Introducing a Foundation Programme Aiming at Academic Cognition

Abstract

The quality of education of an educational programme is a function of the value of the educational goals that the programme aims at, together with the effectiveness and efficiency of the means that it employs to achieve those goals, including pedagogical strategies and assessment tasks. Hence, in order to raise the quality of education, the current discourse of ‘Outcome Based Education’ needs to shift its focus from what the teacher does in the classroom to raising the quality of student learning. To do this, many universities both in India and abroad have initiated Foundation Programmes as part of both General Education and Specialized Education. This article proposes that such a foundation programme must aim at what we call Academic Cognition, in consonance with what NEP 2020 calls Higher-Order Cognition. We spell out the various strands of Academic Cognition, and explore ways in which foundation programmes in the curricula for Higher Education can provide the foundations for Academic Cognition.

Keywords

Higher-order cognition academic cognition undergraduate curriculum academic intelligence academic knowledge trans-disciplinarity academic inquiry

Introduction

The issue of raising the quality of education has to do with raising the quality of student learning. And the quality of student learning has to do with the quality of the process of learning that takes place in the mind of the learner, and the quality of the outcomes resulting from that learning, also in the mind of the learner. The concern of this article is student learning in Higher Education.

In recent days, the term Higher Order Cognition has become popular in educational circles in India (See Patwardhan et al., 2021, 2022; Mohanan et al., 2023: a cluster of joint works in Policy matters). To avoid unnecessary disagreements on higher vs. lower, we will define Higher-Order Cognition as Academic Cognition, by which we mean the kinds of cognitive capacities that are best exemplified in the pursuit of academic knowledge and academic inquiry and research.

The strands of Academic Cognition include learning outcomes that crucially include the capacity for independent self-directed learning, academic inquiry, critical thinking, critical reading, and integration of the bodies of knowledge transmitted through diverse courses and ‘subjects’/‘disciplines’.

We assume that no one would disagree that a curriculum that aims at Academic Cognition is superior to one that aims merely at the understanding and application of academic knowledge, and that the current mainstream education does not provide the foundations for Academic Cognition.

Introducing Academic Cognition into the undergraduate curriculum by restructuring the entire curriculum would be both impractical and unwise. A feasible alternative is to incorporate Academic Cognition into a Foundation Programme in undergraduate education. In this article, we consider the challenges of such a Foundation Programme initiative, and explore ways in which the Programme can provide the basis of Academic Cognition for Higher Education.

This is not a piece of scholarly work with erudite references. (For readers who would like to place our work in the scholarly literature that forms our lineage and inspiration, a small sample of scholarly references: Anderson (2004), Chomsky and Otero (2002), Dewey (1916), Friere (1970), Peirce (1882), Russell (1926)). The few mentions in the endnotes—articles and videos expressing our thoughts, as well as learning resources1—are recommendations for further reading/watching, shared in the hope that they would attract the attention of like-minded education administrators, curriculum designers, textbook writers, and the faculty in Higher Education (HE). It would be gratifying to see this effort resulting in: (a) the formulation of syllabi that specify the learning outcomes we point to in this article; (b) creation of learning materials and pedagogical strategies aligned to the syllabi; and (c) designing of samples of assessment tasks aligned with the rest of the curriculum to achieve the desired growth of the learners’ minds.

This article is organized as follows. The second section makes a case for the design of online courses for a trans-disciplinary foundation programme at the undergraduate level. The third section lays out what we see as the core strands of such a foundation programme in terms of what we call Academic Cognition —what NEP 2020 calls Academic Cognition. The fourth section provides brief examples of learning tasks and assessment tasks oriented towards Academic Cognition. The fifth section lays out how this initiative can be implemented by creating textbooks and learning materials at the state level, and investing 10% or even 5% of the curricular time for the foundation programme, with a small number of faculty members functioning as mentors. The sixth section sums up the discussion and makes some recommendations for raising the quality of HE.

Learner-centred vs. Teacher-centred Education

The bulk of the discourse of educational reform in India has focused on improving the quality of classroom teaching, based on the following assumptions:

Students in programmes of HE are incapable of Independent Self-Directed Learning.

Since students cannot directly learn from the learning materials, the faculty needs to function as mediators between the materials and students.

Therefore, the first step in improving the quality of student learning is setting up Professional Development Programmes for the faculty.

