UGC NET 22^nd November 2021 Paper 1 – Day 3 of UGC NET 2021 is being conducted for five subjects including Political Science. Check the detailed question paper analysis of UGC NET 22^nd November 2021 Paper 1 & Political Science (Paper 2) here.

UGC NET 22^nd November 2021 Paper 1 Analysis: Major Highlights

Some of the major highlights of UGC NET 22^nd November 2021 Paper 1 analysis are as follows –

• The difficulty level of Paper 1 was tough in Shift 1
• The good number of attempts can be 35+ in Shift 1

Detailed UGC NET 22nd November 2021 Paper 1 Question Paper Analysis

The detailed analysis of UGC NET 22nd November 2021 Paper (Shift 1 ) can be checked in the table below –

Topics Asked in Shift 1: Questions in Shift 1 were asked on the following topics –

• NEP 2020
• Teaching Key Behaviour/helping Behaviour
• Formal /Informal Fallacy
• Back to the People / To the people / Red handed
• Train speed
• Digital Initiative
• Value education
• Ugc Chairmen
• SDG internal goal
• Profit & loss
• Natural Disaster
• Renewable energy
• Swayam / Swayam Prabha / NAD / Digilocker
• Indian logic from PYQ
• Sampling Matching
• Independent Variables
• Computer Memory Sequence
• Binary to decimal convert
• Mensuration
• Research Ethics
• Empirical / Hypothetic
• Teaching Skills
• Nishta 3.0
• RC Global education
• Indian school
• Education Commission
• hetvabhasa
• Computer Memory
• Group Communication
• Alternative Research /HO
• Percentage/Average
• Effective Teaching
• Communication Barrier
• Renewable energy
• Research Ethics
• Number series

Details About Today Questions asked in 22nd nov 2021 Ugc Net Exam in Hindi & English

What are fallacies?

Fallacies are errors in arguments that deceive our minds. It is a defect in an argument that consists of something other than merely false premises.

As we see, fallacies can be committed in many ways, but usually, they involve either a mistake in reasoning or the creation of some illusion that makes a bad argument appear good or bad (either).

 An argument is valid when the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. The process that gives no rational grounds for accepting the conclusion is defective forms of an argument known as a fallacy

Fallacies can be used positively, to avoid or expose error or they can be used for negative means, to deceive.

Ethos-  ethos is in an argument that appeals to ethics authority or credibility.

Pathos-  pathos is an argument that appeals to emotions.

Fallacies are usually divided into two groups.

Formal and Informal Fallacies

A formal group– It may be identified through mere inspection of the form of structure of an argument.

In the case of formal fallacies, the conclusion does not follow from the given premises or proposition. The relation depicted in such an argument is not valid and supported by the given premises.

Formal fallacies can be the result of poor logic.

Informal fallacy’s error is in structure.

Informal fallacy-. Informal fallacies are the result of wrong information, assumptions, misuse of language, lack of evidence, or wrong analogy.

Informal fallacies are a form of incorrect argument in natural language. In this, unlike formal fallacies,  the source of error is not just due to their form but can also lie in their content and context.  

It will give an appearance of being correct despite being incorrect and thereby seduces into committing and accepting that this is true.

It is a fallacy in meaning. You’ll think that premises follow the conclusion but there will be an error.

Let’s first discuss what is the difference between formal and informal fallacy –

In the formal fallacy -premises will not follow the conclusion and you will easily find that there is an error in the statement.

In the informal fallacy -it will usually give an appearance of being correct and thereby it will persuade us into committing and accepting them.

Types of informal fallacies

 # unintentionally

It is an appeal to ignorance.  This fallacy is usually committed by us because of ignorance of the truth. We tend to commit this fallacy because it is not proven by anyone till now.

For example- Shyam said to Mohan that he does not believe in God.

When Mohan asked him the reason he said ” Because science failed to give any valid proof of the existence of God.”

Here we can simply say that Mohan has committed the fallacy of ad ignorantiam. We are ignorant of something does not mean it is not possible. Maybe in the coming future science will prove the existence of God.

#Ad populam

It is a proposition which we accept just because everyone else is accepting the same thing.

If everyone is doing one thing, it does not guarantee the rightness of that thing.

For example- If everybody is driving the car at a 200 km per hour speed that does not mean it is legal to drive a car at this speed. It will still be considered wrong.

