Specific goal and specific evaluation parameter should be the basis of development for all Indian Institutes.
B. B. Goel
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 12:39 UTC
India has so many national institutes and central universities but almost none have any clear mandate (no sane person really cares what is mentioned in its websites or published in annual reports). Few Institutes had some clear mandates but their research activities, proud showpiece publications are not much related to their stated objectives as mentioned when they were established. Sometime ago VC of influential universities like JNU used to either get a brand new Institute of his own or become a federal minister of science and technology. That time politicians used to think that scientists and academicians are very learned person and they only can meet our scientific and technological requirements. But since last few years politicians do not think that way. They realized that they (politicians) can not do worse job as compared to those “scientists”. Now they do not want to waste any ministerial post for those people while there are so many aspiring candidates to satisfy in this era of coalition politics. Till few years ago if you were the DBT chairman, your hubby will have no problem to have his new Institute, your son will get an “international faculty” position in Delhi Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology. Many such institutes recruit on the basis of what those founding father (of such Institutes) desires. Many of us assumed that they definitely recruited the best person as per their own experiences, as they were “honest” and “successful” scientists, as we know from Indian media. I assume they recruited as per academic record, publications, awards etc (“standard” set of rules, you know), although some people allege that representation of people from certain geographical area and specific institute/university is way above any logical explanation. Anyway, now evaluate those pet institutes, institutes like Jawaharlal Nehru Institute of Advanced Studies or NIPGR etc according to its performance. Surely nowhere near international standard. That’s the picture for majority of Indian Institutes. Why so? What went wrong? What India, as a country, achieved from the national recourses we spent on such institutes?
Will it not be prudent to set specific goals for each Institute? That goal should be set on the basis of INDIAN socio-economic requirements, not on the basis of what a faculty used to do in US or other countries. Do not let the faculties throw all over the places and produce nothing but some scattered publications. Monitor their progress on the basis of that mandate. Remunerate ALL the faculties (including Director) and other staff on that basis. Set proper punitive measures if they fail to meet the mandated goal of the Institute. More remuneration you ask, more responsibility you need to take and in case of failure you will be punished at maximum level. Recruit the director on that basis and then give him total freedom to recruit. Every person may have his/her own criteria on judging research and scientific potential. Let him exercise him personal thinking and hold him accountable for his actions. It is useless to device golden rules to select new faculties while not having any such criteria for existing faculties and above all for the director who is responsible to develop and maintain the team, work culture and overall responsibility for all the policies of that organization. If some productive scientist or any other staff think that s/he is being unreasonably penalized for no fault of him/her, s/he will get out of that institute to save his financial and career development.
This is my idea. Let others suggest if that is the better way to approach to improve Indian research or if they have other alternatives. Specific goal and specific evaluation parameter should be the basis of development for all Indian Institutes.
Updated 11 August 2009 14:58 UTC
-
Replies
Jump to resultsResults
-
Anonymous
There are long standing allegations that Indian politicians promote only those scientists who never oppose higher authority. They are ready to tell even lies in scientific matters and get national awards. The recent row over Pokhran-II is shedding more light into that matter. It also giving some credibility to long standing allegations that once a person achieves a single feat in a specific area, we and our system put him/her above any criticism in any other field as well. This is true for any profession, for any person in India.
Sethna slams Kalam, says Pokhran II done in haste
“I fully support Santhanam and I stand by his statement that India needs more nuke tests to be conducted,” Sethna, the guiding force behind India’s first nuclear test in 1974, said.
Sethna now in his eighties suggested that Kalam, who was heading the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) when Santhanam was coordinating Pokhran-II, suggested that the missile man was no qualified authority to rubbish his former colleague’s claim. But Sethna said “former president APJ Abdul Kalam was not a scientist and Santhanam is a physicist and he knew what he was talking”.
“What does Kalam understand about physics? He can say anything as he was the President and a politician.” “What Santhanam said was absolutely correct,” he added. -
Is it not very surprising that India is doing great only in those areas where utmost secrecy is maintained, where independent verification is not possible? If we are really talented then we should do as good in other areas of science and technology; in basic research, in civilian technology development (not application oriented techniques like IT solutions), in consumer electronics and other market oriented products. This culture of deceit and falsification has penetrated deep into our scientific ethos. Only those people flourish in Indian science who has accepted this culture. In other words, our self-serving political ethics have established itself deep into our scientific community.
-
Anonymous
The usual Indian politics in action to prevent cleaning some of the dirt in our higher education sector. Too many powerful people, huge lucrative business opportunities are at stake in these private deemed universities.
Check the report in Times Of India: Cloud over review of deemed varsities . -
Anonymous
This news is published in a newspaper today. According to the news, the newly appointed VC of Chennai University, Mr G Thiruvasagam has proposed to start a new MA course on current chief Minister of Tamilnadu state, Mr M karunanidhi (along with a couple of other local political personalities).
As the V-C of Bharathiar University, Thiruvasagam had initiated translation of Karunanidhi’s works into English last year. His loyalty towards the ruling party and its leader gave him the plum position as VC of one of the oldest and most reputed (?) universities in India.
This has crossed all previous examples of sycophancy and cronyism; and once again proved how our higher education is governed and by what type of people. -
Anonymous
Now it’s becoming clearer why people like CV Raman or other Tamil like recent Nobel prize winner Prof Ramakrishnan always go out of that state to do something meaningful in life. Such incidents have not fallen from blue sky but the stage was being set since long with so-called pro-dravidian (pro-lower caste) movement. Almost all political parties in that state thrive on such distorted version of social justice. Tamilnadu has highest percentage of reservation in education and employment for long; more in % and longer than Bihar, another very backward state in India. Now that menace has spread all over the country but yet to reach the level TamilNadu has achieved.
Talking about development in India, in higher education, in research! It need eiethr too much natvity and ignorance about ground level situation there or exceptional ability to hide facts and ability of positive thinking! -
Anonymous
Even Indian Supreme Court judges are not following internationally accepted standard for “conflict of interest” ( 1), how on the earth Indian scientists can be forced to follow the same? This is a huge source for corruption and nepotism in Indian science. People, who are in-charge to enforce and deliver justice want themselves to make sure that they are not forced to follow the same rule they are making for others ( 2).
The more depressing is only 27% of RTI applications are honored. It will be real hard, although not impossible, to make our system more transparent and accountable. -
Anonymous
Even IITs are now trying to cover up and/or blocking irregularities in IIT entrance exam ( 1).
-
Anonymous
An eye opener.
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091109/full/462152a.html -
- 39 Thanks for sharing the link, however the character Shiva Ayyadurai him self looks very illusive …more comments and discussions are at
-
Anonymous
He is not that elusive (from MIT news) : http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/east-west-0917.html
Results
-