Professional Development Programmes are not necessary for those who design syllabi, write textbooks, set examination questions, and those who monitor them.

We would like to question these assumptions and put forward an alternative position, articulated in:

A significant proportion of students in programmes of HE are capable of Independent Self-Directed Learning. With the help of appropriate intervention at the school level and remedial work at the university level, the majority of the remaining students who wish to learn can also be empowered in this direction.

If (a) is accepted, it follows that it is feasible and desirable to create learning resources (textbooks, videos, …) from which students can learn even where motivated and capable teachers are not available to assist them.

If (b) is accepted, it follows that our first step to raise the quality of student learning is creating freely accessible online courses from which students can learn on their own.

If so, the next step would be to design computer gradable final examinations and diagnostic summative tests to find out if and how well the students have learnt what these courses expect them to learn (Mohanan, 2010; Mohanan, 2013).

The role of the faculty would then be to use the online course to mentor the students by engaging with their questions on clarification, and to guide their discussions and debates, rather than to duplicate what the online courses do by lecturing in the classroom.

From among these faculty members, it should be possible to identify and nurture those who are motivated to and capable of creating learning resources and assessment tasks for students.

In the rest of this article, we explore the position in (2).

Central Ideas

Integrated Curricula

As we see it, the ultimate purpose of education from Kindergarten to PhD programmes is the wellbeing of the future world along multiple dimensions: physical, pragmatic, socio-emotional, intellectual, ethical, and ‘secular spiritual’ (where by ‘spiritual’, we mean a sense of the purpose and meaning of one’s life on earth). If we accept this purpose of education, curriculum design in HE needs to go beyond the goals of employability and twentieth-century skills, which are limited to the economic wellbeing of the employers and employees, essentially stemming from the corporatization of HE (Patwardhan & Mohanan, 2022, See Sections 1.2 “A Brief History,” and 2.5 “Employability, Well-being, and the Purpose of Education”).

With the shift to multi-dimensional wellbeing, the goals of HE need to be formulated as being founded on a vision of Academic Cognition, Academic Intelligence, and Educatedness, all of which converge on intellectual wellbeing. This narrowing of focus to intellectual wellbeing is a factor that would distinguish HE from School Education.

As part of this shift, we would also need to consider the following ideas for the design of undergraduate programmes. Their curricula must accommodate both General Education and Specialization. The General Education programme would form a foundation for specialized education, as well as for life after graduation.

All educational programs need to pay attention to the goals of General Education , that is, the information, understanding, skills, abilities, and mindset that we expect of all educated individuals, regardless of their specialization or career paths. This ought to be a component of every program of higher education. The goals of Specialized Education are relevant for particular disciplines or professions, whether philosophy, physics, chemistry, medicine, law, engineering, etc.… General Education would also include other strands of education, such as pragmatic abilities, societal and emotional aspects, ethics, citizenry, and aesthetics. (End Note 1b, p. 8)

Furthermore, while bestowing degrees and certificates, the programmes would have a system of formative assessment designed to provide constructive feedback to students and diagnostic information to the faculty for improving the design of their courses. Assessment tasks would not focus primarily on summative assessment that assigns marks, grades, or ranks.

Academic Cognition and Academic Knowledge

Raising the quality of HE requires the raising of the quality of the learning outcomes that the curriculum aims for. The outcomes we propose can be unified under the concept of Academic Cognition, or equivalently, the concept of Academic Intelligence. These outcomes are distinct from those that are pursued by programmes of Gifted Education, and those that come under twentieth-century skills and employability.

To cognize is to know; a cognitive system is a knowledge system, and knowledge is the outcome of that system. Cognitive science is a science concerned with understanding the nature and evolution of cognitive systems. As we see it, epistemology is the philosophical study of knowledge systems, so we will use the terms cognitive systems, knowledge systems and epistemic systems as synonyms, regardless of the scientific vs. philosophical modes of inquiry in their investigation.

We use the term Academic Cognition to refer to what we see as distinctive about the system of academic knowledge. By academic knowledge , we mean:

The knowledge that students are exposed to in school and college textbooks and classrooms,

What is documented in encyclopaedias, and

What is disseminated through research journals and publications under subjects like mathematics, science, philosophy, history, medicine, engineering, management, and law?