# to shame

This is also called “appeal to authority”. Accepting something because it is coming from some authority.

For example- if Deepika Padukone says the secret of my beauty is Lux, that does not ensure at all that using Lux will surely give the same beauty to everyone.

In this type of fallacy, we do not apply any kind of logic. We blindly follow some authority without giving any logic.

#Hasty generalization fallacy

also called ” converse accident “. Coming to a conclusion without any evidence. or Drawing conclusions from incomplete information.

Hasty generalization is a policy that affects inductive generalizations. The fallacy occurs when there is a reasonable likelihood that the sample is not representative of the group. Such a likelihood May arise if the sample is either too small or not when only selected.

#Strawman fallacy

When you know the other person is right and you don’t have any logical counterargument to fight but to make sure that you always have an upper hand you create a whole new scenario just to win an argument is called the strawman fallacy.

The strawman fallacy is committed when an arguer distorts an opponent’s argument for more easily attacking it, demolishes the distorted argument, and then concludes that the opponent’s real argument has been demolished.

By doing so the argument is said to have set up a strawman and knocked it down, only to conclude that the real man( opposing argument) has been knocked down as well.

For example, Mr. Goldberg has argued against prayer in Public School. Mr. Goldberg advocates atheism but atheism is what they used to have in Russia. Atheism leads to the suppression of all religions and the replacement of God by an omnipotent state. Is that what we want for this country?

As this example illustrates, the kind of distortion the second arguer resorts to is often an attempt to exaggerate the first person’s argument or make it look more extreme than it is.

#Red herring fallacy– (deliberate diversion)

This fallacy is closely associated with missing the point. The arguer diverts the attention of The Reader or Listener by changing the subject to a different but subtly related one. To use the Red Herring fallacy effectively, the arguer must change the original subject of the argument without The Reader or listener noticing it.

For example- Boy- Mom, I want that toy.

Mother- Hey, let’s go home, yummy food is waiting for you.

Here you can see that mother has changed the entire topic deliberately.

# Argument against the person ( argument to the point )

This fallacy always involves two arguments. One of them advances either directly or implicitly a certain argument, and the other than a response by directing his or her attention, not to the first person’s argument but the first person himself.

For example-  If a politician is speaking well and giving a brilliant speech with logical reason another politician who does not have anything to say in opposition says “you can’t control the nation. Your daughter eloped with someone else.

 This is clearly attacking personally.

2nd example- You cannot come first in class because you are ugly.

Here we can see that coming first or last in class has nothing to do with being ugly or beautiful but the opponent has nothing to say against his intelligence, so he attacks him personally.

# Missing the point – ( Ignorance of the list )

The arguer is ignorant of the logical implication of his or her premises and, as a result, draws a Conclusion that misses the point entirely.

This fallacy occurs when the premises of an argument support one particular conclusion but then a different conclusion often vaguely related to the correct conclusion is drawn.

For example- Crimes of theft and robbery have been increasing at an alarming rate lately. The conclusion obvious: we must reinstate the death plenty immediately “

In the above statement at least two correct conclusions are implied by the premises of the first argument 1. Either we should provide increased police protection in vulnerable neighborhoods or 2.we should initiate programs to eliminate the causes of the crimes.

Reinstating the death penalty is not a logical conclusion at all. Among other things, theft and robbery are not capital crimes.

#Complex Question–

When someone invites 2 or 3 questions in one single question.

The fallacy of complex questions is committed when in a single question, more questions are asked and a single answer is then applied to both questions.

When the respondent answers are added to the complex question, an argument emerges that establishes the presumed condition.

This argument is usually intended to trap the respondent into acknowledging something that he or she might otherwise not want to acknowledge.

For example- Have you stopped cheating on exams?

Now let us suppose the respondent answers “yes” to the question.

Therefore, it follows that you have cheated in the past.

भ्रांतियां क्या हैं?

Delusions are errors in logic that deceive our mind. It is a flaw in an argument that consists of something other than a mere false premise.

