MCQ Test: Reading Comprehension- 4 - Bank Exams MCQ

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the question that follows.

The passage of a statutory resolution and a Bill in Parliament — “abrogating” Article 370 which confers special political status on Jammu and Kashmir, and bifurcating the State into two Union Territories — has robbed the Kashmir Valley of its political autonomy, or whatever remains of it after all these years. It may deepen the State’s trust deficit vis-a-vis the Centre. The “abrogation” of Article 370, being hailed as a “glorious” move, is itself a misnomer. “Amending” or “abrogating” Article 370 is a Constitutional improbability; the amending provision of Article 368 says no Constitutional amendments have effect in relation to J&K unless applied by Order of the President under Article 370 that requires the concurrence of the State’s legislature and ratification by its Constituent Assembly.

The moves on Monday can be seen as an exercise in political optics, pandering to a certain majoritarian sentiment. What the Centre has done is to shred even the garb of democracy and spirit of dialogue that successive governments felt was important to engage the people of Kashmir. Through as many as 45 Presidential Orders, the most critical being the Order of 1954, Article 370 has already been divested of its spirit. Secessionist elements and some Indian Constitutional experts have cited this gradual advance of the Union as the conquest of the Valley by stealth.
What even this controversial process of assimilation, with Article 370 in place, has done is to achieve the growth of local political engagement. It legitimises a pan-Indian sentiment in the Valley where the secessionists would like to portray India as a mere occupational force. Indeed, there are several other provisions in the Constitution such as Article 371(A), 371(G), 371(B), 371(C) that validate indigenous political forces in States like Nagaland, Mizoram, Assam, Manipur et al. This asymmetric form of federalism has its global parallels in the substantial autonomy enjoyed by Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland within Great Britain. The protests in Hong Kong affirm the relevance of democratic processes inherent in the one country-two systems followed even by China.

By robbing Article 370 of its special provisions, the BJP has undermined these nuanced and extremely critical democratic processes. Simultaneously, the State has been carved up into two Union Territories with J&K having a legislature and Ladakh without it. The unprecedented step of reorganising a State and divesting it of its legislative authority without even a semblance of consultation with the stakeholders sets a dangerous precedent underlined by several regional groups and political parties, particularly the DMK and the MDMK. It is possible that the BJP would reap rich political dividends for this muscular policy. But the Centre would be responsible for escalation of violence in the Valley where all doors for political engagement and democratic exchange seem to have been closed down for good. Without meaningful participation of the people, any such unilateral integration can remain at best territorial.

Q. Which among the following is correct regarding Scotland and Wales as stated in the passage?

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the question that follows.

The passage of a statutory resolution and a Bill in Parliament — “abrogating” Article 370 which confers special political status on Jammu and Kashmir, and bifurcating the State into two Union Territories — has robbed the Kashmir Valley of its political autonomy, or whatever remains of it after all these years. It may deepen the State’s trust deficit vis-a-vis the Centre. The “abrogation” of Article 370, being hailed as a “glorious” move, is itself a misnomer. “Amending” or “abrogating” Article 370 is a Constitutional improbability; the amending provision of Article 368 says no Constitutional amendments have effect in relation to J&K unless applied by Order of the President under Article 370 that requires the concurrence of the State’s legislature and ratification by its Constituent Assembly.

The moves on Monday can be seen as an exercise in political optics, pandering to a certain majoritarian sentiment. What the Centre has done is to shred even the garb of democracy and spirit of dialogue that successive governments felt was important to engage the people of Kashmir. Through as many as 45 Presidential Orders, the most critical being the Order of 1954, Article 370 has already been divested of its spirit. Secessionist elements and some Indian Constitutional experts have cited this gradual advance of the Union as the conquest of the Valley by stealth.
What even this controversial process of assimilation, with Article 370 in place, has done is to achieve the growth of local political engagement. It legitimises a pan-Indian sentiment in the Valley where the secessionists would like to portray India as a mere occupational force. Indeed, there are several other provisions in the Constitution such as Article 371(A), 371(G), 371(B), 371(C) that validate indigenous political forces in States like Nagaland, Mizoram, Assam, Manipur et al. This asymmetric form of federalism has its global parallels in the substantial autonomy enjoyed by Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland within Great Britain. The protests in Hong Kong affirm the relevance of democratic processes inherent in the one country-two systems followed even by China.

By robbing Article 370 of its special provisions, the BJP has undermined these nuanced and extremely critical democratic processes. Simultaneously, the State has been carved up into two Union Territories with J&K having a legislature and Ladakh without it. The unprecedented step of reorganising a State and divesting it of its legislative authority without even a semblance of consultation with the stakeholders sets a dangerous precedent underlined by several regional groups and political parties, particularly the DMK and the MDMK. It is possible that the BJP would reap rich political dividends for this muscular policy. But the Centre would be responsible for escalation of violence in the Valley where all doors for political engagement and democratic exchange seem to have been closed down for good. Without meaningful participation of the people, any such unilateral integration can remain at best territorial.

Q. Which among the following is correct regarding the Article 368 in the Constitution of India, as stated in the passage?