What is distinctive about the prototypical form of academic knowledge can be stated as follows:

Academic knowledge is a body of rationally justified propositions that we judge to be true beyond reasonable doubt, but always take as fallible, lacking in absolute certainty and in total precision.

The term rational means ‘in accordance with reason’. Reasoning lies at the heart of academic inquiry as a form of collective rational inquiry. Central to rationality are the commitments of:

accepting the logical consequences of the propositions already accepted, and

rejecting combinations of propositions that are logically contradictory.

A clarificatory note on terminology is in order here:

inquiry:	the process of constructing knowledge and critically evaluating its claims.
rational knowledge:	the outcome of rational inquiry. Academic knowledge isthe outcome of collective rational inquiry. (See Appendix A: Rationality, Rational, and Reasoning)
research:	inquiry that aims to make a contribution to the existing body of collective knowledge.

It follows from these concepts that research, but not inquiry, requires an understanding of highly specialized and in-depth knowledge of specific fields. We can design curricula for undergraduate education in such a way that students can acquire the capacity for inquiry. But for research, they would have to wait till they got to graduate education (Master’s and PhD). Our preoccupation in this article is the incorporation of inquiry in the curricula for Bachelor’s Education (i.e., 3–4 years of education after Grade XII).

Academic Intelligence

In the previous section, we suggested that for the purposes of curriculum design in HE, the capacities of Academic Cognition are equivalent to academic intelligence. We should now take a careful look at the relation between academic knowledge and academic intelligence.

Suppose we define intelligence as the capacity to do things with our mind. By academic intelligence, then, we mean the integrated ability to do things with our mind like an academic: to think like a mathematician; like an experimental scientist and a theoretical scientist in the physical, biological, and human sciences; like a philosopher; and so on.

Academic intelligence is not the same as the intelligence that we are born with. Nor is it the intelligence associated with IQ. It is one of the intelligences that we develop after birth. Just as our capacity to do things with our body can be strengthened through nutrition and physical activities, our capacity to do things with our mind can be strengthened through mental nutrition and mental activities.

Academic intelligence is not restricted to the intelligence needed for the application of Academic Knowledge. Developing such intelligence, cultivated through academic inquiry, critical thinking, critical reading, and the activity of integrating the fragments of academic knowledge into an integrated whole, ought to be an important goal of undergraduate education.

As will become clear in later sections, the intelligence developed through the pursuit of academic inquiry, critical reading, and academic critical thinking serves as the foundation for:

specialization in year 2 and year 3;

research and further specialization in year 4, and research in year 5 and during PhD; and

personal, professional, and public lives after graduation.

It must be obvious by now that academic intelligence is the foundation for specialized learning and subsequent specialized research. But what about its value in our personal and public lives?

Building Academic Cognition into a Foundation Programme

Many universities in North America have a General Education (GE) Programme that ensures breadth outside the subject major of an undergraduate student. The foundation programme in some of the Indian universities is the equivalent of GE.

We would like to suggest, following the proposals in the NAAC White Paper, that we go beyond GE to build Academic Cognition as an integral part of the foundation programme. What students would learn in the proposed programme are ways of thinking that go into the capacity for academic inquiry, academic critical thinking, critical reading (and listening) of academic texts, and integration of information and ideas. The clarity, rigour, and precision in thinking and reasoning, as well as the intellectual stamina and humility that we acquire through the practice of these capacities are of value in any domain of life. Regardless of the details of content knowledge, practice of these capacities contributes to lifelong independent learning, rigorous reasoning, and clarity and precision of thought and communication. It would also help students to connect their ethical instincts and sensibilities to rational judgement, decisions, and actions.

Suppose we distinguish between degrees and certificates on the one hand, and the quality of mind on the other. We may refer to that quality of mind as educatedness . If so, we may say that the educatedness of graduates depends on the extent to which the curriculum of the programme achieves the goals of academic cognition.

Trans-disciplinarity

Trans-disciplinary Concepts of Academic Knowledge

Even 3-year-old children ‘know’ that the world they live in has entities like stones, doors, food, water, sky, stars, rain, darkness, night, bananas, butterflies, dogs, people, and blood. They ‘know’ that different entities have different properties: for instance, lemons are sour, sugar is sweet, knives are sharp, rocks are rough and hard, the surface of a table is smooth, and rose petals are soft. There are relations between pairs and triplets of entities and their properties: adults are taller than children; a chair can be made of wood, plastic, or metal; a human hand is composed of the wrist, the palm, and fingers; a railway station ought to have a bus stand near it.

