidates to post-graduate courses in the IIM-Calcutta.
Justice Maharaj Sinha, in an ex-parte interim order, granted the stay on a petition by Sayan Guha, a B-Tech student challenging the Union Human Resource Development Ministry's memorandum.
The interim order stayed till June 9 the operation of the reservation clause of IIM prospectus and also the resolution of office memorandum dated April 20, 2008, passed by the HRD Ministry.
The matter would come up for hearing again on June 9.
IIM-C had scheduled the special interview of OBC students following the HRD memorandum.
Guha's counsels Kishore Dutta and Nilava Bandopadhyay told the court that the office memo and the subsequent reservation clause were in violation of the April 10 Supreme Court order on reservation of OBCs that had set a yardstick for such quotas and defined the creamy layer that would be out of the purview of reservation.
They said while the apex court had directed that graduates would not be considered for reservation, the HRD Ministry had in violation of that passed an office memo to the effect that OBC students would get reservation in post-graduate courses.
No counsel appeared for the HRD Ministry and IIM-C.
SC quashes Calcutta HC order on IIM admissions
Sat, May 17 03:58 AM
The Supreme Court on Friday quashed the Calcutta High Court's order staying implementation of 27% quota for OBCs in central educational institutions even as the Centre said it was considering filing caveats before various high courts to avoid a repeat of similar instances.
Describing the high court's ex-parte interim order as "strange", the apex court said "no court can sit over its judgement" while lifting the Calcutta High Court's stay. As a result of the Supreme Court order, roadblocks on admission of OBC candidates in post-graduate courses in IIMs and IITs now have been cleared.
"Can Calcutta High Court sit over the order of the Supreme Court," the Bench headed by chief justice KG Balakrishnan and comprising Justices H K Sema and P P Naolekar, said after solicitor general G E Vahanvati questioned the legality of the high court order. "Where is the question of stay when the central educational institutions (reservation in admission) act, 2006 has been upheld," the bench said.
However, it said admissions would be provisional subject to the final outcome in the matter before it as those opposing the government memorandum for implementation of the quota in post-graduate courses have contended that the majority verdict of five-judge bench has set a benchmark that a graduate cannot be considered educationally backward.
The court stayed all proceedings relating to OBC quota that are pending in the High Courts of Delhi, Calcutta and Bombay and issued notices to those petitioners, including Delhi-based Youth for Equality, on the Centre's petition seeking transfer of those matters to the apex court.
The Bench said the concept of "creamy layer" was restricted only to class and community and those falling in the category will be excluded from the benefit of quota. "Graduation cannot be clubbed with creamy layer," justice Balakrishnan said .
http://kumudam.com/magazine/Kumudam/2008-07-30/pg3.php
Article on how a press person managed to get fake community certificates for Bharathiyar and Kushboo:-(
http://dailythanthi.com/article.asp?...date=10/2/2008
Uthapuram tense again:-(
We have discussed this at length earlier. But let me try and elaborate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
Caste based reservations are not about financial well being.
Caste based reservations are not about financial well being.
Caste based reservations are not about financial well being.
It is about reversing generations of denying access to education, where the denial was based on caste.
It is unfortunate that even the ones from the castes that have enjoyed access to education for so long view this as vindictive and fail to see the social purpose of the whole thing.
A highly disproportionate advantage enjoyed by a select few castes has been slightly eroded by reservations. Truly that is all that has happened. Nothing more.
Most of the disappointment and whining that we see around this is largely about this. Would anyone at all contest the fact that the forward castes still occuppy leading positons in most walks of life. I am not even suggesting this is some scheming cornering of plum spots. It is an absolutely natural outcome of generations of sociocultural capital that they have built up and so on. But if one were to hear them complain, one would be misled into believing they are being witchhunted and strangled - which is a highly unfair claim.
From a society which has a long history of perpetuating instrinsic inequities based on birth, we are building one where we want a greater participation in all walks of life from all castes. I repeat: this is NOT about financial well being alone. TN has had one of the (if not the) longest history of reservations in India dating back to the 30s. The results are there to be seen.
No candidate who is in the top 50% in a merit list gets rejected. Whiners either don't understand this or intentionally suppress this information.
This is true even with the 69% reservation in TN (I understood this only recently and can explain if you are interested)
I do have my reservations about the reservation system and its progressively counterproductive static design. But we must remember that, we can afford to talk about reform and tweaks in a state like TN which has seen the benefits percolate over years. Most other states have a long way to go before we can even discuss this.
