Reading Comprehension

Directions: Choose the word which is most similar in meaning to the word printed in bold as used in the passage.

MEASURES

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

Which of the following suggestions has/have been made by the author to improve the state of education in India?

A. Allowing the corporate organisations to enter the education sector B. Easy availability of loans and scholarships for making education more affordable C. A rating system for all the organisations to ensure quality

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

Directions: Choose the word which is most similar in meaning to the word printed in bold as used in the passage.

BRIDGE

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

What is the author’s main objective in writing the passage?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

According to the author, which of the following was the only step taken in order to reform higher education?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

Why, according to the author, did the initiatives such as increased industry-academia and finishing schools not help to bridge the skill deficit?

A. These steps were only superficial remedies and the problem could be answered only by reforming the entire education system. B. These initiatives operated on a profit-making basis rather than aiming at any serious systemic reforms. C. The allocation of funds to such initiatives was only one-fourth of the need.

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

Which argument does the author put forward when he compares the education sector with sectors catering to health, potable water, etc?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

Which suggestion(s) does the author make in order to make the institutes of higher learning for technology and management capable of competing globally?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

According to the author, what ‘triggered a cyclone’?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

Which of the following is not true in context of the given passage?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The education sector in India is in ferment, hit by a storm long waiting to happen. The butterfly that flapped its wings was the much-reiterated statement in a much publicised report that hardly a fourth of graduating engineers, and an even smaller percentage of other graduates, was of employable quality for IT-BPO jobs. This triggered a cyclone when similar views were echoed by other sectors which led to widespread debate. Increased industry-academia interaction, “finishing schools”, and other efforts were initiated as immediate measures to bridge skill deficits. These, however, did not work as some felt that these are but band-aid solutions; instead, radical systemic reform is necessary.
Yet, there will be serious challenges to overdue reforms in the education system. In India, as in many countries, education is treated as a holy cow; sadly, the administrative system that oversees it, has also been deceived. Today, unfortunately, there is no protest against selling drinking water or paying to be cured of illness, or for having to buy food when one is poor and starving; nor is there an outcry that in all these cases there are commercial companies operating on a profit-making basis. Why, then, is there an instinctively adverse reaction to the formal entry of ‘for-profit’ institutes in the realm of education? Is potable water, health or food, less basic a need, less important a right, than higher education?
While there are strong arguments for free or subsidised higher education, we are not writing on a blank page. Some individuals and businessmen had entered this sector long back and found devious ways of making money, though the law stipulates that educational institutes must be ‘not-for-profit’ trusts or societies. Yet, there is opposition to the entry of ‘for-profit’ corporates, which would be more transparent and accountable. As a result, desperately needed investment in promoting the wider reach of quality education has been stagnated at a time when financial figures indicate that the allocation of funds for the purpose is but a fourth of the need.Well-run corporate organisations, within an appropriate regulatory framework, would be far better than the so-called trusts, which barring some noteworthy exceptions, are a blot on education. However, it is not necessarily a question of choosing one over the other; different organisational forms can coexist, as they do in the health sector. A regulatory framework which creates competition, in tandem with a rating system, would automatically ensure the quality and relevance of education. As in sectors like telecom, and packaged goods, organisations will quickly expand into the hinterland to tap the large unmet demand. Easy Loan/Scholarship arrangements would ensure affordability and access.
The only real structural reform in higher education was the creation of the institutes for technology and management. They were also given autonomy and freedom beyond that of the universities. However, in the last few years, determined efforts have been underway to curb their autonomy. These institutes, however, need freedom to decide on recruitment, salaries and admissions, so as to compete globally.
However, such institutes will be few. Therefore, we need a regulatory framework that will enable and encourage States and the Centre; genuine philanthropists and also corporates to set up quality educational institutions. The regulatory system needs only to ensure transparency, accountability, competition and widely-available independent assessments or ratings. It is time for radical thinking, bold experimentation and new structures; it is time for the government to bite the bullet.