जैसा कि हम देखते हैं, भ्रांति कई तरीकों से की जा सकती है, लेकिन आमतौर पर, वे या तो तर्क में गलती करते हैं या कुछ भ्रम पैदा करते हैं जिससे एक बुरा तर्क अच्छा या बुरा (या तो) दिखाई देता है।

ऐसा करने से कहा जाता है कि तर्क ने एक स्ट्रॉमैन को खड़ा कर दिया और उसे नीचे गिरा दिया, केवल यह निष्कर्ष निकालने के लिए कि असली आदमी (विपक्षी तर्क) को भी नीचे गिरा दिया गया है।

उदाहरण के लिए, मिस्टर गोल्डबर्ग ने पब्लिक स्कूल में प्रार्थना के खिलाफ तर्क दिया है। श्रीमान गोल्डबर्ग नास्तिकता की वकालत करते हैं लेकिन नास्तिकता वही है जो रूस में हुआ करती थी। नास्तिकता सभी धर्मों के दमन और एक सर्वशक्तिमान राज्य द्वारा भगवान के प्रतिस्थापन की ओर ले जाती है। क्या हम इस देश के लिए यही चाहते हैं?

जैसा कि यह उदाहरण दिखाता है, दूसरा तर्ककर्ता जिस तरह की विकृति का सहारा लेता है, वह अक्सर पहले व्यक्ति के तर्क को बढ़ा–चढ़ाकर पेश करने का प्रयास होता है या इसे उससे कहीं अधिक चरम पर दिखाने का प्रयास होता है।

# Red Herring Illusion – (intentional twist)

यह भ्रम बिंदु के लापता होने के साथ निकटता से जुड़ा हुआ है। तर्ककर्ता विषय को एक अलग लेकिन सूक्ष्म रूप से संबंधित विषय में बदलकर पाठक या श्रोता का ध्यान भटकाता है। रेड हेरिंग की भ्रांति का प्रभावी ढंग से उपयोग करने के लिए, तर्ककर्ता को पाठक या श्रोता को ध्यान दिए बिना तर्क के मूल विषय को बदलना होगा। 

उदाहरण के लिए– लड़का– माँ, मुझे वह खिलौना चाहिए।

Mother- Hey, let’s go home, delicious food is waiting for you.

यहां आप देख सकते हैं कि मां ने जानबूझकर सारा टॉपिक बदल दिया है.

# व्यक्ति के खिलाफ तर्क ( मुद्दे पर तर्क )

There are always two arguments involved in this fallacy. One of them advances a certain argument either directly or indirectly, and the other by directing its attention, apart from the reaction, not at the first person’s argument but to the first person himself.

उदाहरण के लिए– यदि कोई राजनेता अच्छा बोल रहा है और तार्किक कारण से शानदार भाषण दे रहा है, तो दूसरा राजनेता जिसके पास विपक्ष में कहने के लिए कुछ नहीं है, कहता है “आप राष्ट्र को नियंत्रित नहीं कर सकते। आपकी बेटी किसी और के साथ भाग गई।

 यह स्पष्ट रूप से व्यक्तिगत रूप से हमला कर रहा है।

दूसरा उदाहरण– आप कक्षा में प्रथम नहीं आ सकते क्योंकि आप बदसूरत हैं।

यहाँ हम देख सकते हैं कि कक्षा में प्रथम या अंतिम आने का कुरूप या सुंदर होने से कोई लेना–देना नहीं है, लेकिन प्रतिद्वंद्वी के पास अपनी बुद्धि के खिलाफ कहने के लिए कुछ नहीं है, इसलिए वह व्यक्तिगत रूप से उस पर हमला करता है। 

# बिंदु गुम होना – ( सूची की अज्ञानता )

तर्ककर्ता अपने परिसर के तार्किक निहितार्थ से अनभिज्ञ है और परिणामस्वरूप, एक निष्कर्ष निकालता है जो पूरी तरह से बिंदु को याद करता है।

यह भ्रम तब होता है जब तर्क का आधार एक विशेष निष्कर्ष का समर्थन करता है लेकिन फिर एक अलग निष्कर्ष अक्सर सही निष्कर्ष से अस्पष्ट रूप से जुड़ा होता है।

उदाहरण के लिए– चोरी और डकैती के अपराध हाल ही में खतरनाक दर से बढ़ रहे हैं। निष्कर्ष स्पष्ट है: हमें मृत्यु को तुरंत बहाल करना चाहिए “

उपरोक्त कथन में पहले तर्क के आधार पर कम से कम दो सही निष्कर्ष निहित हैं 1. या तो हमें संवेदनशील इलाकों में पुलिस सुरक्षा बढ़ानी चाहिए या 2. हमें अपराधों के कारणों को खत्म करने के लिए कार्यक्रम शुरू करना चाहिए।

