You can find his proposals here.
*All proposal reviews are based on TSA’s assessment of the proposal document provided by the candidate. We crosscheck all facts mentioned in the proposal and give feedback around three parameters :
- Need & Impact of the proposals; we attempt to assess the value of the proposal for the students.
- Feasibility; whether the proposal ever see the light of day or not.
- Originality; if the proposal been implemented before in some form or another.
Proposal I- ‘Career Conclave’ for Placement Preparation
The Career Conclave is a six month mentorship programme for pre-final year students to aid in their forthcoming placement preparation.
i) Need & Impact (3/5)- The proposal provided draws heavily from the feedback collected by CDC from the last placement session (December 2015). It identifies clear target areas that aspirants need to improve upon to better their performance at job interviews and succeed. These areas of improvement include communication skills, case preparations and placement anxiety. The need for career path identification is also apparent from the hordes of students uncertain about the direction they want their future to go into. An official channel for connection between placed graduates and students sitting for placements would also alleviate the burden that students face during their preparation. However, there exist sources that have over the years, proven their usefulness in preparing for interviews. Existing students have lauded TnPedia and AmbitionBox for their near-accurate appraisal of the selection procedures involved. The impact will directly depend on the mentors’ enthusiasm, and regardless of where a student has been placed, we recommend adding a filter during the Buddy selection, which would allow students sitting for placements to decide if any particular buddy is adequately capable of aiding him in the selection process.
ii) Feasibility (2/5): Since, no other group has been delegated to this job, the reporter assumes that the work will be assigned to the Placement Committee. Evidently, this would encumber the already-taxed Committee Members while implementing this proposal – calling up willing alumni or professionals, fixing up time slots for them to deliver their seminars, ensuring students turn up (which remains a huge concern, given how the CDC has been unsuccessful in getting students to turn for Pre-Placement talks over the last couple of years), etc. This would take up a big chunk of PlaceComms’ time, time that could be more valuably used to call up more companies in Phase-2. Also, given how much effort the CDC puts into getting placed students to fill the feedback form, we doubt the effort these students will put into helping their juniors out.
iii) Originality (3/5): Major aspects of the proposal seem to have been borrowed from a model implemented in IIM Calcutta. Also Madhuresh, the VP Candidate two years ago had proposed an unrelated Buddy Program. Many of the sub proposals have already been floated by Ankur Agarwal and co. in the CDC seminar that was conducted for pre-final years. Regardless, the reporter perceives the proposal to be a welcome move.
Proposal II – Undergraduate Research Platform
The platform will allow undergraduates to ideate and work on academic projects of their liking and reward those whose proposals are deemed worthy by the corresponding Project Supervisors.
i) Need & Impact (2/5) – Promoting research is all the hullabaloo ever since the Vision 2020 plans were announced by the administration. The general lack of support perceived by a majority of undergraduates who wish to pursue research is a major bottleneck in the way of actualising the talents of many students. This proposal, if implemented successfully, can significantly promote the research culture in campus. Still, this idea deviates attention from the primary stakeholders of research, the postgraduates and research scholars. The proposal does nothing to address the ever present concerns of the PG & RS community.
ii) Feasibility (1/5) – We strongly doubt that any Professor will be able to acquire the funding required for such a project within the short time that is stipulated in the proposal.There have been several complaints made by research scholars regarding irregular stipends. We also question the candidate’s assumption that any meaningful research would be carried out at a total cost of Rs. 25000. Even if we discount these logistical issues and focus solely on the the student, we challenge the claim that they will finish their assigned project by February. We believe our suspicions are validated by the numerous hurdles faced by students working on their BTPs and MTPs for the better part of the year, their other engagements notwithstanding.
iii) Originality (3/5) – We laud the candidate’s proposal for its novelty. Nonetheless, we maintain our reservations about this proposal coming to fruition. The Dean UG’s and the DOSA’s apparent approvals do not assure of this seeing the light of day.
Proposal III- Training of Mess Workers and Setting of Balanced Diet by a Dietician
i) Need and Impact: (2/5): A proposal to overhaul the Mess System is a proposal that was expected this year after the BRH Mess incident. The quality of food served in the mess is at the top of the list of woes a KGPian has. However, we believe this proposal does little to address the major concerns faced by mess contractors and the student committee alike. Profitability and Mess Worker Unions were two of the major issues identified in the senate meetings and we don’t see this proposal working to abate the above issues. Most Halls give students the freedom to choose the menus for their mess.
ii) Feasibility: (1/5): One of the biggest pitfalls in this proposal is the waning profitability that messes in different halls already face. A dietician and a professional chef training mess workers will burden the coffers of an already broken mess system. There will, no doubt, be reluctance from the already Unionized Mess Workers in actually learning from a professional chef.
iii) Originality (3/5): The ideas seems original, but that could well be because of it’s not a very feasible proposal for KGP.
Proposal IV – Digital KGP
Aims to reduce the paper trail created by the administrative offices and have more efficient information storage and retrieval systems. In particular, a system to collect and analyze data about the medical status of the students as received by BC Roy hospital. Also, a mechanism to get various applications (bonafide, erp) digitally signed by the various authorities.
i) Need & Impact (4/5): The proposal is very ambitious in that it can bring about significant reduction in time spent by students running around trying to get various formalities in order. Storing information digitally will also allow for better administrative processes. Throw in the environmental benefits, the impact if this goes through is significant to say the least.
ii) Feasibility (2/5): Here’s where several issues arise with this initiative. In order to implement such wide ranging changes in the administrative operations, it is generally beneficial if the motivation to do so arises from the top management. There is very little a Vice President can do about the way the administration chooses to run its daily operations. Digitization of the institute’s administration requires significant finances to develop the necessary infrastructure, train the staff, update existing systems etc. We strongly doubt a student representative’s abilities to bring about this change.
iii) Originality (4/5): Although a long shot, it certainly shows very positive intentions. We haven’t found similar proposals.
Proposal V – Workshops by Societies
Various societies such as Business Club & Debating Society will conduct workshops for the benefit of the KGP community. These will be open to all students.
i) Need & Impact (2/5): These workshops, though irregular, still take place throughout the year. Participation in the same has been erratic due to various reasons including lack of proper publicity and enthusiasm from the campus.
ii) Feasibility (2/5): How well this proposal gets implemented depends on the various societies commitments and schedules. Seems feasible enough.
iii) Originality (0/5): No points for originality in this proposal.