Page:The Modern Review (July-December 1925).pdf/364

Rh

Let us take the example of the Board of Higher Studies in History. According to the report of the Post-Graduate Reorganisation Committee the paid teaching staff in History is composed of:

A. Six whole-time lecturers, and two part-time lecturers.

B. The Carmichael Professor of Ancient Indian History and Culture and fifteen other teachers, plus seven lecturers attached to other Boards and to honorary lecturers. Thus the Board is composed of eight teachers of the general history section, twenty-five lecturers from the section on Ancient Indian History, and three members elected by the Post-Graduate Council in Arts. If the members appointed by the Post-Graduate Council in Arts have any pretension to scholarship in any department of Indology and raise any objection to any proposal made by paid members of the teaching staff, they can be silenced at once by the absolute majority.

The Regulations for Post-Graduate teaching were framed in such a manner that they really put a discount on sound research work being done by any of its members and inevitably prevent efficient Post-Graduate teaching from being imparted to the students in Calcutta. The Regulations lay down that;

Thus it will be apparent once more that the merest baby of a graduate, say an M. A. of six months’ standing, becomes an ex-officio member of the Board of Higher Studies as soon as he is appointed a Post-Graduate lecturer. He will be impressed with a wholesome fear for the senior members of the Board and the party in power and he will become impressed with an idea that his future prospects will be determined by this Board's opinion of his “research work”. He will at once cease fo take an independent or indeed any part in the debate, other than silently voting with his “master”. The most dangerous of the functions assigned to the Boards of Higher Studies are:

1. The selection of text and recommended books; because the teachers who form an