Indian Education System

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 14 Jun 2008 22:29

thats because nursing and healthcare admin added 500K jobs last year.

everything else is in steep decline.

I agree for many people(including me) loss of H&D would be very painful
in such a case and I wouldnt reveal too much to folks back home.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 14 Jun 2008 22:40

While growing up in the 1960s Hyderabad Public School Begumpet, was the abode of Nawabi children, and big Lalas sons, wonder what is happened to that institution? Used to prepare for Cambridge and other English institutions

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 14 Jun 2008 23:24

are others seeing similar dropoffs in NSF and NIH funding lately in the
non ivy-league state run univs ?

There has been a significant cut in DOE budgets for particle physics even for national labs forget two bit universities. There is a voluntary furlough of two days every month in additional to letting go of people at places like Fermilab, Stanford's SLAC etc.
Money is tight for conference travel and other fluff. Even the one time International travel support each year touted by IITs to attract young faculty is beginning to look attractive to some on shaky grounds. After the dot com bust in 2000 there was a such a deluge of young engineers who have filled the chairs at IITM too. So there is a precedence and do not be surprised to see many more headed back.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 15 Jun 2008 05:09

Bade wrote:
are others seeing similar dropoffs in NSF and NIH funding lately in the
non ivy-league state run univs ?
Money is tight for conference travel and other fluff. Even the one time International travel support each year touted by IITs to attract young faculty is beginning to look attractive to some on shaky grounds. After the dot com bust in 2000 there was a such a deluge of young engineers who have filled the chairs at IITM too. So there is a precedence and do not be surprised to see many more headed back.

From hearsay, this is what I can figure about NSF funding level in engg. NSF funding has always been a beatch, as in, one writes 10-15 grants and gets funded one means he/she should feel happy and lucky. From that pov, things have nt gotten so terribly bad that its all doom and gloom. Not yet. It will soon get there. With the downturn in the economy, ppl in the lurch who have been through a simiilar downturn in the early 90s tell me that it will get infinitely worse next year before picking up. This case about NSF money is a ring-a-ring-a-roses. One year, its down and the next its up. At least in EE.

NSF funding cannot be a principal reason for someone to shift back to India. Definitely not EE. OTOH, a new kid on the block getting pissed with the system and wanting to not fight the evil battles that folks have to fight through to get tenured may get sick and tired of the BS and would want to be the king of the forest back in India. That king of the forest is also a myth cos even if its the case for a while, it may NOT be for ever. Ppl are coming back and soon the king will become a praja. And that plus the fact that there are lots more PhD grads out here and there are not many fac positions for a 1-1 fit. Even a good school PhD + strong recos + up and coming field + lotsa maskaa from gurujis aint fetching jobs in this day of AA and political correctness, so yea there are lotsa good people out here who just cant find a job. So slowly but steadily, fundamental research in EE is shifting back to Asia and other places that can lure good people. But there is enough critical mass here to sustain this crap here for a while, even if NSF says fck off to every grant request.

There will be more chaos in the coming year. I am already hearing that a few schools stopped their fac searches midway through April!! Florida is one such school. It has been that way at UF for 2-3 yrs, but this year they made some random nonsense straight outta Harry Potter books. Lets leave it at that. But recession hits STEM fields first before kicking everyone else. You will see more students wanting to do grad school to tide away the time. And it will all be de javu all over again.

And Bade, IITs dont offer to pay for one international travel per year, but one in 2 yrs!!! {TIFR is a different beast though, there may be more scope for travel money there.} With so many international conferences, say 3-4 "dont want to miss-ones" a year, thats a pittance for anyone to shift back. At least things have nt gotten so bad in EE yet, maybe physics. There are lotsa loopholes though, so 1-2 per year is in the realistic realm. I ve seen folks from IISc and IITs in at least 1 or 2 conferences or heard them being seen. Lots more students travel these days than it ever used to be. When I was there, travel used to be a farce, let alone publishing in international conferences. Now, I see a huge contingent of IISc folks at the flagship conferences in my field and most are at resort-like locations (meaning super-expensive), just to lure the oldies/big-tickets to show their face.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 15 Jun 2008 07:23

Singha ji>> I have run into many a MBBS guys doing DBA jobs in massa land

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 15 Jun 2008 07:53

the guy I was referring to is a tenured prof in some bio related field in a large
publicly funded univ inside the UC group. must be in his mid 40s. he is not a
newbie postdoc struggling to find a seat at the high table, he has been
seated at the table for sometime.

perhaps he also has other reasons....