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:

There is now no denying that the new government takes office amid a clear economic slowdown. The first macro data set released showed an under-performing economy with GDP growth falling to 5.8% in the fourth quarter of 2018-19 and pulling down the overall growth for the fiscal to a five-year low of 6.8%. Growth in gross value added (GVA), which is GDP minus taxes and subsidies, fell to 6.6% in 2018-19, pointing to a serious slowdown. If further confirmation were needed, the growth in core sector output — a set of eight major industrial sectors — fell to 2.6% in April, compared to 4.7% in the same month last year. And finally, unemployment data, controversially suppressed by the Union government so far, showed that joblessness was at a 45-year high of 6.1% in 2017-18. These numbers highlight the challenges ahead in drafting the Budget for 2019-20. The economy is beset by a consumption slowdown as reflected in the falling sales of everything from automobiles to consumer durables, even fast-moving consumer goods. Private investment is not taking off, while government spending, which kept the economy afloat during the last NDA government, was cut back in the last quarter of 2018-19 to meet the fiscal deficit target of 3.4%.

The good news is that inflation is undershooting the target and oil prices are on the retreat again. But the rural economy remains in distress, as seen by the 2.9% growth in agriculture last fiscal; the sector needs a good monsoon this year to bounce back. Overall economic growth in the first quarter of this fiscal is likely to remain subdued, and any improvement is unlikely until the late second quarter or the early third. There are not too many options before the new Finance Minister. In the near term, she has to boost consumption, which means putting more money in the hands of people. That, in turn, means cutting taxes, which is not easy given the commitment to rein in the fiscal deficit. In the medium term, Ms. Sitharaman has to take measures to boost private investment even as she opens up public spending again. These call for major reforms, starting with land acquisition and labour, corporate taxes by reducing exemptions and dropping rates, and nursing banks back to health. On the table will be options such as further recapitalisation of the ailing banks, and consolidation. The question, though, is where the money will come from. With tax revenues likely to be subdued owing to the slowdown, the Centre will have to look at alternative sources such as disinvestment. There may be little choice but to go big on privatisation. A rate cut by the Reserve Bank of India, widely expected this week, would certainly help boost sentiment. But it is the Budget that will really set the tone for the economy

Q. As per the passage, which of the following reforms has NOT been mentioned in the passage to improve the investment climate?

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:

There is now no denying that the new government takes office amid a clear economic slowdown. The first macro data set released showed an under-performing economy with GDP growth falling to 5.8% in the fourth quarter of 2018-19 and pulling down the overall growth for the fiscal to a five-year low of 6.8%. Growth in gross value added (GVA), which is GDP minus taxes and subsidies, fell to 6.6% in 2018-19, pointing to a serious slowdown. If further confirmation were needed, the growth in core sector output — a set of eight major industrial sectors — fell to 2.6% in April, compared to 4.7% in the same month last year. And finally, unemployment data, controversially suppressed by the Union government so far, showed that joblessness was at a 45-year high of 6.1% in 2017-18. These numbers highlight the challenges ahead in drafting the Budget for 2019-20. The economy is beset by a consumption slowdown as reflected in the falling sales of everything from automobiles to consumer durables, even fast-moving consumer goods. Private investment is not taking off, while government spending, which kept the economy afloat during the last NDA government, was cut back in the last quarter of 2018-19 to meet the fiscal deficit target of 3.4%.

The good news is that inflation is undershooting the target and oil prices are on the retreat again. But the rural economy remains in distress, as seen by the 2.9% growth in agriculture last fiscal; the sector needs a good monsoon this year to bounce back. Overall economic growth in the first quarter of this fiscal is likely to remain subdued, and any improvement is unlikely until the late second quarter or the early third. There are not too many options before the new Finance Minister. In the near term, she has to boost consumption, which means putting more money in the hands of people. That, in turn, means cutting taxes, which is not easy given the commitment to rein in the fiscal deficit. In the medium term, Ms. Sitharaman has to take measures to boost private investment even as she opens up public spending again. These call for major reforms, starting with land acquisition and labour, corporate taxes by reducing exemptions and dropping rates, and nursing banks back to health. On the table will be options such as further recapitalisation of the ailing banks, and consolidation. The question, though, is where the money will come from. With tax revenues likely to be subdued owing to the slowdown, the Centre will have to look at alternative sources such as disinvestment. There may be little choice but to go big on privatisation. A rate cut by the Reserve Bank of India, widely expected this week, would certainly help boost sentiment. But it is the Budget that will really set the tone for the economy

Q. As per the passage, which of the following would lead to ‘putting more money in the hands of people’?

I. Decrease in tax rates.
II. Increase in inflation
III. Increase in private investment

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:

There is now no denying that the new government takes office amid a clear economic slowdown. The first macro data set released showed an under-performing economy with GDP growth falling to 5.8% in the fourth quarter of 2018-19 and pulling down the overall growth for the fiscal to a five-year low of 6.8%. Growth in gross value added (GVA), which is GDP minus taxes and subsidies, fell to 6.6% in 2018-19, pointing to a serious slowdown. If further confirmation were needed, the growth in core sector output — a set of eight major industrial sectors — fell to 2.6% in April, compared to 4.7% in the same month last year. And finally, unemployment data, controversially suppressed by the Union government so far, showed that joblessness was at a 45-year high of 6.1% in 2017-18. These numbers highlight the challenges ahead in drafting the Budget for 2019-20. The economy is beset by a consumption slowdown as reflected in the falling sales of everything from automobiles to consumer durables, even fast-moving consumer goods. Private investment is not taking off, while government spending, which kept the economy afloat during the last NDA government, was cut back in the last quarter of 2018-19 to meet the fiscal deficit target of 3.4%.