As children grow older, they are exposed to academic knowledge in school and college, and they learn about abstract entities like rational numbers, gravity, electricity, nationhood, truth, and knowledge. They learn about the properties of metals and the traits of insects that distinguish them from mammals. They learn about the structure of molecules, flowers, poems, and organizations. They learn that entities, their properties, and their structures change (for instance, change of location in physics). They also explore what causes change. They learn that in biology, a sequence of changes is variously called growth, development, life history, evolution, and so on.

Discipline -specific concepts and propositions of knowledge are specific to particular fields of academic knowledge. In contrast, trans -disciplinary concepts and propositions exist at a level above the level of academic fields and disciplines, crossing disciplinary boundaries. The structure of atoms comes under physics, the structure of molecules comes under chemistry, the structure of cells and skeletons comes under biology, the structure of poems comes under literary studies, the structure of a sentence comes under linguistics, and the structure of a concept comes under philosophy. But the concept of STRUCTURE itself is trans-disciplinary. So are the concepts of ENTITIES, PROPERTIES, RELATIONS, COMPOSITIONALITY, FUNCTION, SYSTEM, CHANGE, CAUSE, EVOLUTION, and so on

Trans-disciplinary Capacities of Academic Inquiry

The ability to design and conduct experiments on the social behaviour of drosophila is a highly specialized discipline-specific ability. So is the ability to use the fMRI machine to investigate the brain regions responsible for addiction, or the telescope to observe distant galaxies, or the ability to solve quadratic equations, or calculate the p value of something in a quantitative study in economics. In contrast, the ability to come up with axioms, definitions, and conjectures; to engage in reasoning; to construct theories; to arrive at legitimate observational generalizations on the basis of a sample; to deduce the predictions of a theory, and to design experiments to test the predictions; to engage in probabilistic reasoning and statistical inquiry; these are all trans-disciplinary abilities.

For the purposes of a foundation course for undergraduate students, what we need are trans-disciplinary concepts and trans-disciplinary tools of inquiry, embedded in the perspective of academic inquiry in general, with an awareness of what is distinctive about mathematical inquiry, scientific inquiry, philosophical inquiry, historical inquiry, and so on.

The Capacity for Trans-disciplinary Integration

The third strand of trans-disciplinarity is that of the integration of the diverse bodies of academic knowledge and inquiry provided to students through the different courses and subjects in their undergraduate programmes. To see the need for a trans-disciplinary perspective in such integration, going beyond inter-disciplinarity and multi-disciplinarity, we need to clarify what we mean by inter-disciplinary, multi-disciplinary, and trans-disciplinary.

Inter-disciplinary inquiry lies at the intersection between disciplines. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology are inter-disciplinary pursuits at the intersection between chemistry and biology. In the area of language studies, inter-disciplinary pursuits include psycholinguistics, biolinguistics, neurolinguistics, sociolinguistics, anthropological linguistics, computational linguistics, and mathematical linguistics.

Multi-disciplinary pursuits bring together the specialized knowledge in multiple disciplines to engage with a complex problem. The problem of protein folding, for instance, draws upon biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, and computer science to figure out how strings of molecules fold into three-dimensional shapes. Just about every problem in medicine is multi-disciplinary.

Trans-disciplinary , in contrast to both inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinary, refers to a domain of inquiry above the level of disciplines, where disciplinary boundaries do not exist. While a multidisciplinary background is essential for building trans-disciplinary concepts and capacities, trans-disciplinarity in education and research is essential for integrating into a single whole the currently fragmented pieces of academic knowledge and research.

An understanding of the concepts and mastery of the tools are crucial for trans-disciplinary capacities/abilities of inquiry, critical thinking, critical reading, and clear and precise academic communication.

Classification of Academic Knowledge

The proposal for trans-disciplinary integration through a Foundation Programme can be implemented only if we abandon the traditional classification of knowledge to acknowledge the concept of knowledge without boundaries, and to induct students into that mindset. In modern universities in most parts of the world, academic knowledge is currently divided into four categories Mathematics, Science, Social Sciences, and Humanities/Arts, respectively. Implicit in this classification is the assumption that ‘social’ sciences like psychology, economics, linguistics, and sociology are not sciences.

