How to improve India's higher education and research quality?
jayanta chatterjee
Tuesday, 04 November 2008 16:46 UTC
It’s a well established fact that India is going downhill in science education and research, despite of relative huge increase in funding and being the major technical manpower supplier for IT and global research community, successfully undertaking Moon mission and so on. I am wondering how we can regain our lost glory and improve on that so far our science education and research is concerned. I am mentioning some remedies below that came to my mind.
1. Reduce spending of public money on higher education and research for non-performing institutes and universities. Only teaching (without any productive research in form of quality publications or usable patents) does not justify huge spending by some so-called “elite” institutes/universities. All institutes/universities should be graded and judged as per their performance and public monetary support should depend on that. (UGC has started this but not with much cooperation from universities and so-called elite institutes and with very limited success so far).
2. Introduce strict accountability of public money for any research in any institute or university. And any research finding (mainly related to novel service or product) using public money must be mentioned in an open source (e.g unrestricted web site(s) for public access). If hundreds of corers of rupees are spent on “developing Bt- crop for insect resistance”, then public have the right to know what is the outcome from that huge spending of tax payers’ money. And if needed, a farmer or other researcher(s) should be able to access that information and more importantly the materials developed in such projects, as claimed by the researcher/institute.
3. Private institutes and universities must follow a minimum standard to give degrees.
4. Start “tenure track” system in Indian institutes/universities.
5. Increase spending substantially on primary and high school education (Both qualitative and quantitative). Increase the salaries of teachers at least at per with university lecturers and put stringent quality control while recruiting the teachers and introduce accountability among them. We must increase substantially the number of primary schools and quality of those and improve on physical infrastructures like school buildings, a minimum standard of school laboratory and library, a decent play ground, some internet connected computers in libraries etc.
6. Change the education system from the primary level (reduce work load, put more importance on physical activities, encourage original thinking etc). There should not be any form of evaluation (exam or so) till age 10 years (i.e till class 4 level). Subsequently the exam patterns should change and put more emphasis on original thinking and problem solving rather than emphasizing database-quiz type format. Basic education should be in mother tongue but English also should be compulsory from class 1.
7. Provide increased opportunities for students in rural and semi-urban India (in form of transparent information dissemination, transparent selection for fellowship/scholarships and recruitments).
For the long run:
Abolish reservation policy altogether. Provide quality primary and high school education free for all.
We have an obligation to give something back to our country which will have a long term impact on the whole society. These are few of my thoughts. Let’s start a vibrant discussion and let us know your opinion in this matter.
Updated 04 November 2008 16:54 UTC
-
Replies
Jump to resultsResults
-
User removed
Good morning -
These aspects are considered by the National Knowledge Commission during 2005 – 2008 under the guidance of noted Intellectuals of India covering all institutes of higher learning and a report is submitted to Prime Minister of India. This refers to policy matters, kindly visit NKC website and read at
. You may also like to exchange your valuable thoughts with Mr. Sam Pitroda, Chairman NKC; Prof. P. Balram Director IISc and Prof. Matto VC Uiversity of Jammu – they are members of NKC. Please enrich yourself with the latest information – developments before knocking their doors.Regards
Dr. R. Dayal Yadav
Director – Research
Study Group DIM. IUI -
Dear Jayanta Chatterjee,
I agree with your observations. I too have done an analysis of the current scenario in education and research and written about the status and what I believe pragmatic solution.
Please see:
Current Sci Vol 95 (4) Pg 448-449
Current Sci VOL. 92 (3) 269, Feb. 2007
Current Science Vol 87 (12) 1641, Enhancing Quality of research
-——-
There are suitable links in these articles which explain how science is being done in countries which innovate and win Nobel Prizes. I feel the root cause of the dismal situation is the quality of teachers (School education) and mentors (research). I have been advocating quantitative criteria for selection and appraisal of the faculty. I know of institutions which have professors without even a single publication in peer-reviewed journals. Mediocrity breeds mediocrity, be it school education or higher education. The worst affected are people in the rural sector.
