This is the representation submitted by the students body in the meetings held on 29th and 30th of September 2010 at FTII
The student community would like to express their views on the whole debate around a Detailed Project Report prepared by Hewitt Associates about what is being dubbed as “Up-gradation of FTII to International Standards “. We would like to re-iterate our view that any such study of a national institute like FTII should not be done by a Private Company having no experience in the field of art education .To us, equating an educational institute with a business venture is fundamentally flawed which essentially seems to be the overriding concern in the Hewitt report.
The ongoing Golden Jubilee celebrations seem like an ideal platform for discussing the future of the institute. We are of the opinion that a national commission should be set up for undertaking this endeavor to ensure that the nature of the exercise remains academic rather than managerial.
To this proposed commission we would like to present our views about how to improve the prevailing situation.
CENTRE FOR FILM EDUCATION AND PRACTICE
Any proposed change should look at FTII, as a national centre for film education and practice. The courses being offered at the institute should be academically designed and structured with this central objective in mind. There are various institutes running under the I&B ministry like MCRC and IIMC which can take the responsibility of teaching the medium of television and other aspects pertaining to mass communication. Also, the various courses should be integrated with each other so as to facilitate a collective learning regarding all aspects of film making .As of now some very essential courses like screenplay-writing, production design and acting have a different financial structure and duration which has often led to issues of learning and scheduling of exercise as well as causing a sense of discrimination amongst students enrolled in these courses. The fact is that these courses are not new. These existed as full-time, subsidized courses before they were shut down and re-started as “self-sustaining”, short-term courses. We should sincerely look towards integrating these courses with the other courses in terms of course content, duration and exercises.
SELF-SUSTENANCE AND THE CASE FOR SHORT COURSES
The DPR prepared by Hewitt Associates strongly recommends launching of what is termed as “self sustaining/industry oriented short term courses. The proposed fee structure for these courses automatically rules out a large section of the Indian population from applying. It seems like a laughable idea for a national institute like FTII. The “need/rationale” for launching these courses clearly gets more importance than maintaining the moral fabric of the institute.
Already existing “self-sustaining” courses
As of today institute runs 12 courses out of which 8 are supposed to be self financed while the 4 flagship courses continue to be subsidized. Logic demands that separate accounts be maintained for two different financial structures.
However, the case here is different- the institute authorities clarified under an RTI filed by the Students’ association that no separate accounts are maintained to check whether the subsidy money is being diverted to run the so called self sustaining courses. It is a common knowledge in the institute that these courses have been draining the subsidy allocation since their inception. Given the situation, it is clear that experiment of launching such course has failed both academically (feedback forms of past students and experience of present students can be scrutinized) as well as financially. At a time when we should be looking at taking corrective action, we are looking to extend our flirtations with a system that has failed.
As far as the need for liaison with the “industry”, recommendations of the Khosla Committee are worth taking note of. It mentions the setting of refresher courses for training industry professionals working in centres like Mumbai, Chennai, Hyderabad, Kolkata, etc. The feasibility of setting up centres/ polytechnics for such courses should be studied which can help in raising the overall standards of the industry .
AUTONOMY
The institute was set up as an autonomous institution under the Information and broadcasting ministry. However, it has been amply clear over rime that the autonomy exists only on paper and the institute actually functions as a government department. Indifference on the part of the ministry has led to several teaching posts lapsing .To revive these posts clearance of various ministries is required which takes unduly long to come. Even the one’s which fall vacant take unjustifiably long to be filled up. Apart from the red-tapism another major roadblock is the remuneration that the institute offers to its faculty. Attracting quality faculty becomes a herculean task under such circumstances. The ones who are there are grossly over-burdened with administrative work. Also, the inability of the institute to take decisions regarding financial decisions has led to shocking delays in recruitment and infrastructure acquisition (reeling under the pressure of increased students) and constant up-gradation of the facilities available. A combination of the above mentioned issues has led to a steady corrosion of the academic atmosphere in the institute.