मृत्युदंड को बहाल करना बिल्कुल भी तार्किक निष्कर्ष नहीं है। अन्य बातों के अलावा, चोरी और डकैती पूंजी अपराध नहीं हैं।

# जटिल प्रश्न –

Ugc Net 2021 Exam Analysis 20 & 21 Nov

जब कोई एक प्रश्न में 2 या 3 प्रश्न आमंत्रित करता है। 

जटिल प्रश्नों की भ्रांति तब होती है जब एक प्रश्न में अधिक प्रश्न पूछे जाते हैं और एक ही उत्तर दोनों प्रश्नों पर लागू किया जाता है।

जब प्रतिवादी उत्तरों को जटिल प्रश्न में जोड़ दिया जाता है, तो एक तर्क सामने आता है जो प्रकल्पित स्थिति को स्थापित करता है। 

यह तर्क आम तौर पर प्रतिवादी को किसी ऐसी चीज को स्वीकार करने में फंसाने के लिए होता है जिसे वह अन्यथा स्वीकार नहीं करना चाहता।

उदाहरण के लिए– क्या आपने परीक्षा में नकल करना बंद कर दिया है?

अब मान लीजिए कि उत्तरदाता प्रश्न का उत्तर “हां” में देता है।

Therefore, it follows that you have cheated in the past.

UGC University Grant Commission

From ancient Bharat to modern India, higher education has always occupied a place of prominence in Indian history. In ancient times, Nalanda, Taxila and Vikramsila universities were renowned seats of higher learning, attracting students not only from all over the country but from far off countries like Korea, China, Burma (now Myanmar), Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), Tibet and Nepal. Today, India manages one of the largest higher education systems in the world*.

The present system of higher education dates back to Mountstuart Elphinstone`s minutes of 1823, which stressed on the need for establishing schools for teaching English and the European sciences. Later, Lord Macaulay, in his minutes of 1835, advocated “efforts to make natives of the country thoroughly good English scholars”. Sir Charles Wood`s Dispatch of 1854, famously known as the ` Magna Carta of English Education in India`, recommended creating a properly articulated scheme of education from the primary school to the university. It sought to encourage indigenous education and planned the formulation of a coherent policy of education. Subsequently, the universities of Calcutta, Bombay (now Mumbai) and Madras were set up in 1857, followed by the university of Allahabad in 1887.

The Inter-University Board (later known as the Association of Indian Universities) was established in 1925 to promote university activities, by sharing information and cooperation in the field of education, culture, sports and allied areas.

The first attempt to formulate a national system of education in India came In 1944, with the Report of the Central Advisory Board of Education on Post War Educational Development in India, also known as the Sargeant Report. It recommended the formation of a University Grants Committee, which was formed in 1945 to oversee the work of the three Central Universities of Aligarh, Banarasand Delhi. In 1947, the Committee was entrusted with the responsibility of dealing with all the then existing Universities.

Soon after Independence, the University Education Commission was set up in 1948 under the Chairmanship of Dr. S Radhakrishnan “to report on Indian university education and suggest improvements and extensions that might be desirable to suit the present and future needs and aspirations of the country”. It recommended that the University Grants Committee be reconstituted on the general model of the University Grants Commission of the United Kingdom with a full-time Chairman and other members to be appointed from amongst educationists of repute.

In 1952, the Union Government decided that all cases pertaining to the allocation of grants-in-aid from public funds to the Central Universities and other Universities and Institutions of higher learning might be referred to the University Grants Commission. Consequently, the University Grants Commission (UGC) was formally inaugurated by late Shri Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, the then Minister of Education, Natural Resources and Scientific Research on 28 December 1953.

The UGC, however, was formally established only in November 1956 as a statutory body of the Government of India through an Act of Parliament for the coordination, determination and maintenance of standards of university education in India. In order to ensure effective region-wise coverage throughout the country, the UGC has decentralised its operations by setting up six regional centres at Pune, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Bhopal, Guwahati and Bangalore. The head office of the UGC is located at Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg in New Delhi, with two additional bureaus operating from 35, Feroze Shah Road and the South Campus of University of Delhi as well.

The UGC has the unique distinction of being the only grant-giving agency in the country which has been vested with two responsibilities: that of providing funds and that of coordination, determination and maintenance of standards in institutions of higher education.

The UGC`s mandate includes:

Promoting and coordinating university education.

