Ever since Narayanamurthy made his comment about falling IIT standards, the newspapers are all abuzz with the news. There was Chetan Bhagat with his comment on Infosys being a bodyshop (we all know that) and the coaching centres defending their territory.
What Narayanamurthy said about falling IIT standards needs to be discussed dispassionately and objectively (both of which our media are incapable of. I am truly thankful that I do not have a television though I have promised my mother to get it before she makes her trip to Delhi. Though with the python/cobra being caught on the campus, I am doubtful whether she will agree to visit me).
Here is my assessment of the education system:
1. Our students cannot do any problem solving. They lack analytical ability, the ability to think-out-of -the-box, the enthusiasm to explore. Of course I might be biased given that my experience is limited to the Universities and to biological science. But over the past 7 years or so, I find that the students are unwilling to explore. I remember as a Ph.D. student, my advisor would ask me about an experiment in the morning. By evening it would have been done, data analyzed and the next experiment planned. And when something exciting happened, I would rush to his room to show the data. I don't find that with any of my students. It is very frustrating as a teacher to deal with this kind of apathy.
The problem of course starts at the school level where we encourage students to memorize the book and regurgitate in the examination. They are absolutely discouraged to think or to ask questions. By the time they are ready to enter University, all their natural curiosity has been killed.
2. Poor writing skills. Most of the students have very poor writing skills. This year, with my M.Sc. students, I experimented. I made them read a paper and write an abstract. I remember in school and as well as for GRE I had to do precis writing. It was compulsory. But my students were appalled. Some of them took 2 hours just to read a 5 page paper. I asked them did they read in general. No, they did not read newspapers (Okay, none of the family is allowed to point out how I read newspapers.). No, they did not read novels. No, they did not read anything other than the prescribed text book and the prescribed chapter. Obviously, their reading and writing abilities are poor. And with all the examinations moving towards objective type, writing ability is never tested.
3. Cracking the examination. The objective type examination calls for great skills in paper setting. Most of the coaching centres teach you how to crack the examination- they grill you on the basics, they tell you how to make guess work - and voila you can crack any examination. And if you give enough of these examinations, you will get through some or at least one. So as examiners/teachers, the greater onus is on us to make innovative question paper. Of course, I am articulating it here but I cannot even convince many of colleagues on this issue and neither can I control the quality of questions they prepare.
4. Our faculty. Let us be very honest. The quality of our faculty has gone down. Most of the institutes/universities hire their own students back. I can understand it if you are hiring the best of your students but what is unforgivable is that usually the very worst of them are hired back. The ones who will be the best nodder, like Wilmot Mulliner who was employed as a nodder at Perfecto-Zizzbaum, are the ones who are hired because they will never question any policy decision or indeed even put up any suggestions towards betterment of the system. Once a person is hired, there is no review, no pressure either to teach or to do research, no punishments, no rewards. So a faculty has no motivation to do any better. The great UGC lumps everyone together. Of course the institutes are one step better than the universities but that is about it. This is nonsense and absolutely unconducive either for cutting-edge research or first-class teaching. In fact, for those hardworking teachers it is demoralizing and demeaning.
So given the above constraints it is not surprising that IIT standards are falling. What is appalling is a complete lack of discussion on these issues. The scientific advisors to the Prime Minister are aware these problems but the ground situation has not changed. With great fanfare, they announced the formation of IISERs and 10 new Central University. I know the faculty who have been hired in some of these places and I have no hopes of these doing any great shakes either.
P.S. Bhatnagar awards are equivalent of India's Nobel Prize. The list is interesting (it is interesting every year and very predictable). But this year it is particularly interesting because the eligibility criteria were changed so that one of the awardees could be given the prize. After going through the list of awardees through the years, I have made my own list as to who is and who is not eligible for awards. It is not for public consumption but if anyone is interested, I can mail them the list.
What Narayanamurthy said about falling IIT standards needs to be discussed dispassionately and objectively (both of which our media are incapable of. I am truly thankful that I do not have a television though I have promised my mother to get it before she makes her trip to Delhi. Though with the python/cobra being caught on the campus, I am doubtful whether she will agree to visit me).
Here is my assessment of the education system:
1. Our students cannot do any problem solving. They lack analytical ability, the ability to think-out-of -the-box, the enthusiasm to explore. Of course I might be biased given that my experience is limited to the Universities and to biological science. But over the past 7 years or so, I find that the students are unwilling to explore. I remember as a Ph.D. student, my advisor would ask me about an experiment in the morning. By evening it would have been done, data analyzed and the next experiment planned. And when something exciting happened, I would rush to his room to show the data. I don't find that with any of my students. It is very frustrating as a teacher to deal with this kind of apathy.