The good news is that inflation is undershooting the target and oil prices are on the retreat again. But the rural economy remains in distress, as seen by the 2.9% growth in agriculture last fiscal; the sector needs a good monsoon this year to bounce back. Overall economic growth in the first quarter of this fiscal is likely to remain subdued, and any improvement is unlikely until the late second quarter or the early third. There are not too many options before the new Finance Minister. In the near term, she has to boost consumption, which means putting more money in the hands of people. That, in turn, means cutting taxes, which is not easy given the commitment to rein in the fiscal deficit. In the medium term, Ms. Sitharaman has to take measures to boost private investment even as she opens up public spending again. These call for major reforms, starting with land acquisition and labour, corporate taxes by reducing exemptions and dropping rates, and nursing banks back to health. On the table will be options such as further recapitalisation of the ailing banks, and consolidation. The question, though, is where the money will come from. With tax revenues likely to be subdued owing to the slowdown, the Centre will have to look at alternative sources such as disinvestment. There may be little choice but to go big on privatisation. A rate cut by the Reserve Bank of India, widely expected this week, would certainly help boost sentiment. But it is the Budget that will really set the tone for the economy

Q. Which of the following, as per the passage, indicate a slowdown in the Indian economy?
I. Fall in sale levels of consumer durables
II. Negative growth in the core sector output
III. Fall in inflations levels

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:

There is now no denying that the new government takes office amid a clear economic slowdown. The first macro data set released showed an under-performing economy with GDP growth falling to 5.8% in the fourth quarter of 2018-19 and pulling down the overall growth for the fiscal to a five-year low of 6.8%. Growth in gross value added (GVA), which is GDP minus taxes and subsidies, fell to 6.6% in 2018-19, pointing to a serious slowdown. If further confirmation were needed, the growth in core sector output — a set of eight major industrial sectors — fell to 2.6% in April, compared to 4.7% in the same month last year. And finally, unemployment data, controversially suppressed by the Union government so far, showed that joblessness was at a 45-year high of 6.1% in 2017-18. These numbers highlight the challenges ahead in drafting the Budget for 2019-20. The economy is beset by a consumption slowdown as reflected in the falling sales of everything from automobiles to consumer durables, even fast-moving consumer goods. Private investment is not taking off, while government spending, which kept the economy afloat during the last NDA government, was cut back in the last quarter of 2018-19 to meet the fiscal deficit target of 3.4%.

The good news is that inflation is undershooting the target and oil prices are on the retreat again. But the rural economy remains in distress, as seen by the 2.9% growth in agriculture last fiscal; the sector needs a good monsoon this year to bounce back. Overall economic growth in the first quarter of this fiscal is likely to remain subdued, and any improvement is unlikely until the late second quarter or the early third. There are not too many options before the new Finance Minister. In the near term, she has to boost consumption, which means putting more money in the hands of people. That, in turn, means cutting taxes, which is not easy given the commitment to rein in the fiscal deficit. In the medium term, Ms. Sitharaman has to take measures to boost private investment even as she opens up public spending again. These call for major reforms, starting with land acquisition and labour, corporate taxes by reducing exemptions and dropping rates, and nursing banks back to health. On the table will be options such as further recapitalisation of the ailing banks, and consolidation. The question, though, is where the money will come from. With tax revenues likely to be subdued owing to the slowdown, the Centre will have to look at alternative sources such as disinvestment. There may be little choice but to go big on privatisation. A rate cut by the Reserve Bank of India, widely expected this week, would certainly help boost sentiment. But it is the Budget that will really set the tone for the economy

Q. Which of the following is / are true as per the passage?

I. There is going to be a definite rate cut by the RBI in the coming week.
II. The rural economy is in better shape than the urban economy.
III. Government spending has increased in the last quarter of 2018-19.

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:

There is now no denying that the new government takes office amid a clear economic slowdown. The first macro data set released showed an under-performing economy with GDP growth falling to 5.8% in the fourth quarter of 2018-19 and pulling down the overall growth for the fiscal to a five-year low of 6.8%. Growth in gross value added (GVA), which is GDP minus taxes and subsidies, fell to 6.6% in 2018-19, pointing to a serious slowdown. If further confirmation were needed, the growth in core sector output — a set of eight major industrial sectors — fell to 2.6% in April, compared to 4.7% in the same month last year. And finally, unemployment data, controversially suppressed by the Union government so far, showed that joblessness was at a 45-year high of 6.1% in 2017-18. These numbers highlight the challenges ahead in drafting the Budget for 2019-20. The economy is beset by a consumption slowdown as reflected in the falling sales of everything from automobiles to consumer durables, even fast-moving consumer goods. Private investment is not taking off, while government spending, which kept the economy afloat during the last NDA government, was cut back in the last quarter of 2018-19 to meet the fiscal deficit target of 3.4%.

