... The IISER solution:
The establishment of the IISERs is noteworthy because it attempts to correct a key misguided policy of post-independence India that separated teaching from research. Under that policy, excluding a few exceptions, Indian undergraduate education took place in colleges, post-graduate education in universities, and research in institutes. Moreover, driven by a desire to push the country quickly to the frontier of science, India’s government allocated resources disproportionately to the institutes at the expense of the colleges and universities. The result, not surprisingly, was dismal. Teaching without the excitement of original research created dull and disheartening intellectual environments in colleges and universities, thereby discouraging all but the most dedicated from pursuing careers in science. Research without teaching deprived researchers in institutes of daily interaction with the bright young minds that keep creative instincts active. In that environment, research became largely imitative and sterile. Today, India’s universities – after taking into account those who pursue research abroad – do not graduate enough motivated students for the research institutes in the country. Similarly, the institutes almost exclusively offer doctoral programs and produce fewer scientists who can teach in colleges and universities and create a vibrant culture of research.
7 Comments:
The UGC has tried to alter this by making it mandatory for all college lecturers to get a PhD if they wanted to get to be professors. However, this has led to the most appalling kind of Maggi noodle research. I truly believe that this kind of research wastes national resources. It must not be allowed. It is far better to have college lecturers who have not done any research than to have this surge of Maggi PhDs
LS
Absolutely, couldn't agree with u more. Bound to result in a massive surge of recycled phDs - soon India will have the largest number of phDs in the world!!
I think it is a paranoid concern reg. overproduction of Ph.Ds. If there is a massive number of Ph.Ds teaching so be it. Whats the big deal between Master/UGs teaching as opposed to say a Ph.D ?
But I guess every institution needs to reward (for research work and publications) original work done by a subset of those Ph.Ds. And I guess this is the precisely function of objective peer review by funding agencies as to which research has to be promoted. If you increase the number of people doing quality work the economic constraints of funding should squeeze out the lower quality research funding. There will be a tug of war for funding but I guess it is not too bad....
I agree that over time, the funding economics will weed out most of the poor research(except the nephews/cousins of the review board members)
However, the modus operandi of college lecturers is as follows--
You register for a PhD at your University. Choose a suitable guide. He says "dont worry I will see to it you get a PhD". Then after two or two and a half years, the "guide " gives you a thesis(for a consideration)...perhaps even bound and ready- and voila! you are Dr XXX.
why do you have to worry about funding ?
This modus operandi seems to have been exported too
http://writing-services.org/
Agree with L absolutely. What's the point in having "guides" and "PhDs" like these? Unfortunate, that's the way we are heading to!
I would like to add to my previous comments----
Of course all college lecturers getting their PhDs are not doing it this way. Some of the FIP research scholars I have met are really serious researchers, But there are a good number of those who get these instant PhDs.
There is lack of vision is why Phd is required even for Lecturers. Phd holders are now dumped in large scale on foreign resources and being mistreated. The first thing to develop may be economic policies where PhD holders have well defined roles before massively producing them. Already thousands of Indian youths are wasting their energy in so called (in)famous competitive exams of India.
Post a Comment