The ambience within disregards basic science in favour of jobs in finance or software
The Indian Institutes of Technology were founded almost
five decades ago with the objective of providing technological
leadership to a new and resurgent India, driven by Jawaharlal Nehru’s
deep commitment to science-led development.
Whether
they provided technological leadership to India or not remains debatable
given the large numbers of their (under)graduate students who have
migrated abroad or shifted to non-technical careers.
India
has deviated substantially from the Nehruvian vision. The undergraduate
education at IIT and the academic culture inside the institutes are
being reshaped to an unprecedented degree by factors that operate at
points of entry and exit — the former related to the joint entrance
examination (JEE), and the latter arising from placement patterns
dominated by non-technical jobs.
Early start
The
core challenge at the entrance level has to do with the overt and
subtle effects of coaching factories. Children are often enrolled for
four to five years of coaching, starting as early as middle school. The
result is much greater burnout, loss of creativity, and eventual loss of
interest in science and technical subject matter, though coaching helps
overcome the multiple deficiencies of school teaching in India to some
degree.
However, the negatives become apparent when
students enter high school, and succeeding in competitive examinations
becomes an all-consuming goal. At one level, the sheer volume of work
leaves little time for other interests and the joys of a normal
adolescent life. The regimentation of solving large ‘banks’ of problems
leaves little room for creativity or curiosity.
Students
become adept at learning how to answer questions but are at a loss on
how to ask questions — especially ones that matter. The intense,
competitive pressure creates an atmosphere ripe for generating severe
anxieties, and often a deep sense of inadequacy and humiliation. To be
sure, this hyper-competitive experience is not different from the ordeal
that students in several other Asian countries undergo. Once they enter
the IITs, many students desire to rediscover normalcy in some sense.
The
initial question students confront is why and what should they learn.
First, unlike in the past, almost everyone plans to take a job and not
go to graduate school. Second, the jobs they aspire to are in finance,
consulting, software, and more generally, ‘managerial’ positions. These
jobs rarely have any subject-related technical content but their pay
packages are substantially higher than for technical jobs. There are far
fewer openings for core technical jobs.
Jobs and advice
Most
job offers come from business analytics firms and finance companies
where the role is to crunch numbers on spreadsheets. While companies in
these service sectors are usually satisfied with their IIT recruits,
students, especially ones with middling academic records, are happy to
do this, and usually enrol in an MBA programme later on. They have a
certain facility with maths (which IIT-JEE selects for), are tech-savvy,
and fairly quiescent as long as the job pays well.
Out
of the small number of students who end up taking core jobs in their
technical branch, most are often embittered about the lower paying — and
lower status — technical jobs. From a student’s perspective, there is
little point in mastering technical material relating to, say,
mechanical, chemical, or civil engineering, or even physics or
chemistry.
As students make their way through the
first year, they run into that great fount of established wisdom:
seniors. They rapidly pick up tips on what kind of jobs pay best, the
general irrelevance of scientific and technical material, how to
traverse the academic system with minimal effort and the importance of
participating in all kinds of personality development activities (the
crowning glory being a ‘student festival’ manager).
The
“greed is good” mantra that students pick up while dreaming about pay
packages also comes loaded with ‘legendary’ tales about how an alumnus
made so much money in his first job or which startup was sold for how
many millions to a bigger software company. These legends merely serve
as a rationalisation for shirking academic work and using unfair means.
As a result, students in their second year are writing business plans or
planning to do some project or short course in business school while
developing a disdain for learning technical subjects and basic
fundamental science material such as physics, chemistry, and
mathematics.
Underwhelming institutions
In the
end, only those few students who have, relatively speaking, not been
affected by this discourse retain the ability to continue building their
technical knowledge. Sadly, poor teaching and lacklustre faculty have
also contributed to this apathy.
Viewed from the
outside, the IITs have managed to retain a glow because every graduating
student finds a placement; students rarely remain unemployed. However,
that says more about the quality of the rest of Indian higher education
than the IITs. The reality is that these institutions are producing
engineers, using large amounts of public money, who rarely use the
knowledge acquired in their IIT education.
One could
argue that a large number of students graduating with engineering
degrees in the US also end up in non-technical fields, prized more for
their analytical skills than domain knowledge. However, unlike US
institutions, the IITs have shown very little will and the means to
tackle student disinterest and faculty apathy, and quell the entire
academic malpractices syndrome.
India’s policymakers
need to ask some hard questions. If the IITs are to regain an ambience
that generates a zest and excitement for learning and knowledge
creation, how many science and engineering graduates does India need in
the classical engineering disciplines? Can a more interdisciplinary
restructuring of the undergraduate programme reignite interest in
academic work?
Over the long term, the questions are
even harder: How does the country drastically overhaul primary and
secondary education, given that what happens upstream is bound to affect
the flow downstream? How does India build a more dynamic manufacturing
sector that will facilitate better use of the immense technical talent
the IITs were set up to provide?
This article is
by special arrangement with the Center for the Advanced Study of India,
University of Pennsylvania. The writer is a professor of chemical
engineering at IIT-Bombay and a Summer 2014 CASI visiting scholar
No comments:
Post a Comment