Student Support Systems

Direct feedback uses the AICTE-prescribed student feedback format, collected once every semester at department level through Google Forms or on paper, with all students encouraged to respond.

Responses are scored on a five-point mapping — Excellent 5, Very Good 4, Good 3, Poor 2, Very Poor 1 — across five parameters: classroom interaction, coverage and quality of course content, use of practical examples and ability to explain concepts, regularity and punctuality, and overall teaching effectiveness.

Indirect feedback comes from four independent directions, which is what makes the picture hard to game. The HOD records live feedback taken during the semester in the Academic Monitoring Log Book. The Principal, HODs and Discipline Committee members interact directly with students on campus. Officers appointed by CTE and GTU collect feedback independently from both students and faculty during official inspections. And CTE monitors academic activity continuously through CCTV.

Corrective measures follow a defined escalation. A faculty member receiving poor feedback is called before the HOD and advised to improve in the following semester. Those receiving average feedback are invited to a formal review discussion in which they are told what the feedback said and guided on the specific areas needing work — the SAR is explicit that the emphasis is continuous improvement rather than criticism.

Faculty with average feedback are then deputed to Faculty Development Programmes in the relevant subject area, which links the feedback loop directly to the FDP participation recorded in Criterion 5.

There is a reward side as well. Feedback feeds into a four-input appraisal — student feedback, faculty self-appraisal, the HOD's evaluation, and marks awarded by the Faculty Appraisal Committee chaired by the Principal — and higher marks are reflected in the individual's Performance Appraisal Report, the same PAR that governs career advancement under Criterion 5.6.

The Training and Placement Cell runs campus recruitment drives, industrial training and internships, skill-building through mock interviews, aptitude tests and personality development, industry interaction sessions, and continuing career counselling. Its infrastructure is a TPO office in the LRUC building, a seminar room in the Mechanical building for personal interviews, and an auditorium for large sessions.

The Finishing School is a state programme launched on 16 March 2017 by the Education Department through KCG. It began as a pilot in around 40 colleges with 35 trainers and has expanded to over 250 colleges with 125 trainers, backed by roughly ₹15 crore of government investment and having trained over 20,000 students. H Kumar's Education Institute, Ahmedabad is the agency assigned to GP Palanpur, appointed through GeM under three named KCG letters from November and December 2022.

RUSA supports the institute under Component 9, the equity initiative, covering access and quality, infrastructure modernisation, faculty development, curriculum enrichment and digital and inclusive education.

The placement cell is convened by Prof. N. V. Oza of Mechanical Engineering, with Mr. I. D. Chaudhary and Mr. J. B. Patel as co-conveners, assisted by departmental TPO members. Faculty coordinators and students from each department run pre-placement orientation, placement activity and database management.

Recruiter engagement is deliberately multi-channel rather than centralised: the cell invites recruiters by email, letter and telephone; faculty refer companies from their own contacts; placement coordinators visit companies in person; and departmental coordinators with their HODs liaise with industry at department level in addition to the central cell's work.

Named management teams are tabulated for all three cells — placement, Finishing School and RUSA.

The campus placement procedure is documented as a sequence with a named owner at each step: prepare the industry list, approach by email and telephone, obtain job-specific selection criteria from each company's HR, circulate to departmental TPO coordinators, who circulate to students and prepare eligible lists; arrange the interview date; publish results on the TPO notice board and by WhatsApp group; and collect offer letters, salary slips or ID cards from students who join.

The district placement fair has its own three-phase procedure — pre-placement (state decides date and venue, activates the monitoring portal, institutes form teams that visit industries across Banaskantha and nearby districts to collect vacancy data, students register on the portal), during (working at the host institute under the nodal officer), and post-placement (review, record keeping, uploading offer letters, account settlement, surrender of remaining grant, and industry feedback).

Institute-wide outcome data is tabulated by department and year, giving pass-outs, students placed, students in higher study, entrepreneurs and a percentage. For EC the figures run 3 pass-outs with 1 placed and 1 in higher study in 2024-25 (67%), 3 with 2 placed and 1 in higher study in 2023-24 (100%), 2 with both in higher study in 2022-23 (100%), 4 in 2021-22 (75%) and 5 in 2020-21 (60%).

Read across the institute the table shows something the EC-only figures do not: higher study, not employment, is the dominant destination for diploma graduates here. Civil is the clearest case — 15 of 17 pass-outs went to higher study in 2024-25, 16 of 16 in each of the two preceding years, 26 of 29 in 2021-22 and 32 of 34 in 2020-21, against at most one placement in any of those five years.