The good news is that inflation is undershooting the target and oil prices are on the retreat again. But the rural economy remains in distress, as seen by the 2.9% growth in agriculture last fiscal; the sector needs a good monsoon this year to bounce back. Overall economic growth in the first quarter of this fiscal is likely to remain subdued, and any improvement is unlikely until the late second quarter or the early third. There are not too many options before the new Finance Minister. In the near term, she has to boost consumption, which means putting more money in the hands of people. That, in turn, means cutting taxes, which is not easy given the commitment to rein in the fiscal deficit. In the medium term, Ms. Sitharaman has to take measures to boost private investment even as she opens up public spending again. These call for major reforms, starting with land acquisition and labour, corporate taxes by reducing exemptions and dropping rates, and nursing banks back to health. On the table will be options such as further recapitalisation of the ailing banks, and consolidation. The question, though, is where the money will come from. With tax revenues likely to be subdued owing to the slowdown, the Centre will have to look at alternative sources such as disinvestment. There may be little choice but to go big on privatisation. A rate cut by the Reserve Bank of India, widely expected this week, would certainly help boost sentiment. But it is the Budget that will really set the tone for the economy

Q. Which of the following is the closest in meaning to the word beset?

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.

The government’s move to infuse upfront an additional capital of Rs 70,000 crore into public sector banks (PSBs) is welcome. The promised removal of the Damocles’ sword of punitive investigation of any banking decision hanging over the heads of bankers today will help banks lend the additional liquidity leveraging this capital would enable.

The moves to support non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) — such as enhancing additional liquidity support to housing finance companies to Rs 30,000 crore by National Housing Bank from Rs 20,000 crore and co-origination of loans by PSBs jointly with NBFCs that are reeling under a liquidity crunch — will provide a booster for fresh loans to the MSME sector.

A transparent one-time settlement policy being provided by banks to benefit MSMEs and retail borrowers in settling their overdues is pragmatic. But banks also must acquire the expertise to assess MSME loan viability and invest in data mining.

Making banks link their lending rates to the repo rates will help better transmission of monetary policy. But for this to work without impairing bank financial health, multiple structural rigidities in the system must be removed. Public sector pre-emption of the bulk of household financial savings must end, for the bond market to really take off to provide longer-term funds for infrastructure projects.

Steps such as further development of the credit default swap markets, facilitating increased trading for price discovery, and establishing an organisation to provide credit enhancement for infrastructure and housing projects make eminent sense, as does onshoring the offshore rupee derivative markets.

A coherent policy of managerial reform, including of remuneration, at public sector banks must accompany the measures announced, for them to take effect.

Q. What can be a suitable title for the given passage?

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.

The government’s move to infuse upfront an additional capital of Rs 70,000 crore into public sector banks (PSBs) is welcome. The promised removal of the Damocles’ sword of punitive investigation of any banking decision hanging over the heads of bankers today will help banks lend the additional liquidity leveraging this capital would enable.

The moves to support non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) — such as enhancing additional liquidity support to housing finance companies to Rs 30,000 crore by National Housing Bank from Rs 20,000 crore and co-origination of loans by PSBs jointly with NBFCs that are reeling under a liquidity crunch — will provide a booster for fresh loans to the MSME sector.

A transparent one-time settlement policy being provided by banks to benefit MSMEs and retail borrowers in settling their overdues is pragmatic. But banks also must acquire the expertise to assess MSME loan viability and invest in data mining.

Making banks link their lending rates to the repo rates will help better transmission of monetary policy. But for this to work without impairing bank financial health, multiple structural rigidities in the system must be removed. Public sector pre-emption of the bulk of household financial savings must end, for the bond market to really take off to provide longer-term funds for infrastructure projects.

Steps such as further development of the credit default swap markets, facilitating increased trading for price discovery, and establishing an organisation to provide credit enhancement for infrastructure and housing projects make eminent sense, as does onshoring the offshore rupee derivative markets.

A coherent policy of managerial reform, including of remuneration, at public sector banks must accompany the measures announced, for them to take effect.

Q. What is the tone of the passage?

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.

The government’s move to infuse upfront an additional capital of Rs 70,000 crore into public sector banks (PSBs) is welcome. The promised removal of the Damocles’ sword of punitive investigation of any banking decision hanging over the heads of bankers today will help banks lend the additional liquidity leveraging this capital would enable.

The moves to support non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) — such as enhancing additional liquidity support to housing finance companies to Rs 30,000 crore by National Housing Bank from Rs 20,000 crore and co-origination of loans by PSBs jointly with NBFCs that are reeling under a liquidity crunch — will provide a booster for fresh loans to the MSME sector.

A transparent one-time settlement policy being provided by banks to benefit MSMEs and retail borrowers in settling their overdues is pragmatic. But banks also must acquire the expertise to assess MSME loan viability and invest in data mining.

Making banks link their lending rates to the repo rates will help better transmission of monetary policy. But for this to work without impairing bank financial health, multiple structural rigidities in the system must be removed. Public sector pre-emption of the bulk of household financial savings must end, for the bond market to really take off to provide longer-term funds for infrastructure projects.