Determining and maintaining standards of teaching, examination and research in universities.

Framing regulations on minimum standards of education.

Monitoring developments in the field of collegiate and university education; disbursing grants to the universities and colleges

Serving as a vital link between the Union and state governments and institutions of higher learning.

Advising the Central and State governments on the measures necessary for improvement of university education

प्राचीन भारत से लेकर आधुनिक भारत तक, उच्च शिक्षा ने हमेशा भारतीय इतिहास में एक प्रमुख स्थान पर कब्जा किया है। प्राचीन काल में, नालंदा, तक्षशिला और विक्रमशिला विश्वविद्यालय उच्च शिक्षा के प्रसिद्ध स्थान थे, जो न केवल पूरे देश से बल्कि कोरिया, चीन, बर्मा (अब म्यांमार), सीलोन (अब श्रीलंका), तिब्बत जैसे दूर देशों से छात्रों को आकर्षित करते थे। और नेपाल। आज, भारत दुनिया की सबसे बड़ी उच्च शिक्षा प्रणालियों में से एक का प्रबंधन करता है*।

प्रधानमंत्री पंडित जवाहर लाल नेहरू 

28 वें दिसंबर, 1953 को उद्घाटन बैठक को संबोधित किया।

उच्च शिक्षा की वर्तमान प्रणाली 1823 के माउंटस्टुअर्ट एलफिंस्टन के कार्यवृत्त की है, जिसमें अंग्रेजी और यूरोपीय विज्ञान पढ़ाने के लिए स्कूलों की स्थापना की आवश्यकता पर बल दिया गया था। बाद में, लॉर्ड मैकाले ने 1835 के अपने कार्यवृत्त में, “देश के मूल निवासियों को पूरी तरह से अच्छे अंग्रेजी विद्वान बनाने के प्रयासों” की वकालत की। 1854 के सर चार्ल्स वुड के डिस्पैच, जिसे ‘भारत में अंग्रेजी शिक्षा का मैग्ना कार्टा‘ के रूप में जाना जाता है, ने प्राथमिक विद्यालय से विश्वविद्यालय तक शिक्षा की एक उचित रूप से स्पष्ट योजना बनाने की सिफारिश की। इसने स्वदेशी शिक्षा को प्रोत्साहित करने की मांग की और शिक्षा की एक सुसंगत नीति तैयार करने की योजना बनाई। इसके बाद, 1857 में कलकत्ता, बॉम्बे (अब मुंबई) और मद्रास विश्वविद्यालय स्थापित किए गए, इसके बाद 1887 में इलाहाबाद विश्वविद्यालय स्थापित किया गया।

अंतर–विश्वविद्यालय बोर्ड (जिसे बाद में भारतीय विश्वविद्यालयों के संघ के रूप में जाना जाता है) की स्थापना 1925 में शिक्षा, संस्कृति, खेल और संबद्ध क्षेत्रों में सूचना और सहयोग साझा करके विश्वविद्यालय की गतिविधियों को बढ़ावा देने के लिए की गई थी।

भारत में शिक्षा की एक राष्ट्रीय प्रणाली तैयार करने का पहला प्रयास 1944 में भारत में युद्ध के बाद के शैक्षिक विकास पर केंद्रीय शिक्षा सलाहकार बोर्ड की रिपोर्ट के साथ हुआ, जिसे सार्जेंट रिपोर्ट के रूप में भी जाना जाता है। इसने एक विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान समिति के गठन की सिफारिश की, जिसका गठन 1945 में अलीगढ़, बनारस और दिल्ली के तीन केंद्रीय विश्वविद्यालयों के काम की देखरेख के लिए किया गया था। 1947 में, समिति को तत्कालीन सभी मौजूदा विश्वविद्यालयों से निपटने की जिम्मेदारी सौंपी गई थी।

स्वतंत्रता के तुरंत बाद, डॉ. एस राधाकृष्णन की अध्यक्षता में 1948 में विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा आयोग की स्थापना की गई थी, “भारतीय विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा पर रिपोर्ट करने और सुधार और विस्तार का सुझाव देने के लिए जो देश की वर्तमान और भविष्य की जरूरतों और आकांक्षाओं के अनुरूप वांछनीय हो सकता है” . इसने सिफारिश की कि विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान समिति को यूनाइटेड किंगडम के विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान आयोग के सामान्य मॉडल पर पुनर्गठित किया जाए, जिसमें एक पूर्णकालिक अध्यक्ष और अन्य सदस्यों को प्रतिष्ठित शिक्षाविदों में से नियुक्त किया जाए।

