Following the Sports Excellence Admissions, IIT Madras has now become the first IIT to introduce the Fine Arts and Cultural Excellence (FACE) program in the undergraduate admissions process from the upcoming year (2025-26). This scheme aims to recognise and encourage students who have excelled in culturals and fine arts. Two seats per branch will be allotted in all B.Tech. and B.S. programs under this scheme, one female-only and the other gender-neutral.
To know more about the FACE program, visit: https://jeeadv.iitm.ac.in/face/
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of The Fifth Estate.
IIT Madras has been on a roll for the last few years, cementing its reputation as a trailblazer among institutions. It was the first IIT to establish a foreign branch and even introduced a sports quota for admissions last year. While the sports quota faced dissenting voices from within the community, the recent announcement of a quota for culturals has seen little to no reaction (perhaps due to the phasing out of students@smail?). Prima facie, the institute’s reasoning remains consistent: IIT Madras, India’s premier institution, is taking the lead in promoting sports and, now, arts.
This article aims to explore the good, the bad, and the ugly of this proposal (and no, I’m not talking about the upcoming Ajith film).
Even if we set aside the practical details of the quota, one can argue that it is good on a principled level. One of the key features of the Indian education system, particularly in college admissions, is that it is rarely holistic. Unlike other Western countries, where applicants are evaluated for their overall achievements – balancing academics and extracurricular activities – the system here is entirely objective, relying on performance in a single entrance exam on one particular day.
This leads to two major implications. First, the average age of preparation has shifted earlier and earlier, with coaching centers now targeting students as young as those in class 6. Second, a narrative perpetuated by both coaching industries and parents has emerged: to crack competitive exams, particularly JEE, one must sacrifice everything that doesn’t directly contribute to exam success. Activities like art, dance, or sports – seen as “distractions” – are sidelined, as students are pushed to give 100% of their focus to JEE preparation.
The impact of this mindset is clearly seen during Freshie Weekender, when the most common answer to “Did you participate in activity X?” is “I did until 9th grade, then I stopped.” This loss of formative years spent pursuing extracurricular interests is precisely what this initiative aims to address.
Even if the motive behind this quota is purely selfish and utilitarian – where excelling in cultural activities becomes a means to the coveted IIT Madras seat – it is still a positive change. The intention behind participating in culturals doesn’t matter as much as the fact that we are incentivizing students to pursue them. Doing so not only helps recognize these activities as valuable but also encourages more people to engage in them. And that, in itself, is a win.
Secondly, the addition of students through this quota to the GSB is inherently a good thing. Presumably, one of the other goals of this program is to give IIT Madras a competitive advantage at Inter IIT Culturals, allowing the contingent to better realize its potential.
There are two ways this can happen. First, through the inclusion of skilled participants – this benefit is obvious. But secondly, and one cannot stress this enough, culturals at any event are rarely a one-person effort. Many of those who participate in culturals are doing so for the first time, and as we know, enthu is all you need. Having experienced and talented individuals on the team can tap into that enthu and significantly elevate the performance of those around them.
Additionally, the knowledge transfer that will inevitably occur can further uplift other members. This unique advantage created by the program has the potential to translate into better outcomes across the board, not just for the contingent but for the cultural ecosystem as a whole.
However, certain areas of the actual implementation may warrant a second look.
The first observation is the substantial difference between the evaluation criteria for the sports quota and the cultural quota. The sports quota was far broader regarding what achievements contributed toward selection. It used a weighted points system for different podium finishes and levels of competition. This system was highly effective as it allowed individuals to showcase their achievements while also considering the difficulty and skill required.
In contrast, the cultural quota’s sole selection criterion appears to be whether an individual has received one of nine government-recognized awards. This approach is counterintuitive for two reasons.
Firstly, government awards are fundamentally arbitrary. One could excel in numerous forums and yet not receive such an award. In a country like India, where talent is abundant, securing a government award often comes down to luck or being noticed.
Secondly, these awards are highly limited in number, which means many skilled individuals may be overlooked. Under the current system, it doesn’t matter how many competitions a candidate has won – what matters is whether they’ve received an award. This rigid framework could exclude numerous talented individuals who might otherwise deserve a spot.
The system introduced for the sports quota is significantly fairer, as it allows individuals to present their achievements comprehensively. Cultural activities encompass a wide range of art forms, each with unique competitions, and this diversity must be accounted for in the application process. Boiling a person’s worth down to a single award is highly reductionist and might fail to reflect the candidate’s quality and potential fully.
The second observation is that the fields this quota extends are minimal. The selection criteria for most awards revolve around music, dance, and theatre, with a heavy emphasis on the first two. However, if the institute has decided to implement a fine arts and culturals quota, the author believes it should encompass the full breadth of cultural activities.
A simple glance at the Inter-IIT Culturals rulebook highlights the vast number of events and cups that can be won. The author would argue that other cultural events are equally challenging to excel in, requiring significant effort and dedication from individuals to perform well. Every cultural activity – or at least those directly relevant to Inter-IIT; that is, those that are widespread and have competitions across different levels – should have the opportunity to be included.
Take, for example, quizzing, a domain where participants must work tirelessly to hone their craft and perform at a high level. It’s also worth noting that IIT Madras has won the Quiz Cup at Inter-IIT for the last five years and has significantly contributed to IITM’s final standing.
Therefore, if the institute has decided to promote culturals, it should design the selection process to accommodate all cultural events under consideration. Limiting the scope to a few arbitrary forms of cultural activities excludes deserving fields and individuals and is a decision that should be revisited.
Another aspect of the policy that warrants consideration is how students admitted through this program will be able to sustain their excellence in their chosen cultural fields. Given the high bar for selection, it is reasonable to assume that their success thus far has been driven by three key factors: significant time investment, access to top-tier coaching, and well-equipped facilities. To continue excelling, they would likely require a similar support system. However, a closer look at the institute’s cultural ecosystem reveals a stark contrast to sports. In sports, every team has a dedicated coach, ensuring structured training and development. In culturals, however, mentorship is mainly decentralized, with clubs being entirely student-run. Self-improvement is almost entirely individual-driven, with seniors doubling as learners and teachers.
Additionally, most cultural clubs do not follow a fixed training schedule, with meeting cadences varying widely based on the club’s structure. Given these differences, one might question how students admitted through this quota can navigate and thrive under such conditions. Perhaps it is worth considering whether the institute should also bring in expert mentors for cultural domains, ensuring that these students can seamlessly continue their pursuit of excellence.
In totality, this move is a great step forward, with the potential to significantly enhance the cultural sphere within the institute and elevate the state of culturals at the collegiate level. However, whether it will fully achieve these ambitious objectives remains to be seen.
