NSTU Correspondent :
A wave of criticism has erupted at Noakhali Science and Technology University (NSTU) following the administration’s recent decision to select Student Council members based on their Yearly Cumulative Grade Point Average (YCGPA). The decision, announced through a notice issued on June 12, has sparked strong reactions from students and now from faculty members as well.
Professor Dr. Abdul Kaiyum Masud of the Department of Business Administration has publicly expressed his disapproval of the policy, clarifying via a Facebook post that he has no involvement in the decision. He also voiced concern over the students’ unrest, calling it valid and understandable.
In his post, Prof Kaiyum wrote: “The university authority has issued a notice regarding the formation of the Student Council, which has clearly caused anxiety among students. As a faculty member, I feel compelled to speak on the matter after witnessing the growing concerns.”
He stated that the notice in question is based on a decision taken during the university’s 6th Regent Board meeting in 2008. However, he pointed out that the latest (58th) board meeting was held just last month indicating that the policy is not rooted in any recent administrative consensus.
“Why implement a decision from 2008 in 2025?” Prof Kaiyum questioned. “Back then, the university had only 4–5 departments, 20–30 teachers, and about 1,000–1,500 students. Today, NSTU has 31 departments, over 400 faculty members, and nearly 10,000 students. The rationale behind applying a 17-year-old policy in today’s vastly changed context is unclear.”
He also responded to speculations regarding his involvement: “Some have suggested that I or other faculty members were involved in drafting this decision. Let me be very clear: I have no connection to this circular and was not informed about it beforehand.”
Prof Kaiyum firmly rejected the notion that CGPA is a valid criterion for leadership. “Leadership cannot be measured or determined by CGPA. During the July movement, we did not see high-achieving students take to the streets. Rather, it was a group of brave young individuals who risked everything to stand against autocracy.”
He added that the 2008 policy stands in contradiction to the spirit of the July 24 student movement, which emphasized democratic participation and activism over academic scores.
Reaffirming his solidarity with the student body, he concluded: “I have always stood with the democratic and legitimate demands of students, and will continue to do so, InshaAllah. I am hopeful that the university administration will engage in discussions and resolve the issue soon.”