1952 में, केंद्र सरकार ने निर्णय लिया कि केंद्रीय विश्वविद्यालयों और अन्य विश्वविद्यालयों और उच्च शिक्षा के संस्थानों को सार्वजनिक निधि से सहायता अनुदान के आवंटन से संबंधित सभी मामलों को विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान आयोग को भेजा जा सकता है। नतीजतन, 28 दिसंबर 1953 को तत्कालीन शिक्षा, प्राकृतिक संसाधन और वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान मंत्री स्वर्गीय श्री मौलाना अबुल कलाम आज़ाद द्वारा औपचारिक रूप से विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान आयोग (यूजीसी) का उद्घाटन किया गया।

यूजीसी, हालांकि, औपचारिक रूप से केवल नवंबर 1956 में भारत में विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा के मानकों के समन्वय, निर्धारण और रखरखाव के लिए संसद के एक अधिनियम के माध्यम से भारत सरकार के एक वैधानिक निकाय के रूप में स्थापित किया गया था। पूरे देश में प्रभावी क्षेत्र–वार कवरेज सुनिश्चित करने के लिए, यूजीसी ने पुणे, हैदराबाद, कोलकाता, भोपाल, गुवाहाटी और बैंगलोर में छह क्षेत्रीय केंद्र स्थापित करके अपने कार्यों का विकेंद्रीकरण किया है। यूजीसी का प्रधान कार्यालय नई दिल्ली में बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग पर स्थित है, जिसमें दो अतिरिक्त ब्यूरो 35, फिरोज शाह रोड और दिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय के दक्षिण परिसर से भी संचालित होते हैं।

यूजीसी को देश में एकमात्र अनुदान देने वाली एजेंसी होने का अनूठा गौरव प्राप्त है, जिसे दो जिम्मेदारियों के साथ निहित किया गया है: उच्च शिक्षा के संस्थानों में मानकों के समन्वय, निर्धारण और रखरखाव के लिए धन प्रदान करना।

यूजीसी के जनादेश में शामिल हैं:

विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा को बढ़ावा देना और समन्वय करना।

विश्वविद्यालयों में शिक्षण, परीक्षा और अनुसंधान के मानकों का निर्धारण और रखरखाव।

शिक्षा के न्यूनतम मानकों पर नियम बनाना।

कॉलेजिएट और विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा के क्षेत्र में विकास की निगरानी करना; विश्वविद्यालयों और कॉलेजों को अनुदान वितरित करना।

केंद्र और राज्य सरकारों और उच्च शिक्षा संस्थानों के बीच एक महत्वपूर्ण कड़ी के रूप में कार्य करना

विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा में सुधार के लिए आवश्यक उपायों पर केंद्र और राज्य सरकारों को सलाह देना।

The University Grants Commission Act And Rules & Regulations Under The Act, 1956

It was something that Prime Minister, Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee, said during his speech on the occasion of the initiation of the University Grants Commission (UGC) Golden Jubilee Year on 28 December, 2002 that sparked off the idea of revisiting the old UGC logo. In his speech, Shri Vajpayee spoke of the need to take a fresh look at the UGC Act, 1956 in the light of the new challenges for the education sector emerging in the twenty-first century. He also suggested that the Commission could consider changing its name to the `University Education Development Commission”. This name truly captures the changed role of the UGC in recent years.

Traditionally, UGC was entrusted with the task of co-ordination, formulation and maintenance of the standards of university education. To this end, it engaged itself in, among other things, framing regulations on minimum standards of education, determining standards of teaching, examination and research in universities, monitoring developments in the field of collegiate and university education, disbursing grants to universities and colleges and setting up common facilities, services and programmes for a group of universities in the form of Inter-University Centres.