Eshwar · Post by **Eshwar** » 15 Jun 2008 21:24

The three major sources of funding for university research are NSF, NIH, and DARPA. And sometimes you can get funding from NASA if the project is relevant. The funding for NSF has certainly reduced under the Bush admin. However, I have come to know that NIH and DARPA has a lot of funds to support research in relevant areas. I heard that the increase in NIH funding is greater than the whole of NSF budget (did not confirm this independently). In order to get funds from these two many profs have started to readjust (or spin) their research to topics which look relevant to these agencies. There is also funding coming in from the corporate world. I guess they get tax benefits by providing research grants to univs. However, they are limited, possibly a single Phd student for 25% RA types. I have seen many profs get CAREER grants from NSF lately. Not a bad situation for NSF, but its getting worse rapidly.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 16 Jun 2008 11:35

Revised income ceiling for OBC creamy layer by June 30

NEW DELHI: In a move that could end the debate over classification of creamy layer among the OBCs, the National Commission for Backward Classes is expected to give its recommendations to the government by June 30 on the revised income ceiling for their eligibility for reservation.

Acting on a government directive, the NCBC has obtained suggestions from commissions from 20 states on the income ceiling of the creamy layer and is in the process of getting similar views from other eight states.

Most of the state commissions have recommended revision of the income limit for creamy layer classification from Rs 2.5 lakh to Rs 4 lakh to Rs 6 lakh.

The recommendations were made at a conference of the NCBC and state backward commissions held here recently.

The conference was attended by representatives of 20 state commissions. At least 40 per cent of the representatives of the state commissions had not come with official recommendations and have promised to get back, NCBC member Abdul Ali Azizi said.

Azizi said the views of those states, which could not attend the meeting, will be taken via correspondence while others have been directed to send their officials' recommendation to NCBC by June 25.

The NCBC will be sending its recommendation to the central government by June 30 on the basis of views that are available by that date.

The recommendations will help the government to define the income limit for the creamy layer among the OBC, setting at rest a debate on the issue.

The creamy layer among the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) on the basis of annual income was defined in 1993 with the ceiling fixed at Rs one lakh. It was later revised to Rs 2.5 lakh in 2004.

The creamy layer cannot claim benefits, including reservation in jobs and professional courses, that are available to the OBCs.

At the recent conference involving the NCBC and the state backward commissions, Karnataka demanded ten-time rise in the ceiling from Rs 2.5 lakh to Rs 25 lakh, while Madhya Pradesh demanded that it be fixed at Rs 10 lakh, four times more from the existing level.

Most of the other states recommended a ceiling of Rs 4 lakh to Rs 6 lakh.

Some of the members also suggested that properties that yield no income should not be included for deciding creamy layer. This includes real state properties, which give no earning and the agriculture land, where no cultivation is taking place.

"Things could have been completed much more smoothly had the state representatives come out clear on their stands and attended the meeting in full capacity," sources in the NCBC said.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 16 Jun 2008 11:50

IBN doesn't care about rest of the 8 general category students. 20 IITians ask to leave doesn't make an eye catching and sensational headlines

IIT-Delhi sacks 12 SC/ST students, under probe

New Delhi: The Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, (IIT-Delhi) may be heading for a messy quota controversy.

The National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has sought an explanation from the director of the institute after 12 undergraduate SC/ST students were asked to leave because of poor performance.

The 12 students have told the commission they were discriminated against and instead of being given special coaching they were asked to attend extra curricular activities.

A student has alleged that a professor at the institute told him said he wasn't doing well in his studies because he was from the SC/ST category.

“We will investigate the students’ allegations and then make a decision,” said Buta Singh, chairperson of the SC/ST Commission.

The institute’s deputy director, Prof Bijendra Jain, rejected the allegations and insisted that the students were asked to leave solely because of their poor performance.

“If certain students cannot perform then we cannot have them,” said Jain. “The commission has the authority to seek an explanation from IIT-Delhi why so many SC/ST students have been asked to leave.

Interestingly, the institute has never asked so many students to leave because of poor performance. “Unfortunately, this year the number of students who have been asked to leave because of poor performance is little to large. Generally, the number is five to eight but the total number of students who have been asked to leave is around 20. It is unfortunate that 12 of those 20 students belong to the SC/ST,” said Jain.

Jain said IIT-Delhi does its best to help all students in their studies. “Before they enter IIT-Delhi, SC/ST students receive coaching in Physics, Chemistry and Maths. At the end of every semester and sometimes in the middle of semesters we monitor the progress of all students.”

The institute had in fact lowered the benchmark for SC/ST students. The 12 students who complain of harassment refused to speak on camera but said they and the 500 other SC/ST students of IIT-Delhi would be forced to take to the streets if the commission fails to help them.

This is nice way to hold whole country ransom. Take to streets and create trouble for everyone.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 17 Jun 2008 10:24

Vina/singha this one is for you guys. I remember either one of you or both of you expressed surprised when you guys heard about ridiculous cut offs for IIT.