Steps such as further development of the credit default swap markets, facilitating increased trading for price discovery, and establishing an organisation to provide credit enhancement for infrastructure and housing projects make eminent sense, as does onshoring the offshore rupee derivative markets.

A coherent policy of managerial reform, including of remuneration, at public sector banks must accompany the measures announced, for them to take effect.

Q. With which of the following statements would the author most likely agree?

I. One-time settlement policy that will benefit MSMEs is impractical for banks and is unwise.  
II. Banks have not yet developed the required proficiency in judging the sustainability of MSME loans.
III. Banks have made huge investments in data mining.

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.

The government’s move to infuse upfront an additional capital of Rs 70,000 crore into public sector banks (PSBs) is welcome. The promised removal of the Damocles’ sword of punitive investigation of any banking decision hanging over the heads of bankers today will help banks lend the additional liquidity leveraging this capital would enable.

The moves to support non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) — such as enhancing additional liquidity support to housing finance companies to Rs 30,000 crore by National Housing Bank from Rs 20,000 crore and co-origination of loans by PSBs jointly with NBFCs that are reeling under a liquidity crunch — will provide a booster for fresh loans to the MSME sector.

A transparent one-time settlement policy being provided by banks to benefit MSMEs and retail borrowers in settling their overdues is pragmatic. But banks also must acquire the expertise to assess MSME loan viability and invest in data mining.

Making banks link their lending rates to the repo rates will help better transmission of monetary policy. But for this to work without impairing bank financial health, multiple structural rigidities in the system must be removed. Public sector pre-emption of the bulk of household financial savings must end, for the bond market to really take off to provide longer-term funds for infrastructure projects.

Steps such as further development of the credit default swap markets, facilitating increased trading for price discovery, and establishing an organisation to provide credit enhancement for infrastructure and housing projects make eminent sense, as does onshoring the offshore rupee derivative markets.

A coherent policy of managerial reform, including of remuneration, at public sector banks must accompany the measures announced, for them to take effect.

Q. According to the passage, what will provide a booster for fresh loans to the MSME sector?

I. Loan waivers and collateral free loans.
II. Increasing additional liquidity support of Rs 20,000 cr by 50%.
III. Joint contribution of credit by PSBs and NBFCs.

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.

The government’s move to infuse upfront an additional capital of Rs 70,000 crore into public sector banks (PSBs) is welcome. The promised removal of the Damocles’ sword of punitive investigation of any banking decision hanging over the heads of bankers today will help banks lend the additional liquidity leveraging this capital would enable.

The moves to support non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) — such as enhancing additional liquidity support to housing finance companies to Rs 30,000 crore by National Housing Bank from Rs 20,000 crore and co-origination of loans by PSBs jointly with NBFCs that are reeling under a liquidity crunch — will provide a booster for fresh loans to the MSME sector.

A transparent one-time settlement policy being provided by banks to benefit MSMEs and retail borrowers in settling their overdues is pragmatic. But banks also must acquire the expertise to assess MSME loan viability and invest in data mining.

Making banks link their lending rates to the repo rates will help better transmission of monetary policy. But for this to work without impairing bank financial health, multiple structural rigidities in the system must be removed. Public sector pre-emption of the bulk of household financial savings must end, for the bond market to really take off to provide longer-term funds for infrastructure projects.

Steps such as further development of the credit default swap markets, facilitating increased trading for price discovery, and establishing an organisation to provide credit enhancement for infrastructure and housing projects make eminent sense, as does onshoring the offshore rupee derivative markets.

A coherent policy of managerial reform, including of remuneration, at public sector banks must accompany the measures announced, for them to take effect.

Q. What is the meaning of the idiom “Damocles’ sword”, as used in the passage?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow:

Paragraph 1: The government has announced a list of ‘Institutes of Eminence’ (IoE) among India’s institutions of higher education. This was awaited for the simple reason that finding a place on it would save an educational institution from the clutches of a dreaded regulator. Regulators are meant to ensure that we have a socially desirable outcome, but in the case of higher education in India the opposite seems to have been the case. The University Grants Commission (UGC) has over half a century micro-managed this space to an unimaginable level of silliness. The result has been publicly-funded universities that are cavernous wastes, shattering the aspirations of our youth and producing low-level ‘knowledge’. Evidence of the role of India’s higher-education regulator may be seen in the feature that the few instances when this is not the case the institutions have enjoyed privilege that leaves them protected from its depredations.

Paragraph 2: The latest offering is in the form of a proposed Higher Education Commission of India (HECI). The intention is to leave the HECI to focus on quality while leaving funding of public institutions to the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). Even as we observe the progress of the HECI and wonder if it is going to be any more than old wine in a new bottle, we already have an inkling of what could go wrong. This springs from the government’s announcement of a list of IoEs. The government has chosen three public and three private institutions for this status. The public institutions are the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, and the Indian Institutes of Technology at Delhi and Mumbai. The private ones are the Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani, the JIO Institute and the Manipal Academy of Higher Education. This list suffers from a serious lack of credibility. Where in it are the universities of India? We understand that the government’s aim is to rectify the low presence of Indian institutions in the global rankings of universities.