धानमंत्री श्री अटल बिहारी वाजपेयी ने 28 दिसंबर, 2002 को विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान आयोग (यूजीसी) के स्वर्ण जयंती वर्ष की शुरुआत के अवसर पर अपने भाषण के दौरान कहा था कि पुराने यूजीसी लोगो को फिर से देखने का विचार आया। अपने भाषण में, श्री वाजपेयी ने इक्कीसवीं सदी में उभर रहे शिक्षा क्षेत्र के लिए नई चुनौतियों के आलोक में यूजीसी अधिनियम, 1956 पर नए सिरे से विचार करने की आवश्यकता की बात कही। उन्होंने यह भी सुझाव दिया कि आयोग अपना नाम बदलकर ‘विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा विकास आयोग‘ करने पर विचार कर सकता है। यह नाम वास्तव में हाल के वर्षों में यूजीसी की बदली हुई भूमिका को दर्शाता है।

परंपरागत रूप से, यूजीसी को विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा के मानकों के समन्वय, निर्माण और रखरखाव का कार्य सौंपा गया था। इसके लिए, यह अन्य बातों के अलावा, शिक्षा के न्यूनतम मानकों पर नियम बनाने, विश्वविद्यालयों में शिक्षण, परीक्षा और अनुसंधान के मानकों को निर्धारित करने, कॉलेजिएट और विश्वविद्यालय शिक्षा के क्षेत्र में विकास की निगरानी, ​​विश्वविद्यालयों और कॉलेजों को अनुदान देने और अंतर–विश्वविद्यालय केंद्रों के रूप में विश्वविद्यालयों के समूह के लिए सामान्य सुविधाओं, सेवाओं और कार्यक्रमों की स्थापना करना।

NISHTHA  (Elementary Level) – Face to Face

• 120 NRGs
• Around 23500 SRGs across 34 states/UTs
• 17.5 Lakh Teachers and School Heads across 17 States/UTs

NISHTHA  1.0 (Elementary Level) – Online 

• 18 Online Courses in 11 Languages
• 30 States/UTs
• 8 Autonomous Organisation under MOE, MOD & MOTA
• Approx. 24 Lakh Teachers and School Heads at Primary and Upper Primary

NISHTHA 2.0 (Secondary Level) – Online

• 13 Online Courses
• 33 States/UTs Initiated in 10 Languages
• 8 Autonomous Organisation under MOE, MOD & MOTA
• Targeted 10 Lakh Teacher and School Heads at Secondary Level

NISHTHA 3.0 (FLN) For NIPUN Bharat – Online

• 12 Online Courses
• 31 States/UTs Initiated in 9 Languages
• 5 Autonomous Organisation under MOE, MOD & MOTA
• Targeted  25 Lakh Teacher and School Heads at Pre-Primary and Primary Level

In which of the following research methods, an empirico-inductive paradigm is employed?

A) Ethnographic Probe

B) Case study method

C) Ex post facto method

D) Narrative method

E) Experimental method

Select your answer from the options given below:

A, B and C

B, C and D

A, B and D

C, D and E

Option 3 : A, B and D

निम्नलिखित में से किस शोध पद्धति में, एक अनुभवजन्य-प्रेरक प्रतिमान कार्यरत है?

ए) नृवंशविज्ञान जांच

बी) केस स्टडी विधि

सी) पूर्व पोस्ट फैक्टो विधि

डी) कथा विधि

ई) प्रायोगिक विधि

A, B and C

B, C and D

A, B and D

C, D and E

Option 3 : A, B and D

अनुसंधान एक जटिल सामाजिक घटना या प्रक्रिया को समझने की दिशा में एक व्यवस्थित जांच है। शोध समस्या के आधार पर शोधकर्ता द्वारा शोध विधियों का चयन भिन्न हो सकता है।

नृवंशविज्ञान विधि

• किसी संस्कृति के अध्ययन और वर्णन की प्रक्रिया ।
• यह गुणात्मक शोध है।
• यह अध्ययन के तहत एक समुदाय की एक अंदरूनी सूत्र की तस्वीर प्रदान करता है ।
• शोधकर्ता एक विशिष्ट समुदाय में जा सकता है और रह सकता है जहां अनुसंधान संस्कृति और उनकी शैक्षिक प्रथाओं का संचालन और अध्ययन करने जा रहा है ।