The disparity in the quantum of machine production in India and that in other countries leads to _______.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question given below it:­

Today the import duty on a complete machine is 35% for all practical purpose, whereas the import duty on raw materials and components ranges from 40-85%. The story does not end here. After paying such high import duties on component, once a machine is made, it suffers excise duty from 5% - 10% (including on the customs duty already paid). At the time of sale, the machine tools suffer further taxation, i.e. central sales tax or State sales taxes which range from 4% - 16%. This much for the tax angle. Another factor, which pushes the cost of manufacture of machine tools, is the very high rate of interest payable to banks ranging up to 22%, as against 4%-7% prevailing in advanced countries.
The production of machine tools in India being not of the same scale as it is in other countries, the price which India's machine tool builders have to pay for components is more or less based on pattern of high pricing applicable to the prices of spares. The above represents only a few of the extraneous reasons for the high cost of Indian machines.
The machines tool industry in India has an enviable record of very quick technology absorption, assimilation and development. There are a number of success stories about how machine tool builders were of help at the most critical times. It will be a pity, in fact a tragedy, if we allow this industry to die and disappear from the scene.
It is to be noted that India is at least 6000 km away from any dependable source of supply of machine tools. The Government of India has always given a great deal of importance to the development of small scale and medium scale industries. This industry has also performed pretty well. Today, they are in need of help from India's machine tool industry to enable them to produce quality components at reduced costs. Is it anybody's case that the needs of the fragile sector (which needs tender care) will be met from 6000 km away?
Then, what is it that the industry request from the Government? It wants a level playing field. In fact, all of us must have a deep introspection and recognize the fact that the machine tool industry has a very special place in the country from the point of strategic and vital interest of the nation. Most important, it requests for the Government's consideration and understanding.

According to the passage, assembling imported components into machine proves ultimately ________.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question given below it:­

Today the import duty on a complete machine is 35% for all practical purpose, whereas the import duty on raw materials and components ranges from 40-85%. The story does not end here. After paying such high import duties on component, once a machine is made, it suffers excise duty from 5% - 10% (including on the customs duty already paid). At the time of sale, the machine tools suffer further taxation, i.e. central sales tax or State sales taxes which range from 4% - 16%. This much for the tax angle. Another factor, which pushes the cost of manufacture of machine tools, is the very high rate of interest payable to banks ranging up to 22%, as against 4%-7% prevailing in advanced countries.
The production of machine tools in India being not of the same scale as it is in other countries, the price which India's machine tool builders have to pay for components is more or less based on pattern of high pricing applicable to the prices of spares. The above represents only a few of the extraneous reasons for the high cost of Indian machines.
The machines tool industry in India has an enviable record of very quick technology absorption, assimilation and development. There are a number of success stories about how machine tool builders were of help at the most critical times. It will be a pity, in fact a tragedy, if we allow this industry to die and disappear from the scene.
It is to be noted that India is at least 6000 km away from any dependable source of supply of machine tools. The Government of India has always given a great deal of importance to the development of small scale and medium scale industries. This industry has also performed pretty well. Today, they are in need of help from India's machine tool industry to enable them to produce quality components at reduced costs. Is it anybody's case that the needs of the fragile sector (which needs tender care) will be met from 6000 km away?
Then, what is it that the industry request from the Government? It wants a level playing field. In fact, all of us must have a deep introspection and recognize the fact that the machine tool industry has a very special place in the country from the point of strategic and vital interest of the nation. Most important, it requests for the Government's consideration and understanding.

According to the passage, all the following factors are responsible for high cost of Indian machines EXCEPT ________.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question given below it:­

Today the import duty on a complete machine is 35% for all practical purpose, whereas the import duty on raw materials and components ranges from 40-85%. The story does not end here. After paying such high import duties on component, once a machine is made, it suffers excise duty from 5% - 10% (including on the customs duty already paid). At the time of sale, the machine tools suffer further taxation, i.e. central sales tax or State sales taxes which range from 4% - 16%. This much for the tax angle. Another factor, which pushes the cost of manufacture of machine tools, is the very high rate of interest payable to banks ranging up to 22%, as against 4%-7% prevailing in advanced countries.
The production of machine tools in India being not of the same scale as it is in other countries, the price which India's machine tool builders have to pay for components is more or less based on pattern of high pricing applicable to the prices of spares. The above represents only a few of the extraneous reasons for the high cost of Indian machines.
The machines tool industry in India has an enviable record of very quick technology absorption, assimilation and development. There are a number of success stories about how machine tool builders were of help at the most critical times. It will be a pity, in fact a tragedy, if we allow this industry to die and disappear from the scene.
It is to be noted that India is at least 6000 km away from any dependable source of supply of machine tools. The Government of India has always given a great deal of importance to the development of small scale and medium scale industries. This industry has also performed pretty well. Today, they are in need of help from India's machine tool industry to enable them to produce quality components at reduced costs. Is it anybody's case that the needs of the fragile sector (which needs tender care) will be met from 6000 km away?
Then, what is it that the industry request from the Government? It wants a level playing field. In fact, all of us must have a deep introspection and recognize the fact that the machine tool industry has a very special place in the country from the point of strategic and vital interest of the nation. Most important, it requests for the Government's consideration and understanding.