For instance consider the creamy-layer clause. Other things remaining equal within a caste category it is reasonable to assume the 'creamy layer' can compete better academically. Note: we are not talking about how the Open Competition seats. Only the reserved seats. In which situations will the 'creamy layer' filter truly help the reserved categories enabling true targeting (as its proponents claim is its purpose)? Only in states where there a vast number of able candidates both in creamy and non-creamy layers within a reserved category. Then the clause can prevent the former from taking the seats which the latter ought to get, which is the true purpose of reservation. There may - I can't say this for certainty - be a reasonable case for this in TN based on the across-the-board development we have experienced. But certainly not all over India.
In an underdeveloped state (eg. Chattisgarh) it is quite likely that the only few reserved category candidates who are able to compete at the highest level may be ones in the creamy layer. We are not at a stage of social development where we can afford to exclude them and thereby perpetuate the disproportionate overrepresentation of the already forward caste categories - which is what the system seeks to counter.
We badly badly need a caste census to assess where we stand today and debate and arrive at suitable policy changes.
Quite curiously, you will find that the people who oppose the caste census happen to be people who oppose reservations!
I got 87% and was able to get only very average private engineering college. We have to studay well even with reservation.
Of course. A few years back Joe shared the medical cutoffs for the various categories.
Anyone who has seen them, can clearly see how hollow and prejudiced the 'death of merit' arguments are.
புதியவர்களுக்காக ...Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
புதியவர்களுக்காக ...Quote:
Originally Posted by joe
Folks railing against 'affirmative action' and creamy layer do so like frogs in a well. they need to come out of their bubbleQuote:
Originally Posted by P_R
and look how societies are being rebuilt with strength due to affirmative actions. It sure takes a while and only point worthy in their
arguments is the suggestion to revisit the quotas every 10 years or so based on census data and see if a particular community needs to be
moved closer to the "Open" category (while expanding the 'open' quota space).
Next time someone says 'death of merit' , this should be flung in their faces:
https://mobile.twitter.com/ksnagaraj...9141376/photos
தமிழகத்தில் உயிரியல், இயற்பியல், வேதியல் பாடங்களில் அதிக மதிப்பெண் பெற்றவர்கள் யார் ?
http://www.payanangal.in/2010/06/blog-post.html
wow didnt know that such a thread existed, a newbie to the hub, i must say i'm genuinely surprised to see people arguing both sides of the argument without letting their emotions take over and most importantly without resorting to cliches like 'merit first' and 'every one's equal'. In fact pretty happy to see the 'death of merit' claims squashed with evidence, would be interested to see the engg cut offs which I think would be a li'l different( happy to be corrected if I'm wrong)
but a big :thumbsup: to most of the hubbers who've put forth their arguments in a sane manner. have learnt lots from this thread :)
Its my long held belief that nothing is tougher than getting an admission to a medical college in TN . i feel vindicated . Pasangala nenaicha paavama irukku. One just cannot afford to make any error.Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
What is your scale to measure the deserving people?
Let us analyze the few past histories and analyze the issues on this topic?
What is the purpose of reservation and why it is required?
Purpose: Spreading the opportunity to all the section of people in an unhealthy competitive situation
Cause:
1. Social issues - Unethical social hierarchy and discrimination being followed for many centuries
2. Elites (power and money) and common people divides and discrimination
3. Suppressed based on Religious identity
4. Rural and Urban divides
A quick analysis based on current situation:
1. Social issues - Once considered as an issue, now people are using this for political opportunity by the elites. Now Indian Politics is driven by social divides and religion divides
2. Elites - Volatile in nature, there is no clear method available for segregating them dynamically
3. Religious - Not required except in Govt jobs
4. Rural and Urban - To be added
Current reservation analysis:
1. SC/ST - There is a exclusion clause devised in the name of Religion to control them migration/converting to other religion for political reasons, this is also an unethical practice in the current SC/ST reservation, which has to be removed
2. OBC - There is a exclusion clause added in the name of 'Creamy Layer' or Elites. There is lot of implementation flaw on identifying the real 'Creamy Layer' or Elites, which has to be removed
3. Religion based reservation - Introduced for two reasons 1. Participation in Govt which called as inclusive growth 2. Political reasons. To be limited to only Govt Administrative Jobs
4. Rural vs Urban - This is very much required for inclusive growth, at least for the education opportunities. Currently, not available
Cap: Overall reservation should be limited to 50%
Long Term Solution: Reservation will cease to exist or make no significance when economics growth rate is higher than 10%