In an ideal world, constitutional bodies like the academic council and the governing council should be taking decisions to ensure the smooth functioning of the institute. However, in reality, these platforms are being continuously subverted by the ex-officio members who can conveniently choose whether to attend the meetings or not. All the effort being put in this exercise will come to nought if we don’t take this matter seriously. All concerned should ensure that constitutional bodies like the academic council, the governing council and the syllabus review committee be empowered in the true sense of the word to run the affairs of the institute as these bodies are any day more qualified to assess the prevailing situation.
Options Available
In the past, a number of options have been spoken of to ensure autonomy. These range from declaring FTII as an institute of national importance/centre for advanced learning, a shift in the parent ministry to passing an act in the parliament. All the available options should be studied closely and their respective pros and cons should be considered. A final decision should be arrived at after that.
NUMBER OF STUDENTS VIS-A-VIS INFRASTRUCTURE
Over the past few years, the number of students enrolled in various course has consistently gone up. However, the kind of corresponding infrastructural overhaul that is required by a highly specialized area of film education has not happened. The straight result of this has been a constant qualitative depletion in the education that is being offered. We see it as a direct violation of the Reservation, 2006 which puts the onus on the various institutes to ensure that the increased students does not lead to a qualitative depletion.
Rapid advancements and planned obsolescence in digital technology coupled with infinite dependence on ministry for taking decisions regarding financial matters has further resulted in a gap between the requirements and availability of facilities. This has ensured constant breakdowns in the functioning of the institute leading to frequent delays in completing exercises of the syllabus.
Instead of upgrading the available infrastructure, various efforts are being made to “re-design ‘ the syllabus to ensure the completion of various courses. Its a complete travesty of all academic ethics where exercises are been hacked down in the garb of making it time efficient. A truncated syllabus coupled with fundamental changes in the structure of the institute will ensure that FTII is arm twisted into being a back-office for serving fodder to the industry rather than encouraging plural cinema in the country.
All efforts should be directed to ensuring that the infrastructure required by the present courses should be overhauled rather than mindless expansion into courses which don’t even suit the profile of a national institute like FTII.
LONG OUTSTANDING ISSUES OF THE STAFF AND FACULTY
Teaching and non-teaching staff form the backbone of any academic institute consequently keeping them motivated is one of the top priorities. The prevailing situation at the institute is unfortunately quite the opposite. The ever-increasing number of students, coupled with slack recruitment policies have ensured that the staff is both underpaid and overworked
Certain demands of the staff have been outstanding for many years now. The unjustifiable delay in sorting out these issues has led to a certain lethargy and lack of motivation among the staff. The long-standing court cases filed by the staff are clearly a point to be discussed with utmost sincerity if we are really concerned about raising the standard of the institute.
In view of the above information the student community proposes the following:
- A national commission should be set up to review and formulate a vision statement for the future of FTII consistent with the spirit of laid down objectives. Such commission should also explore and advise on the necessary infrastructure to carry out the vision efficiently.
- FTII to be recognized as a national institution of importance and be freed from the frequent attempts to make it a ‘’financially viable/self-sustaining/revenue generating’’ organization.
- Up-gradation of the existing infrastructure for the existing courses as a matter of priority to ensure the smooth functioning of the institute.
- We support the need for training courses for working professionals and enthusiasts. However we are convinced that any haphazard or unnecessary and superficial expansion of the film institute will lead to more unmanageable problems in the future, if not at the outset. For running such courses separate institutions/polytechnics should be established in the closest proximity to the centres like Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai, Mumbai, Hyderabad etc.
- The constitution of the governing bodies including academic and governing councils, FTII Society and syllabus review committee should be reviewed to ensure real autonomy and decision making power both academically and financially.
- The outstanding demands of the non-teaching staff should be addressed with immediate effect to improve their morale and functioning.