Paragraph 3: While the early European universities may have started as academies of the arts they were soon to have medicine and astronomy as areas that they pursued with vigour. Somewhere along the line we seem to have lost this breadth and come to revel in a landscape dominated by engineering schools. These engineering schools, notably the IITs, have done us proud but cannot be equated with the great universities of the world for the simple reason that they are focussed on a narrow domain. Also, if the idea behind IoEs is that they will be left alone and given enhanced financial support, it must be acknowledged that until very recently the IITs have not been meddled with neither have they been starved of resources. The IISc is of course broader than the IITs but does not embrace the social sciences and the humanities, the presence of which would be considered necessary for a university.

Paragraph 4 : If a list of eminent institutions in the country is at all needed, the absence of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) from the first list of IoEs is striking. Its faculty has brought many of the world’s leading ideas to Indian students and in at least area came close to building a new school of thought, however controversial. It is not as if similar efforts in the social sciences have not occurred elsewhere in India but JNU has perhaps sustained its reputation as a university for longer. It already had schools of Computer Science and the Life Sciences over four decades ago when these were fledgling disciplines giving it a certain breadth early on.

Paragraph 5 : Even as we may wonder at the exclusion of JNU from the list of IoEs released by the government one might wonder at how the private institutions that are on it made the cut. While BITS Pilani may have made a significant contribution to the country at a time when it desperately needed engineers, but is yet not what may be considered a university, the presence of the two others on the list leave one nonplussed. One of them, we are told, has been conferred the status on grounds of its promise, a dubious position to take as this institute has little to show except for the financial heft that will surely undergird it. The other is known largely for its association with the practice of charging capitation fees for education.

Q. Which of the following may be inferred from paragraph 3?
I. Universities should embody knowledge across a wide range of disciplines.
II. There is an emphasis on a depth of knowledge across a broad horizon in Indian Universities today.
III. In India, a lot of focus is given to Institutions which are focused on only few areas.

Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow:

Paragraph 1 : The government has announced a list of ‘Institutes of Eminence’ (IoE) among India’s institutions of higher education. This was awaited for the simple reason that finding a place on it would save an educational institution from the clutches of a dreaded regulator. Regulators are meant to ensure that we have a socially desirable outcome, but in the case of higher education in India the opposite seems to have been the case. The University Grants Commission (UGC) has over half a century micro-managed this space to an unimaginable level of silliness. The result has been publicly-funded universities that are cavernous wastes, shattering the aspirations of our youth and producing low-level ‘knowledge’. Evidence of the role of India’s higher-education regulator may be seen in the feature that the few instances when this is not the case the institutions have enjoyed privilege that leaves them protected from its depredations.

Paragraph 2 : The latest offering is in the form of a proposed Higher Education Commission of India (HECI). The intention is to leave the HECI to focus on quality while leaving funding of public institutions to the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). Even as we observe the progress of the HECI and wonder if it is going to be any more than old wine in a new bottle, we already have an inkling of what could go wrong. This springs from the government’s announcement of a list of IoEs. The government has chosen three public and three private institutions for this status. The public institutions are the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, and the Indian Institutes of Technology at Delhi and Mumbai. The private ones are the Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani, the JIO Institute and the Manipal Academy of Higher Education. This list suffers from a serious lack of credibility. Where in it are the universities of India? We understand that the government’s aim is to rectify the low presence of Indian institutions in the global rankings of universities.

Paragraph 3 : While the early European universities may have started as academies of the arts they were soon to have medicine and astronomy as areas that they pursued with vigour. Somewhere along the line we seem to have lost this breadth and come to revel in a landscape dominated by engineering schools. These engineering schools, notably the IITs, have done us proud but cannot be equated with the great universities of the world for the simple reason that they are focussed on a narrow domain. Also, if the idea behind IoEs is that they will be left alone and given enhanced financial support, it must be acknowledged that until very recently the IITs have not been meddled with neither have they been starved of resources. The IISc is of course broader than the IITs but does not embrace the social sciences and the humanities, the presence of which would be considered necessary for a university.

Paragraph 4 : If a list of eminent institutions in the country is at all needed, the absence of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) from the first list of IoEs is striking. Its faculty has brought many of the world’s leading ideas to Indian students and in at least area came close to building a new school of thought, however controversial. It is not as if similar efforts in the social sciences have not occurred elsewhere in India but JNU has perhaps sustained its reputation as a university for longer. It already had schools of Computer Science and the Life Sciences over four decades ago when these were fledgling disciplines giving it a certain breadth early on.

Paragraph 5 : Even as we may wonder at the exclusion of JNU from the list of IoEs released by the government one might wonder at how the private institutions that are on it made the cut. While BITS Pilani may have made a significant contribution to the country at a time when it desperately needed engineers, but is yet not what may be considered a university, the presence of the two others on the list leave one nonplussed. One of them, we are told, has been conferred the status on grounds of its promise, a dubious position to take as this institute has little to show except for the financial heft that will surely undergird it. The other is known largely for its association with the practice of charging capitation fees for education.