The problem of course starts at the school level where we encourage students to memorize the book and regurgitate in the examination. They are absolutely discouraged to think or to ask questions. By the time they are ready to enter University, all their natural curiosity has been killed.
2. Poor writing skills. Most of the students have very poor writing skills. This year, with my M.Sc. students, I experimented. I made them read a paper and write an abstract. I remember in school and as well as for GRE I had to do precis writing. It was compulsory. But my students were appalled. Some of them took 2 hours just to read a 5 page paper. I asked them did they read in general. No, they did not read newspapers (Okay, none of the family is allowed to point out how I read newspapers.). No, they did not read novels. No, they did not read anything other than the prescribed text book and the prescribed chapter. Obviously, their reading and writing abilities are poor. And with all the examinations moving towards objective type, writing ability is never tested.
3. Cracking the examination. The objective type examination calls for great skills in paper setting. Most of the coaching centres teach you how to crack the examination- they grill you on the basics, they tell you how to make guess work - and voila you can crack any examination. And if you give enough of these examinations, you will get through some or at least one. So as examiners/teachers, the greater onus is on us to make innovative question paper. Of course, I am articulating it here but I cannot even convince many of colleagues on this issue and neither can I control the quality of questions they prepare.
4. Our faculty. Let us be very honest. The quality of our faculty has gone down. Most of the institutes/universities hire their own students back. I can understand it if you are hiring the best of your students but what is unforgivable is that usually the very worst of them are hired back. The ones who will be the best nodder, like Wilmot Mulliner who was employed as a nodder at Perfecto-Zizzbaum, are the ones who are hired because they will never question any policy decision or indeed even put up any suggestions towards betterment of the system. Once a person is hired, there is no review, no pressure either to teach or to do research, no punishments, no rewards. So a faculty has no motivation to do any better. The great UGC lumps everyone together. Of course the institutes are one step better than the universities but that is about it. This is nonsense and absolutely unconducive either for cutting-edge research or first-class teaching. In fact, for those hardworking teachers it is demoralizing and demeaning.
So given the above constraints it is not surprising that IIT standards are falling. What is appalling is a complete lack of discussion on these issues. The scientific advisors to the Prime Minister are aware these problems but the ground situation has not changed. With great fanfare, they announced the formation of IISERs and 10 new Central University. I know the faculty who have been hired in some of these places and I have no hopes of these doing any great shakes either.
P.S. Bhatnagar awards are equivalent of India's Nobel Prize. The list is interesting (it is interesting every year and very predictable). But this year it is particularly interesting because the eligibility criteria were changed so that one of the awardees could be given the prize. After going through the list of awardees through the years, I have made my own list as to who is and who is not eligible for awards. It is not for public consumption but if anyone is interested, I can mail them the list.
1 comment:
Narayanamurthy is not talking about falling IIT standards, he is talking about the falling "quality" of entering IIT students. Furthermore, he is not blaming the IITs directly for it; he is blaming the coaching classes. To be precise, he is quoted as saying "Thanks to the coaching classes today, the quality of students entering IITs has gone lower and lower."
This is highly contentious. Firstly, what is the evidence that the quality of entering IIT students has gone down over time? How exactly is the "quality" of an IIT student measured? Secondly, even if true, how do we know that it is the coaching classes that are responsible for the decline in quality? A third point is that coaching classes have been around at least since the 1970s: why did they start causing this "decline in quality" just now?
I don't like coaching classes myself but you can't just arbitrarily blame them without evidence. It is true that coaching classes are geared towards the IIT exam but the same point can be made about Indian schools in general who focus excessively on the school leaving exam. You make this very point in your post.
Narayanamurthy's idiocy seems to have been matched by Chetan Bhagat. So what if Infosys does body shopping? They are exploiting an available business opportunity and there is nothing wrong with it. The crack about body shopping reminded me of another idiot, Praful Bidwai, who claimed that India's IT workers are nothing more than "cyber-coolies." I felt like replying that coolies -- cyber or otherwise -- earn a living by doing honest work. Quite unlike Praful Bidwai and his ilk.
Regarding your comments on Indian students, please bear in mind that you are getting a "biased" sample. Most of the better students go abroad. This is true not only in Natural Sciences but also in Social Sciences. It is not surprising that a substantial fraction of those that you get at JNU are poorly trained and poorly motivated. The incentives do not help matters either. In the USA, if you do not work, your scholarship will get taken away. I would think that something like that is next to impossible to implement at many Indian universities.
I am not disputing your observations; I am just saying that one has to be careful in generalizing.
Post a Comment