Attendance Related Suggestions

1. We can increase the weightage of CP as an incentive so that students start attending classes.
2. "Give weightage to attendance. Keep negative marks for each missed class."
3. CP should be mapped to the attendance.
4. Factor attendance into CP
5. Introduction of attendance as a component in overall evaluation where, barely fulfilling the
attendance criteria of 75% would attract zero or negative marks, and for the students who
have better attendance will be awarded with certain bonus points in that component of
evaluation.
6. like many profs do, give cp according to attendance
7. For Attendance a stricter approach may communicate the story, It needn't be like there would
be still loopholes to get rid of it but again what's important is how we are approaching it to the
batch and it’s important as a whole. Let the student go and sleep in class but if hearing an iota
of it could make or drive a change that’s where the opportunity lies and that’s what the
concept of it is whole about.

CQPi Related Suggestions

1. Although academic rigor is very important, I think since the batch average is so poor, it
makes no sense to put CQPI on the resume now at such a later stage when the batch
doesn't even have time to improve their grades. This will create more problems for CAS
as then students will get fewer shortlists and it may even hamper our placements. Let's
start this initiative in the upcoming batch. I think that is a more feasible option right now.
We can do more engaging sessions like maybe case-study sessions which is more
interactive and can generate business knowledge in students. We can start an initiative
called "Dean's List" in which the top 15-20 students will be awarded and get recognition.
2. Adding CQPI to the resume might create difficulties in getting shortlists. For the BM
batch of 2022-24, CQPI should only be provided when the company asks for it. For
subsequent batches, it can be added to the resume as they will have a chance to improve
it. Also, give a chance to take retest on a voluntary basis to students who have just passed
(maybe with a D grade) or got an F grade in only one subject.
3. Well, it is an interesting topic to bring onto the surface. Let's start from the beginning,
how we all get into XIMB ? By means of Score in competitive exams or by means of
interview weightage or by means of work experience or by means of any special
achievement in a specific field? It's all debatable. Well, i feel it's the cumulative and
relative weightage in each field that makes us a good manager. Since the ultimate purpose
of B-School is supply good manager to society by providing all facilities in order to make
a student industry fit( Which we often address as holistic development of individual). I
believe overall development doesn't limit to marks or CQPI rather individual's managerial
skill to situation. Yes, subject knowledge matters, I'm not denying. But why only to CQPI
! In XIMB our curriculum is not limited to class room exercise, it goes beyond the
confined class room. Students are engaged their time in several committee work,
activities and other official jobs too. If we are giving weightage to CQPI, then why not to
extracurricular activities in a tangible manner like CQPI( Like one should compensate in
the form of CQPI for committee and other activities). Because everyone's time has its
own value. Why are we not focusing on how we make the classroom participation
interesting? We are more or less following the same pedagogy since years. Also getting
marks or CQPI is a two way channel ( From students efforts to teachers reward). Also i
believe XIMB follow the Manta of transparency. Most of our quizzes's marks , it's
solutions are not been disclosed in UMS, results are not updated with immediate effect.
So where is the scope of improvement for students? In addition to that , adding CQPI to
 CV which can affect in their final placement, which is not good for college image. Yes,
rather putting stress on CQPI, the focus should shift towards class participation as XIMB
students are from diverse fields so individual has strength and weakness in different
fields. Also in order to establish this balance the role of CRs and Cul rep is quite critical.
4. Students fulfilling the essential criteria of 5CQPI as per academic mandate should need
not mention their CQPI on the CV, now there are many issues with CQPI as it's not an
accurate indicator of a student's performance; different professors evaluate different
subjects for separate sections having other parameters and hence a considerable gad in
grading, it would be unfair to take away their chances in placements at least to appear for
interviews based on CQPI, the idea is to improve academic rigor, but this is not the way
to it, because if it's only about CQPI the number of instances of cheating would increase.
In many cases, this unethical activity employed by a few students has helped them
maintain a decent CQPI. The way forward toward improving academic quality is the type
of student-teacher interaction and different methods of knowledge sharing; only a few
subjects can be just grasped within 20 sessions. It needs an outside discussion as well as a
structured approach. Core financial subjects, economics, and statistics need more support
than the rest, so in a way, we need to ensure the materials and evaluation of such courses
are changed. There should be a component for in-class quizzes that can be held on UMS,
which will provide continuous reading, a forum for open discussion and doubt sessions
outside class, where students can approach faculty, all these would help improve
academic rigor, and CQPI shall see an overall improvement.
5. Although CQPI as a performance indicator is relevant to academics, it could act as a
parameter for direct judgement among candidates in regards to placements. It is as good
as saying higher CQPI, would attract better placements for a candidate. If this CQPI is
added to the resume, the concerns for getting shortlists among the candidates would
increase since it has only been informed after end of three semesters. If we chose to go
forward with this proposition, the shortlisting parameters for all the companies has to be
well defined and completely transparent to avoid any potential backlash from the batch.
6. "CQPi mustn't be added the very point.... Rest the trade off could be either if you want to
add the cv then
a. Take extra curricular participation also a weightage into curriculum
b. Dean office making a proper communication to the batch regarding term 4 to be a
wait-and-watch thing where let the batch come up with their approach n
performance n then decide. Although majority of the batch has taken subjects of
their own interest n area. (Because there is no impact and logic here to put last or
past 3 sems into count) if you want to start implementation start it fresh and from
the very beginning.
c. The mix of students who come aren't uniform so for eg. an Engineer struggling
with finance and accounts needs an extra time so as to ramp up his or her game
but again that won't be able to match the one who has already did his or her 3-4
years in it and vice a versa for non engineers in Operations. So relative grading
must be rectified to a leveling ground so that it doesn't hampers one morale and
refrain from one's dedication to commit"
Conclusion - Things have occured may be because of many reasons but the very pertinent
reason is the ego clash which is obvious too. Faculties with such rich experience and reputation if
all of his 20 sessions go or run as a silo transcript it then hurts the faculties sentiment and ego
whereas the unofficial tussle between dean office and the staff is of no area which had to shed light
upon. So, maneuvering to the dean office with batch insensitivity is what the faculty reroutes too.
and this is very obvious from the CR and CulRep's action. They represent the section and are liable
to uplift the sections performance in each and every field be it acads or extra curriculars but we see
it shows as they being a post master and a link to communicate info which is obviously not the
scenario. If you want to uplift the batch performance you would ask to reroute it via your CR and
CulRep because the position they hold brings in them a lot of capability to work for batch's
betterment and growth. So amidst of this clash if we are just able to replicate well to faculties and
to their ego's the batch would be the best because again the unsatisfied and disgruntled faculties sit
among themselves and the topics go around. eg- The thread of attendance related mail going
aorund faculties mail box, it was nothing but a target to dean's office because if you would be
really so much hampered about it then you could have stated it directly and direct communications
could have been followed but via that thread the VC's intervention has to be done and then things
were made stringent to bring back into place.