Interestingly, while psychiatry, language pathology, and computational linguistics are viewed as sciences, psychology, and linguistics remain outside the ‘science’ umbrella. Likewise, while the study of chimpanzee, insect, and bacterial societies is viewed as part of the sciences, sociology as the study of human society is taken to be a non-science pursuit.

Such a classification is detrimental to both research and education in that it is a barrier to cross-pollination between the sciences that study the human species and those that study other species. It also prevents cross-pollination across the disciplines that come under ‘Social Sciences’ and ‘Humanities’.

The Santa Fe Institute of Complexity (www.santafe.edu), devoted to research and education on complex adaptive systems across traditional disciplinary boundaries, provides a perspective on the structuring of academic knowledge without boundaries because its focus is on the theme of complexity across those boundaries.

A Sequenced List of Themes for an Introductory Course

To concretize what we have recommended in the preceding sections, we give below a tentative list of themes that would have the potential to function as the skeleton for describing an introductory foundational course. 1.

Coming up with Questions to Explore:

Testing Hypotheses; Inquiry through Reflection

How Do We Come to Know What We Know?

Sources of Knowledge

Perception; Introspection; Memory; Reasoning; Testimony;

Invention; Intuition; and Insight

Trans-disciplinary Academic Knowledge and Inquiry

What is Inquiry? What is Research? What Makes Something

Academic? What Makes Something Trans-disciplinary?

Logic and Reasoning in Academic Inquiry

Reasoning: from Premises, Deriving Conclusions (PDC); Steps of Reasoning;

Valid and Invalid Derivations; Unearthing the PDC Structure of Texts; the

Relations of Transitivity; Logical Consequence, Implication, and Entailment;

The words therefore and hence, if and only if, not, and their symbolic notation.

Judging the Truth of Premises

The Soundness Criterion; The Logical Consistency Criterion;

Truth of the Premises; Reasoning, Experience, and Testimonies.

Language, Logic, and Truth in Academic Inquiry

Sentences, Propositions, Words, and Concepts;

All, Every, and Any; If P then Q, vs. If not P, then not Q

The meaning of if, therefore, and because.

Classifying

Classes and Sub-classes; Ways of Classifying and Sub-classifying;

Choosing between Competing Classificatory Systems;

Justified and Unjustified Categories.

Generalizing

Correlations; Generalizing vs. Abstracting

10.

Defining

Definitions in Mathematics, the Sciences, and the Humanities;

The Relation between Classifying and Defining.

Concluding Remarks

What we have outlined in this article is a vision of an undergraduate curriculum and a curriculum framework whose ultimate purpose is the wellbeing of the future world and whose function is to nurture trans-disciplinary concepts of knowledge and trans-disciplinary concepts and tools of inquiry in order to achieve academic cognition. To implement that dream, we need a well-thought-out action plan.

Undergraduate programmes in most universities in North America have two mutually complementing sub-programmes: those providing depth, offered through specialization by the subject major (and minor), and breadth, offered by General Education (GE). The idea of GE in these programmes is that of a number of baskets of courses outside the subject major and minor from which students are expected to choose and are required to pass in order to qualify for graduation.

While a curriculum that incorporates that concept of GE is indeed better than one that offers narrow specialization without breadth, we find the idea of GE as a basket of courses from various disciplines, without a unified curriculum, to be less than satisfactory because the framework serves neither the goal of integration nor that of developing inquiry abilities. The concept of GE that we propose as an alternative is one that is closely tied to the concepts of educatedness and higher-order cognition.

Let us re-conceptualize the two sub-programmes as follows:

Specialized Education: The information, understanding, skills, abilities, and mindset that we expect from specialization in a specific major or minor subject (mathematics, computer science, philosophy, astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, zoology, botany, health sciences, psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics, linguistics, medicine, law, engineering, business management, English language, English literature, education, and so on).

General Education: The information, understanding, skills, abilities, and mindset expected of all educated individuals, regardless of specialization or career path.

Given this distinction, the component of GE in undergraduate programmes would need to aim at the educatedness that results from the pursuit of Higher-Order Cognition/Academic Intelligence, as the foundation for both the courses in Specialized Education as well as for life after graduation.

