Mentor’s comment-
- https://www.thehindu.com/
opinion/op-ed/recast-this- apples-and-oranges-ranking- method/article37831893.ece - In the intro, mention the background of the NIRF.
- In the body, mention the five parameters used for the ranking: teaching, learning and resources; research and professional practice; graduation outcome; outreach and inclusivity, and perception. In the next part mention issues such as lack of adequate financing for the state-run institution and lack of the cost-benefit analysis in NIRF ranking.
- Conclude by mentioning the need for taking these factors into account while formulating the ranking methodology.
Id00000486418
Hello
Decent attempt. Intro is fine, you have mentioned the parameters too. Issues are also mentioned. Some are missing for example..inadequate faculty, issues with infra(labs etc), state HEIs are struggling to embrace emerging technologies involving artificial intelligence, machine learning etc, while CFI has this facility.
Other points are fine, answer ends a bit apruptly.
Mention a small way forward and then conclude properly.
Keep practicing. 🙂
pay_IMEe1E3EFVyRCt
Shri Ram
Nice attempt. Introduction is fine, further you can mention it was launched in 2015. Parameters have been mentioned.
Analysis is also good…you have covered more or less most of the points..in cost-benefit ratio talk about comparison between central and state institutes(return on investment by the govt.).
You can mention some generic points too like inadequate faculty strength, both quality and quantity wise; infrastructure issues like lack of labs etc
Other points are good.
Conclusion is fine.
Keep writing. 🙂
@Staff – ISyOdQANazdk6B
Bhanu
Introduction is fine, parameters mentioned are also okay, you have missed perception. After that you have separately dealt with issues of central and state institutions, but the question asks to find issues in comparing both of them on the scale..so a comparative approach needs to be taken..
Talk about difference in funding in both categories of institutions, also cost-benefit ratio for both is not properly evaluated, in spite of more share of Ph.D. students in State-Run HEI in comparison with institutes of National Importance , central universities, fewer funds have been received by them.
State HEIs are struggling to embrace emerging technologies involving artificial intelligence, machine learning etc, while CFI has this facility.
You can supplement these points with some data.
Conclusion is fine.
Decent attempt but you have diverted a bit from the core demand of the question.
Keep practicing. 🙂