Delhi University (DU) has begun a new academic session, marking a significant moment as it welcomes its inaugural cohort of fourth-year students under the Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUP), a framework introduced by the National Education Policy (NEP) in 2020.
The FYUP aims to provide greater flexibility, promote research skills, and better align Indian higher education with global benchmarks. Students can choose to graduate with a bachelor’s degree after three years or continue for an additional year to earn an honours degree that includes a research component. However, as DU embarks on this ambitious initiative, it contends with several significant challenges—emerging issues such as insufficient infrastructure, a shortage of faculty, curriculum gaps, and notable dissatisfaction among both students and staff. These obstacles raise critical questions regarding the programme's viability and long-term effect on DU's reputation as a prominent public institution.
According to DU Vice-Chancellor Yogesh Singh, of the approximately 66,000 third-year FYUP students, around 30,014—about 45%—have chosen to graduate with a three-year degree rather than opting for the fourth year. This opt-out rate suggests a prevailing uncertainty about the value of the fourth year, especially among those preparing for competitive exams like CAT or DGAT, or those aspiring to pursue master’s degrees.
“Everything is sorted out now, and if there are any issues, we will resolve them gradually,” Singh told The Hindu, expressing confidence that the university has taken steps to ensure effective teaching and learning for both new students and those in their fourth year.
He further stated, “I want to assure our students that no one should be worried about anything.” Nevertheless, mixed feedback from students and faculty suggests that the university’s assurances may come too soon, as various logistical and systemic challenges continue to exist.
This academic year, DU is offering 71,624 undergraduate seats across 79 programmes in 69 colleges. Some colleges hosted orientation programmes for fourth-year students on August 1, while others scheduled theirs for the following Monday. Faculty noticed low attendance from fourth-year students at these sessions, although they remain optimistic about an increase in turnout. This tepid response highlights the confusion and skepticism surrounding the FYUP’s rollout, as students face unclear expectations and resources.
Infrastructure Challenges and Scheduling Issues:
A significant challenge facing DU is its insufficient infrastructure to accommodate the extended program. To handle the increased academic demands, the university notified colleges to extend their operating hours from 8 AM to 8 PM. This announcement, sanctioned by the Executive Council, indicated that “The university has already advised the colleges/institutions to function from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. for optimal utilization of the available resources. To facilitate this and ensure faculty and staff availability during this period, the deployment of faculty and staff will be staggered.”
This directive has faced considerable criticism, with Professor Mithuraaj Dhusiya, a member of the Executive Council, calling it “extremely problematic.” He expressed concerns that the extended schedule introduces “significant safety risks to students and teachers” and is “neither feasible nor practical,” highlighting DU’s readiness in terms of infrastructure and workforce.
A political science master's student, wishing to remain anonymous, described the classroom experience as “suffocating.” At the Faculty of Social Sciences, nearly 200 students are crammed into a hall with just one entry and exit. “It feels less like a classroom and more like a crowded metro coach,” the student remarked, noting that with a 200:1 student-teacher ratio, individualized learning is nearly impossible.
Associate Professor Abha Dev Habib from Miranda House shed light on the infrastructure crisis, stressing the necessity for significant investment to support the research-intensive fourth year of the FYUP. “If Miranda House admits 1500 students each year, the university should be prepared to accommodate at least two-thirds of them in the fourth year with additional classrooms and research-focused laboratories,” she stated.
Habib pointed out the lack of funding for such expansions, saying, “Since this government took office, we haven't received any funds for expansions, whether for EWS initiatives, launching new courses, or the fourth year."
The shortage of resources is especially pronounced in scientific disciplines, where postgraduate students have voiced worries about outdated laboratory facilities. A Physics Honours freshman commented, “The lab equipment is quite old, rusty, and not suitable for research. DU urgently needs upgrades before taking on the added responsibility of four-year undergraduates.”
Curricula and Practical Learning:
Students are voicing their frustrations with the FYUP curriculum, particularly due to its heavy focus on theoretical teaching at the expense of practical experience. Bharat Vashisht, a third-year BSc Physical Science with Chemistry student at Kirori Mal College, criticized the Skill Enhancement Courses (SEC) and Value-Added Courses (VAC) for lacking real-world applicability. “Courses like communication, personality development, leadership, and negotiation skills are delivered in a purely theoretical manner, missing out on practical application,” he remarked.
Vashisht also highlighted issues with course evaluations, mentioning that some subjects do not have exams, enabling teachers to give marks without assessments. “This results in students prioritizing passing grades over actual learning,” he noted, expressing doubts about the program’s overall effectiveness. “The concept of the NEP is promising, but its execution is lacking. While the number of subjects has grown, the quality of teaching remains inconsistent.”