For a role of mentors I would refer to an article in Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2008. 77:15–44 (Biography of Paul Berg (Nobel Laureate)and would make a specific reference to the school teacher: Sophie Wolfe, whose motivation led to three students going for science and winning Nobel Prizes.The readers can get in touch with me at:
omsharma53@yahoo.com
for publications referred to above or any other discussion on this issue. Hopefully, the sustained campaign would provide solutions.
Regards
Om
-—-
Om P Sharma, PhD
Scientist-in-Charge
IVRI
Palampur -
Dear Dr. Chattrejee,
The solutions that you suggest look pretty fine and in tune with how the things are done in the developed world.However, I do not agree with your expression:
“Private institutes and universities must follow a minimum standard to give degrees”The expression “must” would not do. Private institutions (with few exceptions) have become an industry. They would follow standards if they are compelled to do NOT otherwise. We used to believe that degrees are to be earned but now unfortunately degrees can now be “purchased”.
The most basic thing is the school/college teaching and research mentorship. These three are the key guys who would make the difference. All of us know that many things other than merit come into play while recruiting faculty. A threshold of quantitative criteria are a must. I would reiterate for the current scenario:
Mediocrity breeds Mediocrity. In many institutions mentors are alloted on the basis of seniority rather than the choice of the student. Very often this NIPS the TALENT in the BUD. School education in science is also insipid. The existing school faculty is not in a position to cope up with the revised/advanced syllabus. I guess there are seminars on these issues but hardly anything gets implemented with a mission. A movement for attaining excellence is the need of the hour with the same enthusiasum as that of the bloggers on this website. I am optimistic, postive and crusader.
Please go on with the Nobel Mission.Om Sharma
IVRI Palampur (HP)
omsharma53@yahoo.com -
Dear Jayant, Yadav and Sharma
Thanks for writing your views. I am the person who is always with system and try to improve the system. It doesn’t mean I do not understand the weakness of system. In other words I consider my nation as my home, if their is problem we try to improve because it is responsibility of every family member to improve. I have seen at my institute most of our scientist are sincere and wish to improve system. The question is how to improve system at individual level. I wants to know views of other colleagues on how scientists may contribute in building better nation. I agree with Jayant that we can improve the ystem if we realise that their is problem in system. I also wants to know views of colleagues “how they are contributing to system” learning from examoles is easy than reading books. -
User removed
System of India are complex but constitutional inputs and amendments have inspired sincere individuals to act in favor of it. However, as we know, so long there are cunning people around us this system will be maligned equally from time to time – thus corruption. Corruption can’t be rooted out but it can be controlled like that of our hairs and nails. True, we don’t have numbers in academic institutions or administrative wing to take the position of such barbers. So a coordinated effort is a must. Such efforts can be initiated only from a platform where we are employed or destroyed. Well, before initiation of this discussion I would like to put forward three message from three gentlemen. Mr. Shiv Khera writes on the cover page of his famous book, You Can Win – “Winner don’t do different things. They do things differently”. Mr. R. Ramanathan refers an incident in his book Who Is Kalam refering a situation where Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam takled when he was asked to translate a report from English to Hindi by Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav, the then Cabinet Minister and boss of Dr. Kalam. Dr. Kalam learned Hindi over night just to put his signature in Hindi. Mr. minister understood the very sense following which Dr. Kalam placed his salute before his boss.Mr. Jeffery A. Krames writes on page no. 59 in his famous book “The Rumsfeld Way” – In business, although it is more responsive than government, things don’t just happen by command …It is helpful if employees understand what the direction is and why. To a great extent success will depend on their execution.
Regards
-
Thank you Dr Shamra.
“We used to believe that degrees are to be earned but now unfortunately degrees can now be “purchased”. Unfortunately, this trend is here in USA as well, although the quality of US customer is a bit better (academically). In this era of corporatization, education and research are not spared. In a recent survey, it has been shown that more than 75% of students in three Ivy League US universities, Harvard, Princeton and Stanford are from rich and powerful families in US and across the world. Here people are very worried about their kids’ university education, not for high standard of academic eligibility but for high tuition fee. By the way, huge increase in Indian students in US universities indicates the level of corruption in India.