As part of a scheme for implementation of the ideas proposed in this article, we would like to recommend: I.

The formulation of a Programme Final Syllabus: A sufficiently clear formulation of the information, abilities, capacities, mindset, and habits of thought that we expect undergraduate students to have by the end of the programme. [This needs to be done collectively by a sufficiently large team of stakeholders. As a starting point, however, see Appendix B.]

II.

Textbooks and other Learning Resources for (II).

III.

A Professional Development Programme A:A programme for a small team of faculty to become the leaders to take (I)–(III) forward by developing their own trans-disciplinary capacities and contributing to the design of the syllabus, learning materials, assessment, and faculty development.

IV.

A Professional Development Programme B:A programme for the entire faculty to contribute to the teaching of discipline-specific or trans-disciplinary capacities.

A series of Foundation Courses:A set of online courses that embody the educational goals specified in (I). [With these courses, Faculty would have the space/time to provide value-added help and opportunities for interaction, above and beyond what the courses provide.] The online courses have the same status as textbooks and other learning resources from which students can learn on their own.

These proposals are to be viewed as an initial seed for thought. We need a dedicated team of educators and administrators to develop it further so that we can start thinking about the challenge of a final version of the tentative outline proposed above.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank Malavika Mohanan, S. Vaideeswaran, Vigneshwar Ramakrishnan, and Rama Kant Agnihotri for their feedback on a draft version of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Notes

ORCID iDs

Tara Mohanan

Author’s Bio-Sketch

K. P. Mohanan, a co-founder of ThinQ, obtained his PhD in Linguistics from MIT, and taught at renowned institutions such as the University of Texas at Austin, MIT, Stanford University, and the National University of Singapore. He made significant contributions to linguistic theory, co-designed an Inquiry-Oriented undergraduate programme in Linguistics at NUS, and explored academic knowledge and inquiry in the context of human beliefs. Mohanan joined the faculty at IISER-Pune in 2011, where he continued his work until his retirement in 2016.

Email: mohanan.kp@gmail.com

Tara Mohanan, a co-founder of ThinQ, obtained her PhD in Linguistics from Stanford University, and taught at the National University of Singapore till 2006, when she resigned to return to India for personal reasons. At NUS, she co-designed an Inquiry-Oriented undergraduate programme in Linguistics. She is recognized for her research in syntax, phonology, morphology, and semantics, working primarily on Hindi, Malayalam, and other South Asian languages. She has a rare range in educational experience that spans from experimenting with Inquiry-Oriented activities in a 2nd Grade class to advising PhD scholars writing a doctoral dissertation.

Email: tara.mohanan@gmail.com

References

Anderson

R. D.

(2004) European universities from the enlightenment to 1914 (2004). Oxford University Press.

Chomsky

, & Otero

C. P.

(2002). Chomsky on democracy and education . Routledge.

Dewey

(1916) Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education . Reprinted: Grapevine India (2022).

Friere

(1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed . The Continuum International Publishing Group.

Mohanan

K. P.

(2010). Entrance examinations in science and technology. Current Science , 9(10). https://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/99/10/1321.pdf

Mohanan

(2013). Aptitude tests, talent tests and achievement tests . Yojana. https://www.thinq.education/post/aptitude-tests-talent-tests-and-achievement-tests

Mohanan

, Mohanan

K. P.

, Ramakrishnan

, & Patwardhan

(2023). An approach to reimagining a National Curriculum Framework for University Education. University News , 61(12), 20–26. https://www.thinq.education/post/reimagining-a-national-curriculum-framework-for-university-education

Patwardhan

, Mohanan

K. P.

, & Mohanan

(2021). Higher education in India: Vision, purpose, policy and strategy. In Mittal

& Devi

S. R.

(Eds.), Implementing national education in India 2020 to transform higher in India . Association of Indian Universities.

Patwardhan

, & Mohanan

K.P.

(2022). NAAC white paper, Re-imagining assessment and accreditation in higher education . http://naac.gov.in/images/docs/notification/ReImagining_Assessment_and_Accreditation_in_Higher_Education_in_India_2207202.pdf

10.

Peirce

C. S.

(1882). Logic and a liberal education. In Wiener

P. P.

(Ed.), Charles S. Peirce: Selected writings (pp. 336–337). Dover Publications.

11.

Russell

(1926). On education . Routledge.