Not anytime soon. Highly unlikely during this calendar year. At least for most of the NLUs.

Kian will be responsible.

It's unlikely that any single centre would have more than 2000 students, if one goes by what happened during CLAT 2020. And those centres having 2000 students were like the HQ of TCS, or a full fledged university campus, with capacities for over 10k. There was very little problem relating to social distancing at the centres themselves. One would assume there would be even less of that now that the Consortium has had over a year to prepare for this. Traveling to the centers for the examinees remains a problem though.

You copied this from a tweet. Thanks for changing "inoculation" to "infection".

Also, this is directed to LegallyIndia mods/Kian. Do you disable particular IP addresses from commenting? I have been unable to comment anything from my laptop and mobile devices. This comment is done using a guest window on Chrome. I'm sorry if I violated any policies or commented overtime. Please lift the ban.

Hi, thanks for the reply. I use legallyindia as a unregistered guest. I was able to comment using my laptop until a few months ago. Recently I revisited LI after a long time and was not able to do any of that on my laptop. But I had to comment certain stuff, so I used my cell. Even that has stopped working now. After clicking on "Add your comment" the window simply does nothing, like an empty widget or something. I'll check for cookies maybe. Or maybe use the incognito function.

I'm curious, Kian. Did you actually ever ban anybody from LI till date?

Scooter- maybe? What was his scene some 5-7 years ago?

What does not recording full IP address mean? How much do you record?

You may be using the same user name. Try with a different username.

You don’t get to decide that. That’s it.

Holding an online exam where 40% plus aspirants weren't able to participate wasn't moralistic by any stretch of imagination. Withdrawing a month before the exam while keeping the rest in the dark was not moralistic either. Nor was trying to surreptitiously bypass its own academic council. Sudhir is so from the high horse that he can't even hear it neigh.
If he was really sanguine about the importance of holding the exam in time, online or not, then why did he not withdraw this year well in advance and conduct his own? Afraid that the SC will again give him a bloody nose like the last occasion? National level online exams can't be conducted in this country fairly and ensuring access given the state of our infra. LSAT doesn't count because the type of people who give it actually have access. Most do not.

Lol dude. Talk about distracting and obfuscating. Sudhir was right about the need to hold exams on time and not postpone them indefinitely. Nls lost a whole trimester last year because of this BS.

And sure his planning might have been rushed because he was trying to get the first year batch in in October. If he had had time maybe it would not have had so many bugs. But FM likely knew then that the math he was spouting was bullshit and he kept engaging in bad faith. I don’t particularly care about the politics of nls administration so you? That’s not a moral question to my mind? Sudhir made hard choices last year and he did it to save his academic year and to provide his students and applicants with some amount of structure. Not this indefinitely postponing game the other clueless ones were doing.

Let me also say this- it is not any more moralistic to hold an in person exam when the country is staring down the barrel of the third wave. Fm again gets it wrong- the space between second and third wave is not a “window of opportunity” that people can use to step out and do as they like. The third wave happens because people don’t follow the same discipline after the end of the second wave. Actual people die because of this kind of behaviour- how is that moralistic pray tell? Also how much access does an in person exam hold in this situation where a person has to risk the life and health of themselves and their family members to write an exam that could be written anywhere?

Believe it or not there are core values to society that are more important than access. More important than “do I have more or less than my neighbour”. And those values are protecting peoples lives and health and the bodies they have to spend their entire life in. Life trumps access.

It’s nice that you ignored my whole point in your rant too! Brings back so much déjà vu from last year.

Holding an offline exam is irresponsible. Holding an online exam is elitist and compromises access. Even Sudhir's exam last year did not see even 50% participation of CLAT, thus showing that plenty of people were forced to sit out. Sudhir might have been thinking about what to do with the students once they are in, but not enough about giving people a fair chance to get in. A lost trimester can be compensated in the next 4 years. If they cannot do that, then it's their pedagogical problem.
If Faizan and the Consortium are singing the same tune about lost time this year, then I agree with the guy above, it's a moral turnaround. That puts them in the wrong, not Sudhir in the right.
I honestly do not know that with the amount of cash the Consortium gets from this exam, why they cannot ensure that a lot more bigger and smaller cities have centres, thus ensuring that there won't be any crowding and travel problems can be minimised too. They can easily plot the map by using the addresses of the applicants. But that would mean the NLUs won't get their huge share of profit from the exam, which is what is more important to them, I guess.