According to some recent articles, US research and technology development is fast loosing its edge. Now US higher education and research is dominated by mediocrity and it all started during early 80s. Some articles also predict the end of US domination as world’s scientific powerhouse will end in not-so-distant future and then there will be no science “superpower” anymore (NATURE. 2008. 545: 412-413). Currently US education and research organizations like NSF and NIH are very worried about it and they are trying to introduce measures to control the damage, e.g by enforcing faculties to “mentor”. Currently PhD and Postdocs in US are treated just as a technical manpower (in lay man’s term, “bonded labor with some knowledge of research techniques”)(SCIENCE. 2005. 308:717-718; SCIENCE. 2007. 317. 1016).
Overcrowding of students from countries like India and China is making the situation worse. As you rightly said, “mediocrity breeds mediocrity”. US after 80’s is a classic example for that. European and Japanese researchers stopped coming and settling in US since last decade or so (a few retired EU faculties do come and continue in some universities but the general trend is not that).
As students from developed countries are less interested in careers in science education and research, India (and a few other third world countries like China) has become a major supplier of technical manpower worldwide. But majority of those students/technicians are neither qualified nor interested in a career in research. But they don’t have any other alternative. In India, science education (now in IT as well) is not a choice but a necessity to get a job and then go abroad. No wonder majority of parents force their kids to take science after passing their 10th grade. During PhD and postdoc tenures, these people just lend their hands and carry out experiments designed and analyzed by their supervisors and get first author papers. Majority of such people with first author papers in high profile journals and/or those who boasts of working with some high profile faculties there in US/EU invariably lose their productivity when they take up faculty positions in India (and abroad). Many of such “scientists” occupying high positions in Indian universities and institutes have heavy weight degrees from high profile universities in US or Europe. Many of the “scientists” involved in medical malpractice and crime also have such degrees.
The point I am trying to make here is: we must not blindly follow US system to reform our own system. India has its own strengths and weaknesses. We must carefully consider those before formulating any policy. -
Some of my friends asked me to mention the source of “In a recent survey, it has been shown that more than 75% of students in three Ivy League US universities, Harvard, Princeton and Stanford are from rich and powerful families in US and across the world”. I could not find the actual article published in either Nature or Science. But here is one:
The “Big Three” (Hardavr, Yale and Princeton) are notoriously lacking one of [diversity’s] most critical dimensions: class diversity. In a study of the percentage of low-income students in 2000 (as measured by the proportion of federal Pell Grants – need-based awards that do not have to be repaid and make up the bulk of many poorer students’ aid) at the nation’s leading universities, the Big Three were found to be among the nation’s least economically diverse schools. Of the 40 universities studied, Harvard and Princeton ranked 39th and 38th respectively, with Yale at 25th. While the three top universities in economic diversity were all public institutions (the University of California at Los Angeles, UC-Berkeley, and UC-San Diego), the next two—the University of Southern California and New York University—were private. And one university in the top 10, California Institute of Technology, is among the most selective private institutions in the nation."1”More recently, Yale,2 Princeton3 and Harvard4 5 instituted no-loan financial aid policies which provide students with need-based aid from private funds held by the universities. This enables greater attendance from the poorer classes than Pell Grant statistics would indicate, since many recipients of university grants do not receive Pell Grants.
1. Karabel, Jerome (2005-09-04). “The Chosen Few”, Boston Globe.
2. Arenson, Karen W. (2008-01-15). “Yale Plans Sharp Increase in Student Aid”, New York Times.
3. http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2001/02/05/news/2213.shtml
4. Rimer, Sara; Finder, Alan (2007-12-10). “Harvard Steps Up Financial Aid”, New York Times.
5. http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2007/12.13/99-finaid.html -
User removed
Learning from examples is better than reading the books – our contribution.