Q. What could be a/some result/s of the function of funding of public institutions being left to the Ministry of Human Resource Development instead of HECI?
I. The government may use its discretion to reward institutions according to its ideological predilections.
II. The Institutions may be forced to comply with even some dubious rules setup by the government.
III. The government can be made accountable for attaining excellence in education.

Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow:

Paragraph 1 : The government has announced a list of ‘Institutes of Eminence’ (IoE) among India’s institutions of higher education. This was awaited for the simple reason that finding a place on it would save an educational institution from the clutches of a dreaded regulator. Regulators are meant to ensure that we have a socially desirable outcome, but in the case of higher education in India the opposite seems to have been the case. The University Grants Commission (UGC) has over half a century micro-managed this space to an unimaginable level of silliness. The result has been publicly-funded universities that are cavernous wastes, shattering the aspirations of our youth and producing low-level ‘knowledge’. Evidence of the role of India’s higher-education regulator may be seen in the feature that the few instances when this is not the case the institutions have enjoyed privilege that leaves them protected from its depredations.

Paragraph 2 : The latest offering is in the form of a proposed Higher Education Commission of India (HECI). The intention is to leave the HECI to focus on quality while leaving funding of public institutions to the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). Even as we observe the progress of the HECI and wonder if it is going to be any more than old wine in a new bottle, we already have an inkling of what could go wrong. This springs from the government’s announcement of a list of IoEs. The government has chosen three public and three private institutions for this status. The public institutions are the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, and the Indian Institutes of Technology at Delhi and Mumbai. The private ones are the Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani, the JIO Institute and the Manipal Academy of Higher Education. This list suffers from a serious lack of credibility. Where in it are the universities of India? We understand that the government’s aim is to rectify the low presence of Indian institutions in the global rankings of universities.

Paragraph 3 : While the early European universities may have started as academies of the arts they were soon to have medicine and astronomy as areas that they pursued with vigour. Somewhere along the line we seem to have lost this breadth and come to revel in a landscape dominated by engineering schools. These engineering schools, notably the IITs, have done us proud but cannot be equated with the great universities of the world for the simple reason that they are focussed on a narrow domain. Also, if the idea behind IoEs is that they will be left alone and given enhanced financial support, it must be acknowledged that until very recently the IITs have not been meddled with neither have they been starved of resources. The IISc is of course broader than the IITs but does not embrace the social sciences and the humanities, the presence of which would be considered necessary for a university.

Paragraph 4 : If a list of eminent institutions in the country is at all needed, the absence of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) from the first list of IoEs is striking. Its faculty has brought many of the world’s leading ideas to Indian students and in at least area came close to building a new school of thought, however controversial. It is not as if similar efforts in the social sciences have not occurred elsewhere in India but JNU has perhaps sustained its reputation as a university for longer. It already had schools of Computer Science and the Life Sciences over four decades ago when these were fledgling disciplines giving it a certain breadth early on.

Paragraph 5 : Even as we may wonder at the exclusion of JNU from the list of IoEs released by the government one might wonder at how the private institutions that are on it made the cut. While BITS Pilani may have made a significant contribution to the country at a time when it desperately needed engineers, but is yet not what may be considered a university, the presence of the two others on the list leave one nonplussed. One of them, we are told, has been conferred the status on grounds of its promise, a dubious position to take as this institute has little to show except for the financial heft that will surely undergird it. The other is known largely for its association with the practice of charging capitation fees for education.

Q. Which of the following best describes the tone of the author in paragraph 1?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow:

Paragraph 1 : The government has announced a list of ‘Institutes of Eminence’ (IoE) among India’s institutions of higher education. This was awaited for the simple reason that finding a place on it would save an educational institution from the clutches of a dreaded regulator. Regulators are meant to ensure that we have a socially desirable outcome, but in the case of higher education in India the opposite seems to have been the case. The University Grants Commission (UGC) has over half a century micro-managed this space to an unimaginable level of silliness. The result has been publicly-funded universities that are cavernous wastes, shattering the aspirations of our youth and producing low-level ‘knowledge’. Evidence of the role of India’s higher-education regulator may be seen in the feature that the few instances when this is not the case the institutions have enjoyed privilege that leaves them protected from its depredations.

Paragraph 2 : The latest offering is in the form of a proposed Higher Education Commission of India (HECI). The intention is to leave the HECI to focus on quality while leaving funding of public institutions to the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). Even as we observe the progress of the HECI and wonder if it is going to be any more than old wine in a new bottle, we already have an inkling of what could go wrong. This springs from the government’s announcement of a list of IoEs. The government has chosen three public and three private institutions for this status. The public institutions are the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, and the Indian Institutes of Technology at Delhi and Mumbai. The private ones are the Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani, the JIO Institute and the Manipal Academy of Higher Education. This list suffers from a serious lack of credibility. Where in it are the universities of India? We understand that the government’s aim is to rectify the low presence of Indian institutions in the global rankings of universities.

