Editor,
I am writing as a deeply concerned citizen, utterly baffled and saddened by the drastic decline of the education system in Meghalaya. Our state was once proudly celebrated as the educational hub of the Northeast, shaping and nurturing legendary role models like Arundhati Roy, Harishankar Brahma, Victor Banerjee, and James Michael Lyngdoh. Today, that glorious legacy is slipping away. As reported in your esteemed daily dated May 25, 2026, Meghalaya is now performing alarmingly poorly, burdened with staggeringly high student dropout rates.
While official media reports paint a rosy picture of heavy investments and relentless efforts by stakeholders, the hardcore facts on the ground tell a completely contradictory story. The dismal results speak for themselves; it requires no rocket science to see the failure. What specific, measurable steps have the education department and stakeholders actually taken? How will they dispute the raw data and figures presented by the media?
A major reason for this decline is the blatant exploitation of our educators. Teachers are already drowning under the weight of the new education format, managing regular classes, endless assignments, and corrections—all while surviving on modest salaries that fail to keep pace with current inflation. On top of this academic burden, they are routinely pulled away to act as census enumerators and election agents. If we continuously over-burden and exploit our teachers, how can we realistically expect them to give 100 percent to our children?
Adding to this chaos is the current crisis surrounding the Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUP). For the youth about to graduate, this has turned into a painful ordeal. Students are trapped in a dilemma, wondering if this fourth year is a practical reality or just the illusion of political ideologues. When FYUP was introduced, stakeholders aggressively compelled its mandatory implementation despite a lack of proper infrastructure. Now, three years later, as the first batch finishes their third year, students are left completely stranded. The very stakeholders who championed the system have gone into hiding, refusing to clarify whether the fourth year even exists structurally.
While I appreciate the North-Eastern Hill University Teachers’ Association (NEHUTA) for finally taking up this issue, one cannot help but question the timing. Why wait until the eleventh hour, when students are about to pass out of their third year, to launch an agitation? Why was this incomplete structure allowed to be implemented in the first place?
An earnest suggestion to all stakeholders is simple: respect our teachers, let them focus on what they do best without exploiting them, and permanently free the education sector from political agendas and interference. If we do not act now, I dread to think what the future holds for our children under this new education system in Meghalaya.
Yours sincerely
Dr Andy TG Lyngdoh,
Via email
Choosing between a 3-year & a 4-year UG programme
Editor,
Apropos the news item “FYUP transition: NEHUTA asks students to stick to three-yr prog” (ST, May 24, 2026), it is highly concerning to read that “The North-Eastern Hill University Teachers’ Association (NEHUTA) has warned students to avoid the fourth year of the new Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUP), advising them to stick to the traditional system due to the university’s failure to establish a clear transition to postgraduate studies.” This only adds to the confusion and the anxiety of the 6th semester students who are writing their final exams now.
Since 2023, students who are admitted in colleges affiliated to NEHU are enrolled under the Four-Year Undergraduate (FYUG) programme. Therefore, in principle, colleges are obliged to offer the four-year programme. It is a different matter if some of them cannot do so due to low enrolment or resource constraints. Students who wish to pursue their studies into the fourth year may shift to colleges that offer the same. Students who have successfully completed four years of undergraduate programme are eligible to directly pursue Ph.D. or go for a one-year master’s degree programme subject to fulfilment of other eligibility criteria. And of course, students who have completed 3 years of undergraduate programme are eligible for a two-year master’s degree programme.
The one-year master’s degree (OYPG) programme is not yet operationalised in NEHU. However, from the academic session starting August 2027 onwards, NEHU is duty bound to offer the OYPG since presumably there will be students who will have completed four years of UG programme. Now, the question is whether to choose between the 3-year or the 4-year UG programme. A 3-year UG programme is time-saving and cost effective for students who wish to apply for entry level jobs immediately after graduation or prepare for competitive exams since a Bachelor’s degree is the minimum qualification in most cases. On the other hand, if a student plans to go for a career in academics and research, study abroad, or pursue PhD, then a four-year UG programme is more beneficial. For a career in academics and research, the traditional 3-year UG degree plus a 2-year master’s degree is still an equally good choice. The right choice depends on one’s career goals, financial situation, and learning preferences.
One batch of students are about to complete 3 years of the undergraduate NEP 2020 curriculum. Therefore, protesting NEP at this stage will not be constructive at all. Besides, the stark reality is that, irrespective of whoever is the VC, NEHU cannot act independently of the powers that be, that is, the powers that hold the purse strings. Let us also remember that prior to the NEP curriculum, students under NEHU were at a great disadvantage, studying only 8 papers in a major subject while students in other universities were studying twice or more the number of papers. Yes, there are problems galore with the NEP, chief among them is the lack of regular or sanctioned additional manpower to handle the heavy workload and specialised courses like vocational training courses. The way forward is to find solutions to those problems for the benefit of our students. It may also be noted that there are many students who look beyond NEHU for higher studies. Our students have to move forward and we have the responsibility to ensure that our protests do not keep them stranded at the crossroads.
Yours etc.,
Dr. Veronica Pala,
Dept of Economics, NEHU
(Disclaimer: The writer is a member of NEHUTA and the views expressed here are personal and not the official stance of NEHU authorities).