केस स्टडी विधि

• एक केस स्टडी एक सामाजिक इकाई का गहन , विस्तृत और गहन अध्ययन है;
• यह गुणात्मक शोध की एक विधि है ;
• यह इकाइयों की संपूर्णता को बनाए रखता है अर्थात यह एक ऐसा दृष्टिकोण है जो किसी भी सामाजिक इकाई को समग्र रूप से देखता है।
• यह अध्ययन की इकाई के बारे में विस्तृत जानकारी एकत्र करने में मदद करता है और नए विचारों और आगे के शोध के लिए सुराग देता है ।
• विश्लेषण के एक उपकरण के रूप में, यह एक विशेष उदाहरण तक सीमित संख्या और विभिन्न प्रकार के लक्षणों, गुणों और आदतों का पता लगाने में मदद करता है।
• केस स्टडी पद्धति आत्मकथाओं को समझने के लिए हमारी धारणा को गहरा करने और अंतर्दृष्टि को तेज करने का तरीका दिखाती है ।

पूर्व तथ्यात्मक विधि           

• एक पूर्व-कार्योत्तर शोधकर्ता एक ऐसे प्रभाव का पता लगाने का प्रयास करता है जो उसके संभावित कारणों से पहले ही हो चुका है। 
• शोधकर्ता का स्वतंत्र चर पर कोई सीधा नियंत्रण नहीं होता है क्योंकि यह इसके प्रभाव उत्पन्न करने से बहुत पहले हुआ है।

कथा अनुसंधान 

• यह साहित्य की समीक्षा करने का एक तरीका है।
• यह गुणात्मक शोध है।
• कभी-कभी, यह एक व्यवस्थित समीक्षा के विपरीत होता है।
• यह एक व्यवस्थित समीक्षा की तुलना में कम केंद्रित होता है और इसमें शामिल साहित्य की आलोचनात्मक व्याख्या पर पहुंचने का प्रयास करता है।

प्रयोगात्मक विधि

• इसे दो या दो से अधिक चरों के बीच कारण संबंध स्थापित करने के लिए डिज़ाइन किया गया है।
• इस पद्धति में, एक स्वतंत्र चर में हेरफेर किया जाता है।
• स्वतंत्र चर को छोड़कर अन्य सभी चर स्थिर रखे जाते हैं।
• स्वतंत्र चर के हेरफेर का आश्रित चर पर प्रभाव देखा जाता है।

इसलिए, नृवंशविज्ञान जांच, केस स्टडी विधि, और कथा पद्धति विधियां हैं, एक अनुभवजन्य-प्रेरक प्रतिमान कार्यरत है।

Research is a systematic inquiry towards understanding a complex social phenomenon or a process. Based on the research problem, the selection of research methods by the researcher may vary.

Ethnographic method

• The process of studying and describing a culture.
• It is qualitative research.
• It provides an insider’s picture of a community under study.
• The researcher can go and live in a specific community where the research is going to conduct and study the culture and their educational practices.

Case study method

• A case study is a deep, detailed and intensive study of a social unit;
• It is a method of qualitative research;
• It preserves wholeness of the units i.e. it is an approach that views any social unit as a whole.
• It helps to collect detailed information about the unit of study and gives clues to new ideas and further research.
• As a tool of analysis, it helps to ascertain a number and variety of traits, qualities, and habits confined to a particular instance.
• Case Study method shows the way to deepen our perception and sharpen insights to understand biographies.

Ex post-Facto Method           

• An ex-post-facto the researcher attempts to trace an effect that has already occurred to its probable causes. 
• The researcher has no direct control over the independent variable because it has occurred much prior to producing its effects.

Narrative research 

• It is an approach to review the literature.
• It is qualitative research.
• Sometimes, it is contrasted with a systematic review.
• It tends to be less focused than a systematic review and seeks to arrive at a critical interpretation of the literature that it covers.

Experimental method

• It is designed for establishing causal relationships between two or more variables.
• In this method, an independent variable is manipulated.
• All other variables except the independent variable are held constant.
• The effect of the manipulation of the independent variable on the dependent variable is observed.

Hence, Ethnographic Probe, Case study method, and Narrative method are methods, an empirico-inductive paradigm is employed.

UGC NET 22^nd November 2021 Political Science Analysis: Major Highlights

Some of the major highlights of UGC NET 22^nd November 2021 Political Science analysis are as follows –

• Political Science was easy to moderate in Shift 1
• Almost 7 questions were tough in Shift 1
• The nature of questions was factual than conceptual
• Almost 65-70 questions in Political Science were doable and easy
• Most of the questions were related to books and authors
• Also Read-

UGC NET 2021 Political Topic-Wise Weightage

The topic-wise weightage of UGC NET 2021 Political Science on November 22nd Shift 1 is as follows –

Also Read