Paragraph 3 : While the early European universities may have started as academies of the arts they were soon to have medicine and astronomy as areas that they pursued with vigour. Somewhere along the line we seem to have lost this breadth and come to revel in a landscape dominated by engineering schools. These engineering schools, notably the IITs, have done us proud but cannot be equated with the great universities of the world for the simple reason that they are focussed on a narrow domain. Also, if the idea behind IoEs is that they will be left alone and given enhanced financial support, it must be acknowledged that until very recently the IITs have not been meddled with neither have they been starved of resources. The IISc is of course broader than the IITs but does not embrace the social sciences and the humanities, the presence of which would be considered necessary for a university.

Paragraph 4 : If a list of eminent institutions in the country is at all needed, the absence of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) from the first list of IoEs is striking. Its faculty has brought many of the world’s leading ideas to Indian students and in at least area came close to building a new school of thought, however controversial. It is not as if similar efforts in the social sciences have not occurred elsewhere in India but JNU has perhaps sustained its reputation as a university for longer. It already had schools of Computer Science and the Life Sciences over four decades ago when these were fledgling disciplines giving it a certain breadth early on.

Paragraph 5 : Even as we may wonder at the exclusion of JNU from the list of IoEs released by the government one might wonder at how the private institutions that are on it made the cut. While BITS Pilani may have made a significant contribution to the country at a time when it desperately needed engineers, but is yet not what may be considered a university, the presence of the two others on the list leave one nonplussed. One of them, we are told, has been conferred the status on grounds of its promise, a dubious position to take as this institute has little to show except for the financial heft that will surely undergird it. The other is known largely for its association with the practice of charging capitation fees for education.

Q. Which of the following is/are true as per the passage?
I. Among countries with a comparable research output, India with 0.8% R&D spending trails Russia, Brazil, South Korea and even Singapore, according to Unesco data.
II. HECI would focus on funding while quality would be regulated by the Ministry of Human Resource Development.
III. The Institution of Eminence (IoE) status has been given to six institutes, three each from the public and private sectors.

Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow:

Paragraph 1 : The government has announced a list of ‘Institutes of Eminence’ (IoE) among India’s institutions of higher education. This was awaited for the simple reason that finding a place on it would save an educational institution from the clutches of a dreaded regulator. Regulators are meant to ensure that we have a socially desirable outcome, but in the case of higher education in India the opposite seems to have been the case. The University Grants Commission (UGC) has over half a century micro-managed this space to an unimaginable level of silliness. The result has been publicly-funded universities that are cavernous wastes, shattering the aspirations of our youth and producing low-level ‘knowledge’. Evidence of the role of India’s higher-education regulator may be seen in the feature that the few instances when this is not the case the institutions have enjoyed privilege that leaves them protected from its depredations.

Paragraph 2 : The latest offering is in the form of a proposed Higher Education Commission of India (HECI). The intention is to leave the HECI to focus on quality while leaving funding of public institutions to the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD). Even as we observe the progress of the HECI and wonder if it is going to be any more than old wine in a new bottle, we already have an inkling of what could go wrong. This springs from the government’s announcement of a list of IoEs. The government has chosen three public and three private institutions for this status. The public institutions are the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, and the Indian Institutes of Technology at Delhi and Mumbai. The private ones are the Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani, the JIO Institute and the Manipal Academy of Higher Education. This list suffers from a serious lack of credibility. Where in it are the universities of India? We understand that the government’s aim is to rectify the low presence of Indian institutions in the global rankings of universities.

Paragraph 3 : While the early European universities may have started as academies of the arts they were soon to have medicine and astronomy as areas that they pursued with vigour. Somewhere along the line we seem to have lost this breadth and come to revel in a landscape dominated by engineering schools. These engineering schools, notably the IITs, have done us proud but cannot be equated with the great universities of the world for the simple reason that they are focussed on a narrow domain. Also, if the idea behind IoEs is that they will be left alone and given enhanced financial support, it must be acknowledged that until very recently the IITs have not been meddled with neither have they been starved of resources. The IISc is of course broader than the IITs but does not embrace the social sciences and the humanities, the presence of which would be considered necessary for a university.

Paragraph 4 : If a list of eminent institutions in the country is at all needed, the absence of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) from the first list of IoEs is striking. Its faculty has brought many of the world’s leading ideas to Indian students and in at least area came close to building a new school of thought, however controversial. It is not as if similar efforts in the social sciences have not occurred elsewhere in India but JNU has perhaps sustained its reputation as a university for longer. It already had schools of Computer Science and the Life Sciences over four decades ago when these were fledgling disciplines giving it a certain breadth early on.

Paragraph 5 : Even as we may wonder at the exclusion of JNU from the list of IoEs released by the government one might wonder at how the private institutions that are on it made the cut. While BITS Pilani may have made a significant contribution to the country at a time when it desperately needed engineers, but is yet not what may be considered a university, the presence of the two others on the list leave one nonplussed. One of them, we are told, has been conferred the status on grounds of its promise, a dubious position to take as this institute has little to show except for the financial heft that will surely undergird it. The other is known largely for its association with the practice of charging capitation fees for education.

Q. As per your understanding of the passage studied above, what can be some reasons for lack of quality in higher education?
I. State universities recruited a lot of faculty members on contract basis who have little incentive to perform.
II. Public universities are insulated from political pressure.
III. The amount spent on research is very less as compared to foreign Institutions.