Anonymous email triggers QAU inquiry, committee finds no verifiable grounds

An anonymous email claiming problems in an Anthropology course at Quaid e Azam University triggered a Senate committee inquiry,

Islamabad: An anonymous email claiming problems in an Anthropology course at Quaid e Azam University triggered a Senate committee inquiry, but the university department told the committee that no student matching the name used in the complaint was enrolled in the department and the committee found no verifiable grounds for the allegations.

The issue came before the Senate Standing Committee on Federal Education and Professional Training during a briefing on complaints about a pending major course for eighth-semester Anthropology students and the time allotted for its completion and examination.

According to the department, the complaint was raised via email and was initially treated as anonymous. During the meeting, the chairperson of the Anthropology Department told the committee that the name mentioned in the complaint did not match any student enrolled in the eighth semester or elsewhere in the Anthropology Department.

The department said the course in question was Economic Anthropology and had been offered to students in different semesters in earlier years. It said eighth semester students had been reminded to report any pending course before completing their degrees. However, a student representative informed the department on August 8 that the course had been missed and requested that it be offered.

The course then started on August 11. The department told the committee that it normally consisted of 16 classes and that the special batch was taught daily. One session was used for the midterm examination and another for the final examination, leaving 14 days of teaching.
There were 40 students in the batch, of whom 37 registered for the course. The department said attendance was full and that students wanted to complete the subject because delaying it could have resulted in them paying a much higher fee in the next semester.

The committee questioned the short course schedule because classes started on August 11 and the final examination was held on September 2. The chairperson asked how many classes were actually conducted and whether the time provided was sufficient for the course.

The department explained that the students were from a passing batch and had approached it late regarding the pending subject. It said the summer semester had started in July and students would normally have been expected to register at that time. The special course was arranged after the August 8 request.

The department also acknowledged some oversight by the previous chairperson and course coordinator in checking students’ pending courses. At the same time, it said students had repeatedly been asked to inform the department if any subject was still left before completing their degrees.

The committee heard the university’s explanation and said it was necessary to listen to both sides before reaching a view. The chairperson said the department had clarified the situation and acknowledged that the special arrangement had been made for the students.

The official further stated that the departmental committee found no verifiable grounds for the claims raised in the complaint. It also requested that the email address used in the complaint be reported to the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency for action against the people behind the campaign. The university said 48 hours of make up work and a 14 day sequence of continuous classes had been completed before the final examination.

The students subsequently completed the course and appeared in the terminal examination on September 2. The matter was disposed of after the committee heard the university’s explanation about the complaint, course schedule and measures taken for the students.