Again with the BS about how a lost trimester can be compensated. Time is linear. There already exists a ton of work for terms 2-15. The skills you learn in your first year are essential and everything else builds upon them. It cannot be rushed anymore than it already is. The math isn’t the problem- you can’t have ten hours of classes a day because when will students eat and sleep and read and when will faculty prepare?

This idea of it being “their” pedagogical problem. As if students are customers and universities have the onus to deliver education on time regardless of constraints encapsulates everything that’s wrong with Indian academia. It’s our pedagogical problem. And the answer is unsavoury- but there is only one - you do everything you can to ensure access - but at a certain point you have to say enough and try and save the academic year. Robbing admitted students of a decent education because one is too scared of the outrage machine or of barely reasoned court decisions does a greater injustice in the long run.

It might surprise you to know that things weren’t always “fair” and “equal access” before the pandemic either. And they certainly weren’t fair and equal access after the much postponed mid pandemic exam last year. There is no perfect. You try to strike a balance you can live with and move on like an adult.

The balance has been struck. So why aren't you being able to move on still?

I mean if you don’t want to talk about it cause it makes you uncomfortable - fine. But I think it’s worth the trouble to look at what happened last year in the light of what we’re being told this year. If that’s not for you- you move on.

Their pedagogical problem clearly means NLSIU's, not the students. In your outrage, you are failing to read properly.

Here are reasoned arguments:

1. Sudhir behaved last year as if he was solely concerned about the 80 students who would get into NLSIU, and not the 80000 who had been trying to. As part of the group conducting the entrance examination, he should not have done that.
2. When it comes to 1st year students having to attend more classes or miss out on an internship out of ten, as opposed to hundreds of times greater in number aspirants being deprived of chances to get quality legal education, logic, reason, and utility dictate that the latter's interest should be prioritised.
3. Just because CLAT was not entirely fair before the pandemic, one cannot take actions that would deliberately render it more unfair after the pandemic. Neither logic nor reason supports that.
4. First year sessions have ended in most NLUs now. I cannot see everybody complaining about what an irreversible damage has been caused to their legal education because of the accelerated schedule. Only those who take themselves too seriously or believe that they are the sole exclusive bearer of God's own gift to these students, would be harbouring such delusion.
5. If a pedagogy cannot be flexible enough to adapt to circumstances, then it has become outdated and should be chucked out, not embraced forcefully.
6. Sudhir himself did not try to withdraw well in advance from CLAT this year and conduct a separate examination, adhering to proper notice period and ensuring that the judiciary won't strike it down again. If he is that convinced about the strength of his argument from last year, then what was preventing him from doing so exactly?

There are plenty of logic and reason to go around, you are just choosing to ignore those to suit yourself.

Memories from last year would be those of the SC thrashing Sudhir so hard that he ran away and didn't even try to go his own way in this year. Happy times.

This is what passes for a reasoned argument now is it? There’s logic and reason and oneupsmanship and tribalism.

You have not made a single logical argument till now. Your only ground for not allowing a lost trimester is because Sudhir said that it cannot be done. I say that it can be done. NLUs give multiple vacations, then classes can be made 6 days a week for a year and so on. Multiple options available without having to resort 10 hours of daily classes. It's certainly not a problem with our pedagogy, because I believe that it can be done, and plenty of NLUs have actually done it without cribbing. As for oneupmanship, if anybody is guilty of it above all, that has to be the Messiah of Nagarbhavi.

Again- the pioneer of this Mathy approach to the problem - fm- in the video admits that the “solution” as it were did not work. It’s not just my opinion or yours that’s new here.

If your students are able to do a five year course in less than five years without major changes to their quality of life- I’d think your curriculum would be suspect.