பக்கம்:புதிய கல்வி முறை-10-2-3.pdf/56

36 degree course and to transfer the two years of the Intermediate course to the school stage. But for various reasons, and mainly for financial considerations, this was not done. Instead the recommendation of the Sargent Report of an eleven-year higher secondary school followed by a three-year course for first degree was revived and the pattern of 8+3+3. was adopted. The Intermediate course was therefore broken up into two parts and the first year was either added to the school stage or converted into a pre-university course of one year and the second year was added to the two-year under graduate course for the first degree to create the three-year degree course. This was an unfortunate decision dictated by the compulsion of economy rather than the logic of academic reform. The entire position was reviewed once again by the Education Commission (1964–66). It found that, as a result of the decisions taken after the Report of the Secondary Education Commission, there were at least four different patterns of schools and colleges in the country which may be stated as follows: (1) Kerala was the only State where the pattern of 10+2+3 had been adopted, with the two-year stage being located in junior colleges; (2) The pattern of 10+2+2 prevailed only in Uttar Pradesh where a ten-year school was followed by a two-year intermediate course and a two-year course: for first degree; (3) The pattern of 11+3 prevailed in the Delhi Union. Territory and the State of Madhya Pradesh where. an eleven-year higher secondary school was followed by a three-year course for the first degree;. and