We started our journey on 4th November 2000 under the mentorship of Dr. Kalam. Prior to this there were more than fifty debates placed on Indiavotes.com over a period of one year following noted intellectuals of India including Justice Dr. Anand. The last debate was – Does India have a future? Yes, the conclusion said but it wanted to look into the Systems of India. Following this notion we initiated our program on Systems of India en route development. Our mission was divided in two parts – mission mode approach and mission mode project. Till we got 60 staunch Indian Intellectuals it was approach and later on it became project. The tw o initial national observers were Dr. Raja Ramanna, who was known to me since my university days, and Shri J. N. Dixit, to whom I was introduced through an interaction organised by India Today. To cut the story short Intellectuals University India was declared on 24th June 2008. Till date we have connected indigenus intellectuals from 130 countries under the blessings of Shri Somnath Chatterjee, Hon. Speaker of Lok Sabha. There are sixty dignitaries on board as Authority – H. E. Madam President; Patron IUI- Lok Sabha Speaker; Adviser – Chief Justice of India; Chief Mentor – Shri Mohammad Hamid Ansari, Hon. VP India; forty mentors from forty different fields whose personality and personal quality have been studied over a period of three years; Counselors; International Technical Advisers and Human Engineers. Each one of them are institutions in themselves besides discharging their duties as Indian or India related professionals. Entire activities are carried out under the lens of CVC keeping all records under the scrutiny of Secretary to the President of India, Secretary General Rajya Sabha, Secretary General Lok Sabha and Secretary General Supreme Court of India. Details can be had from them. However we don’t allow any kind of publicity from any platform other than the operating systems placed and controlled under the joint vision of Parliament of India and Supreme Court of India. We are mapping all 610 districts of India and collecting experience from district administation for ploting observation, analysis and national action plan for filling up the gaps in the systems. Intellectuals of India are the movers and shakers in this mission but only those who have clear observation, straight analysis and ready made plan for action to be mooted only through the govt. agencies and agencies working for enriching the democratic systems of India. Study Group DIM is R & D wing of IUI. Their activity includes Administrative Reforms. Development and Advancement under the lens of CVC and full control of Parliament and supreme Court of India.
Regards
Dr. R. Dayal Yadav
Director – Research
Study Group DIM. IUI -
Thank you Dr. Yadav and Raghava. I know there are still few people in India who seriously think about the country and still dream to reform its systems. But common people, general students cannot catch hold of those people when they are in higher position and those who have not achieved any position of power are not recognized by his/her peer and generally are keep themselves aloof from others. It’s mainly the mediocre, corrupt and highly vocal people who rule there. In fact I was so disgusted when I was in India (during my school days and till PhD in some so-called famous institutes in India) that I do not think that I’ll ever apply for a position in any Indian govt institute or university. Unfortunately I never got the opportunity to meet people like Dr Kalam. Indian system does not encourage people who ask questions, demand accountability. Sycophancy is the rule of the day. No wonder Dr Kalam is replaced. I know the pain of working under a dishonest, mediocre but highly powerful people. Honest people gradually removing themselves from others (in society and in research) to keep their dignity and morality intact and to themselves. But it’s heartening that some people are trying. In India reform has to be top-down, as we have destroyed the basic fabric of the society and the whole governance became person-centric. If the person in-charge is good, the system functions else it’s as good as non-functional, which is the case for majority of our democratic institutions. In reality, there is NO system in India, it’s all person based.
-
User removed
Yes, sycophancy is the rule of the day – even Dr. Kalam had declared Dr. CNN Rao as the third best nanotechnologist of the world for which he was laughed at. But we corrected him later and now Dr. Rao is back to his bench as one of the best scientist of the country but as nanoscientist with crystal engineering or solid state chemistry base. We must not forget to correct people when they are wrong – truth is that there are very less number of people like you in India – but we prefer to request you to place your words in a little bit soft manner – though we don’t mind in present form too.
Regards
Regards
Results
-
