By Zeenat Alam

Imagine you dream of joining a prestigious Ph.D. program, eager to dive into cutting-edge research. But suddenly, there's a plot twist! The University Grants Commission (UGC) has shaken things up by swapping out the typical university entrance exams for Ph.D. admissions. Instead, they're pushing forward with the National Eligibility Test (NET). And just like that, the academic world is buzzing with debates!

Here's the scoop: Recently, the UGC announced that NET scores will now serve as the golden ticket for Ph.D. candidates, sidelining the need for university-specific entrance exams. Why the switch? The UGC says it's all about streamlining the process, ensuring fairness, and aligning with the National Education Policy 2020.

Top of Form

Cheers and Jeers: Let's break it down, shall we? On one side of the ring, we've got the cheerleaders, hailing the move for its standardized approach. No more juggling multiple entrance tests – it's a one-size-fits-all deal now! Plus, transparency is the name of the game with NET scores laying it all out on the table.

But hold your horses, folks! However, there are also dissenting voices. They're waving the red flag, warning about the downsides. Critics argue that a single standardized test might not cut the mustard when it comes to capturing the diverse talents and passions of Ph.D. aspirants. Plus, there's the whole homogenization debate – are we sacrificing university autonomy at the altar of standardization?

The potential homogenization of admission criteria across universities is a major concern with the shift towards using the National Eligibility Test (NET) for Ph.D. admission. Traditionally, universities had the autonomy to design their entrance exams, allowing for tailored admissions processes. However, reliance on the NET may lead to a standardized approach, potentially overlooking the unique strengths and priorities of individual institutions. This could result in a one-size-fits-all system that diminishes diversity and fails to fully capture candidates' distinct qualities. It underscores the need for careful consideration of the implications of standardized testing in Ph.D. admissions to maintain flexibility and accommodate the diverse needs of academic institutions.

Let's listen to perspectives from the front lines.

"For a Ph.D., one already has to write an entrance exam. Many of my colleagues and seniors have mentioned that passing the NET is not easy for all disciplines and it adds extra pressure to students who wish to pursue a Ph.D. The UGC should reconsider this. Nowadays, many jobs require qualifications such as a Ph.D. with experience. Therefore, students have to spend a lot of time obtaining a degree. As students, they have many commitments to fulfill. If this process is extended like this, everything will be in question for them in obtaining a Ph.D. degree". - Said Dr. Kamlesh, KVASU, Kerala

"I think a Ph.D. is a very different course and it can't be treated with the same criteria as other UG and PG courses. For fellowship competition, it is required, no issues in that, but allowing and restricting someone desirous of contributing something to society through advanced expertise and observations in an extensive and detailed manner, it is not justified. Often, many people take enough time to realize that they are now ready to undertake the Ph.D. course, and sometimes a long professional journey culminates towards this decision. Then, how can we put everyone through the same filter? Is this fair? Not enough for me, at least." - Said Ziaul Hasan, PhD Scholar, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.

I think it's a good move by the UGC to make it mandatory for Ph.D. aspirants to qualify for the NET exam. What happened in the private universities that get projects from DBT and many such organizations that hire their own students for the JRF post to fulfill and make them mandatory to pursue a Ph.D.. To stop this I think govt has taken a good initiative. In India there are many Ph.D. holders who are doing the job of 20k to 30k....they wasted their crucial 5 years in private universities where getting a PhD is so easy and there are many Ph.D. holders who are jobless. I think by making it mandatory the UGC will halt the overexploitation of students by private universities. - Said - Anu Shree Varshney, Assistant Professor.

"Requiring the NET for Ph.D. admissions could exclude deserving candidates, limit diversity, and overlook alternative pathways to academic excellence. Instead, a holistic approach considering various factors such as research acumen, management skills, soft skills, time management, etc., ensures fair assessment and fosters inclusivity in academia. A Ph.D. is a journey of resilience, dedication, determination, patience, and perseverance. Making an exam an indicator of Ph.D. admissions shows that the government doesn't trust its education system and hence has to keep a biased exam as an indicator". - Said - Malika Ahuja, Microbiologist. 

All India Student's Federation (AISF) has demanded immediate withdrawal of the notice claiming it is another step towards making education exclusive for the privileged categories. AISF said by making multiple choice questions (MCQ)-based NET exam mandatory, the government is trying to turn Ph.D. into a rat race and promote a “coaching centre culture”.

“NET has a centralized nature and is constituted without considering the diverse socio-economic situation of the students. By making NET mandatory for Ph.D., the union government is technically liquidating the entrance tests conducted by various universities,” Dinesh Seerangaraj general secretary of AISF told New Indian Express.

Survey Says: We quickly dipped into the social media pool to gauge public sentiment. On LinkedIn, 42% of folks gave the nod to Ph.D. admission via the NET Exam, while a whopping 58% were raising eyebrows at the idea. Instagram had a slightly rosier outlook, with 57% giving it the thumbs up and 43% shaking their heads in disagreement.

LinkedIn Poll - 

Instagram Poll - 

In Conclusion: So, where does that leave us? The UGC's move to hitch Ph.D. admission to the NET has certainly set the academic world abuzz. While it's a step towards standardization and transparency, there are valid concerns about diversity, fairness, and the impact on aspiring researchers.

The road ahead? It's paved with dialogue, refinement, and a whole lot of soul-searching. After all, we're talking about shaping the future of research – and that's a journey worth getting right.

Oh, hold on now! All the clouds are still unclear; we have to wait until the NET June 2024 exam notification for a better understanding of its implementations and guidelines regarding Ph.D. admission through NET scores. It will be interesting to see.

UGC Public Notice regarding National Eligibility Test (NET) as an Entrance Test for Admission to Ph.D.

If you're passionate about sharing your story OR insights, experiences, and expertise with our audience, please join our Life Sciences- Writer Community WhatsApp group for more details - Click here to join

Please follow our WhatsApp Channel and follow us on LinkedIn Instagram and X (Twitter) or @biotechville for instant/daily job updates.

Thank you for sharing with others!

Disclaimer:

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author(s)/Individual opinion and do not necessarily represent the official stance of BiotechVille. The content is opinion-based and not intended to malign any organization or individual. BiotechVille does not guarantee the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability, or availability of the information in this article. Any reliance on such information is at your own risk. BiotechVille reserves the right to edit or remove content at its discretion.