Shreya Sharma (name changed), a Chemistry Honours student from Miranda House, points out the limited benefits of the FYUP for those interested in research. “The fourth year is mostly about submitting a theoretical dissertation, which doesn’t offer meaningful experience in research,” she stated. Sharma believes that pursuing a master’s degree would better equip students for Junior Research Fellowships (JRF) or PhD programs, as the research component in the fourth year suffers from delayed schedules, poor infrastructure, and insufficient time for actual research classes.
Similarly, Sana (name changed), a B.Com Honours student from Daulat Ram College, mentioned that her choice to enter the fourth year hinges on her CAT score. “If I manage to get into an MBA program, I won’t choose to continue,” she said, reflecting on the varied opinions from seniors and faculty about the advantages of the program.
On the other hand, Sonal Gupta, a Political Science student at Daulat Ram College, opted for the fourth year with a different perspective. For her, it represents an opportunity. “By studying economics as an optional subject for seven semesters, I can graduate with a Political Science degree while also obtaining a minor in Economics,” she explained. “This gives me the flexibility to pursue a master’s or even a PhD in Economics down the line.”
Faculty Overburdened:
The research-heavy fourth year of the Four-Year Undergraduate Program (FYUP) is placing immense strain on faculty members who are already managing numerous teaching and administrative tasks. Anumeha Mishra, an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law, highlighted the challenges of overseeing student research. “Supervising just one student is a massive undertaking. Now picture a teacher who’s expected to supervise 10 or more,” she noted, alluding to a recent proposal that may assign up to 10 students to each teacher, with the option to increase that number if needed.
Mishra cautioned that this added responsibility, coupled with existing teaching and administrative workloads, undermines both the quality of education and the faculty’s own research productivity, which is essential for their career progression. “When a teacher can’t dedicate enough time to a student, it ultimately affects the student’s ability to learn,” she explained. “Teachers are human, and when they are overwhelmed, the quality of their instruction inevitably declines.”
She also pointed out that the focus on merely meeting all requirements often detracts from the importance of delivering valuable content. “You can claim something is excellent, but it’s the quality and substance that truly matter,” she emphasized. “Failing to provide that quality results in a decreased educational experience.”
This perspective is shared by Habib, who voiced concerns about the lack of clarity in course design. “The Delhi University Act states that student admissions should be guided by a curriculum with a clear set of papers, syllabi, and exam formats. However, that's not what has transpired over the past three to four batches,” she remarked, labeling the 2022 cohort as a “guinea pig batch” navigating the shift from a three-year to a four-year program.
Concerns over Privatization and Systemic Changes in Higher Education:
The challenges faced by the Four-Year Undergraduate Program (FYUP) at Delhi University (DU) raise significant concerns about the future of publicly funded higher education in India. Habib voiced her worries that diminished investment in universities like DU and a decline in educational quality might push students toward private institutions. “The elite of India will move out of public-funded universities,” she commented, emphasizing that institutions such as DU, JNU, Jamia, and Aligarh Muslim University have historically played a crucial role in shaping the country's educational landscape and producing professionals in various fields, including law and civil services.
The prolonged admission process, worsened by the introduction of the Common University Entrance Test (CUET), has resulted in vacant seats at DU as students choose to enroll in private universities with more efficient admissions. “Many people have already committed to private universities,” Habib remarked. “Several haven't even applied to DU due to the delays in the admission process.”
Habib further criticized the systemic changes brought about by the National Education Policy (NEP), including the reworking of textbooks and the exclusion of fundamental concepts like secularism and scientific thinking from educational resources, such as the NCERT preamble. “This action is political,” she asserted, pointing out that it undermines the principles of equality and dignity in education. The absence of funding for structural changes, like those seen with FYUP and the earlier Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) initiative, has led to a shift in costs to students, raising alarm over gradual privatization. “Without any grants, structural changes have been implemented, putting the financial burden on students,” Habib noted.
Fee hikes at DU have been significant, with the University Development Fund increasing from Rs 900 in 2022 to Rs 1,500 in 2025 and charges for HIDA rising from Rs 500 to Rs 1,500. While the university defends these increases as necessary for improvement in infrastructure and facilities, students argue that little has changed, pointing to overcrowded classrooms, unreliable WiFi, and concerning teacher-student ratios. Critics warn that such financial pressures on students jeopardize DU’s commitment to providing affordable and accessible public education.
Ronak Khatri, President of the Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU), offered a sharp critique of the FYUP, dubbing it a “New Entertainment Policy” rather than a genuine education initiative. He questioned teachers' preparedness to deliver specialized courses, using yoga as an example, suggesting that many instructors lack the necessary training. “Teachers are uncertain about what to teach in Skill Enhancement Courses and Value-Added Courses,” Khatri highlighted, pointing out the chaotic implementation of NEP.
As DU approaches the fourth year of FYUP, the program's goal of promoting research and flexibility is clouded by significant practical obstacles. With nearly half of eligible students opting out, alongside inadequate infrastructure, overwhelmed faculty, and curricula that are criticized for being overly theoretical, the FYUP's potential for success hinges on effectively addressing these systemic challenges.