Which of the following statements is TRUE in the context of the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question given below it:­

Today the import duty on a complete machine is 35% for all practical purpose, whereas the import duty on raw materials and components ranges from 40-85%. The story does not end here. After paying such high import duties on component, once a machine is made, it suffers excise duty from 5% - 10% (including on the customs duty already paid). At the time of sale, the machine tools suffer further taxation, i.e. central sales tax or State sales taxes which range from 4% - 16%. This much for the tax angle. Another factor, which pushes the cost of manufacture of machine tools, is the very high rate of interest payable to banks ranging up to 22%, as against 4%-7% prevailing in advanced countries.
The production of machine tools in India being not of the same scale as it is in other countries, the price which India's machine tool builders have to pay for components is more or less based on pattern of high pricing applicable to the prices of spares. The above represents only a few of the extraneous reasons for the high cost of Indian machines.
The machines tool industry in India has an enviable record of very quick technology absorption, assimilation and development. There are a number of success stories about how machine tool builders were of help at the most critical times. It will be a pity, in fact a tragedy, if we allow this industry to die and disappear from the scene.
It is to be noted that India is at least 6000 km away from any dependable source of supply of machine tools. The Government of India has always given a great deal of importance to the development of small scale and medium scale industries. This industry has also performed pretty well. Today, they are in need of help from India's machine tool industry to enable them to produce quality components at reduced costs. Is it anybody's case that the needs of the fragile sector (which needs tender care) will be met from 6000 km away?
Then, what is it that the industry request from the Government? It wants a level playing field. In fact, all of us must have a deep introspection and recognize the fact that the machine tool industry has a very special place in the country from the point of strategic and vital interest of the nation. Most important, it requests for the Government's consideration and understanding.

If the banks' rate of interest in India is made at par with that in advanced countries, the cost of manufacturing of machine tools _____________.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question given below it:­

Today the import duty on a complete machine is 35% for all practical purpose, whereas the import duty on raw materials and components ranges from 40-85%. The story does not end here. After paying such high import duties on component, once a machine is made, it suffers excise duty from 5% - 10% (including on the customs duty already paid). At the time of sale, the machine tools suffer further taxation, i.e. central sales tax or State sales taxes which range from 4% - 16%. This much for the tax angle. Another factor, which pushes the cost of manufacture of machine tools, is the very high rate of interest payable to banks ranging up to 22%, as against 4%-7% prevailing in advanced countries.
The production of machine tools in India being not of the same scale as it is in other countries, the price which India's machine tool builders have to pay for components is more or less based on pattern of high pricing applicable to the prices of spares. The above represents only a few of the extraneous reasons for the high cost of Indian machines.
The machines tool industry in India has an enviable record of very quick technology absorption, assimilation and development. There are a number of success stories about how machine tool builders were of help at the most critical times. It will be a pity, in fact a tragedy, if we allow this industry to die and disappear from the scene.
It is to be noted that India is at least 6000 km away from any dependable source of supply of machine tools. The Government of India has always given a great deal of importance to the development of small scale and medium scale industries. This industry has also performed pretty well. Today, they are in need of help from India's machine tool industry to enable them to produce quality components at reduced costs. Is it anybody's case that the needs of the fragile sector (which needs tender care) will be met from 6000 km away?
Then, what is it that the industry request from the Government? It wants a level playing field. In fact, all of us must have a deep introspection and recognize the fact that the machine tool industry has a very special place in the country from the point of strategic and vital interest of the nation. Most important, it requests for the Government's consideration and understanding.