On Tuesday, 3rd September, 2024, an email from the Ministry of Academic Affairs (MAA) announced the reintroduction of ‘Foundation Course (FC) Representatives.’ It detailed the structure: three elected representatives will cater to 3 each of the 9 FCs. FCs are a compulsory part of every undergraduate Ashoka student's trajectory. They aim to introduce various schools of thought and develop critical thinking skills.
Once candidates meet the eligibility criteria and get MAA’s approval, they could start campaigning. Voting for the UG student body opened on 16th September at 10:00 AM and ended on the same day at 10:00 PM. Following this, the MAA sent out the results, announcing the FC representatives for the upcoming academic year.
The elected representatives are Harshangad Singh (UG’25) for Economy, Politics and Society (EPS), Environmental Studies (EVS) and Indian Civilisations, Khushi Jain (UG’27) for Principles of Science (POS), Quantitative Reasoning and Mathematical Thinking (QRMT), and Mind and Behaviour, and Madiha Tariq (UG’27) for Literature and the World, Great Books, and Introduction to Critical Thinking (ICT).
The Edict spoke to the Minister of Academic Affairs, Sania Bhargava (UG’25) about the election process. While discussing the duties of the elected representatives, Sania highlighted that their role is similar to student representatives of other academic departments, primarily in “acting as a channel of communication between the faculty and the students.”
Sania also discussed how the MAA team wanted the FC rep elections to have happened before orientation week so that the first-year students could have reached out to the elected representatives. However, due to communication issues with the Office of Academic Affairs (OAA), the timeline had to be pushed.
The Edict also asked Sania the reason behind FC representatives being reintroduced this year. She explained that the Ministry had a lot on its plate in the previous academic year, especially in tackling the National Education Policy (NEP) changes. Hence, the elections for FC reps were put on hold. This year, the MAA “is trying to align all its activities towards a single campaign of ‘chain of right information,’ and the FC reps helped us serve the purpose profoundly.”
The Edict also spoke to Mohan Rajagopal (ASP'25), one of the first FC representatives when the role was introduced. When he applied, Mohan said, a manifesto had to be submitted, after which there was a campaigning period followed by a day of voting, quite similar to this year’s procedure. During his time as FC representative, though, the categories were different – freshman rep, STEM rep, and non-STEM rep.
The voter turnout for the FC rep elections this year draws particular attention. Of the entire Undergraduate batch strength, which is nearly 3000 large, there were a total of 293 responses. The OAA and MAA decided not to specify a quorum, to avoid stagnation in the elections.
The highest “voter turnout” was seen in the EPS, EVS, and Indian Civilisations category. Particularly interesting was the winning vote in the Literature and the World, Great Books, and ICT category, in the first round of the election. Of the six candidates, the None of the Above (NOTA) option won with 80 votes.
When asked about this result, Sania said they were all “taken aback by NOTA winning in this category.” She found it “most surprising” that six candidates were contesting, “and yet NOTA won overwhelmingly.” She elaborated on “the fact that Ashokans took the effort to vote for NOTA” and said that it “conveyed [...] some strong preference in mind” and not a casual act or lack of choice.
Madiha Tariq (UG’27), the elected FC representative for Literature and the World, Great Books, and ICT, spoke to The Edict about the process of running for representative this year. On her campaigning, Madiha said that she “wrote an email detailing [my] motivations to run” and “prepared a concise manifesto for people to peruse.” Additionally, since she stood in the “second round”, after the NOTA result, The Edict asked her whether there was any difference in the procedure. “There was no procedural difference in running for the second election. It followed the same logistics,” Madiha clarified.
Mohan also discussed the way that the role was structured at the time he ran, which did not allow for communication or logistical agreement between a department and the representatives. On increasing course caps, for one, Mohan said, “Ultimately it is up to the department whether or not this goes through.” As an FC rep, he did “not have a department to talk to,” making the whole process of negotiation difficult. Mohan says that he “went into the position expecting a lot to do, which was both true and not true.”
Sania herself mentioned that the role of an FC representative is quite similar to that of other major department representatives. The similarities between the two raises some important questions. Firstly, on what unique contributions are to be anticipated from the newly elected representatives. Secondly, on what their role will entail, making up for the overlap with other department representatives. This is particularly important to consider as each FC originates from a particular academic department.
As the year progresses and academic changes unfold, multiple factors will determine the goals these elected representatives achieve.
(Data visualized by Madhumitha GI and Srijana Siri; Cartoon by Anandi Gupta)
(Edited by Madhumitha GI and Jyotsna Sidharth)
Comments