7% in maths can get you through IIT-JEE

NEW DELHI: If you score 7% in your Class XII mathematics paper, you fail. But if you score 7% in your IIT-JEE mathematics paper, you can still make it. That's exactly what happened in the 2007 entrance exam, an RTI query has revealed.

The top 7,202 general category candidates who qualified in the 2007 joint entrance examination, with an aggregate cutoff of 206 marks, included those whose score in one of the subjects was as low as 12 (mathematics), 22 (physics) and 18 (chemistry).

Given that the maximum marks in each subject were 162, the scores of some of the qualified candidates in JEE 2007 work out to 7%, 14% and 11% in the three subjects.

These details have come to light from the fresh data supplied last month under RTI by IIT-Bombay on JEE 2007, which had been organized by it. If such poor performance in individual subjects could not stop candidates from making it to the all-India rank (AIR) list, it was thanks to a radical change in the 2007 examination in the procedure for calculating subject-wise cutoffs.

As TOI first reported on March 17, the change resulted in single-digit cutoffs: 1 in mathematics, 4 in physics and 3 in chemistry, making a mockery of the purpose of ensuring that the selected candidates displayed a certain minimum level of knowledge in every subject.

Under the procedure introduced in 2007, the cutoffs are pegged to the best marks obtained by the bottom 20% of the candidates in each subject.

The change was prompted by the embarrassment IIT-Kharagpur faced over its inability to explain before the Central Information Commission how it had arrived at the much higher cutoffs in the previous examination organized by it in 2006.

The latest disclosure made by IIT-Bombay belies the general expectation that, because of sheer competition, the relaxation in subject-wise cutoffs, which constitute the first screening of the candidates, would not compromise the quality of the intake.

Consider the case of the candidate who scored just 12 in mathematics, a subject crucial to all engineering branches, and yet managed to get rank 3,989 on the strength of his aggregate of 239 marks.

Another candidate who got merely 12 more in mathematics and 6 more in the aggregate, however, jumped 590 rungs higher in the AIR list: his rank 3,399 was, according to the latest counselling browser published by IITs, good enough to secure admission in 2007 in IIT-Kanpur and IIT-Kharagpur.

Despite the negative marking that is done for wrong answers, how can IITs justify the presence of such poor performers in the coveted AIR list?

N Venkataramani of IIT-Bombay, who was the vice-chairman of JEE 2007, told TOI: "Don't let these aberrations make you lose sight of the fact that an overwhelming majority of the selected candidates are the best in the country. Having changed the cutoff procedure on account of the problems that arose with the 2006 examination, we are closely reviewing the new system and will refine it as we go along."

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jun 2008 10:31

why are people so concerned with cutoffs. they start at the top and admit candidates until
all seats are exhausted. doesnt matter if the last guy into the gate has 10 or 20, he's
deserving among the pool who took jee.

I am not in favour of passing judgement on people's abilities solely on a exam score.
if seat is there, let him/her get in and try their best. some will make and some wont.

the DU journalists who laugh at the guy getting 10, 20, 15 in JEE how much do you
think they would get ?

laugh not at the climber, who is crawling up hand over hand on the rocky path.
feel pity for those who sit at the bottom and heckle him.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 17 Jun 2008 10:41

Sumeet wrote: ...

The admission for the SC/STs has been following the below logic.

Under the procedure introduced in 2007, the cutoffs are pegged to the best marks obtained by the bottom 20% of the candidates in each subject.

Given that the general category candidates has increased tremendously over the last few years, the bottom 20% has plummeted. Till the mid-90s or so, the bottom 20% used to be fairly decent. As in the SC/ST cutoff was fairly reasonable. Now that the quality of General category low AIRs has also gone down, there are many many more extremely lousy candidates from the SC/ST side. Most of them end up in the 1-year preparatory course wherein they get the needed help to do ok during the regular 4 year program. But then, there are also many many of those prep-course entering folks, who lack even the bare-basic foundations. And they are promptly sent off after the 1 year prep course. Some of them get sent off if they fail to maintain a CGPA of 4.0 or higher over a 2 semester period. They first get a warning and then they are out.

I see this as a systemic problem. Wherein both the quality of the GC candidates has also dropped very very badly. In fact, that is a bigger evil. I would nt be too surprised if the 12 of those who did nt make it to the degree were from this lower rung. This is a big problem cos these folks come with the GC tag and are expected to be paper tigers. The IIT-admin will not take this lying down. Usually there is a review of official policy given the change in admission. The 7% is a transient, made sensational, as exp by ToI. Treat it for what its worth. There is always some consistent tinkering of the policies. If the IIT students are smart, the admin there is smarter.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 17 Jun 2008 10:53

Singha wrote:why are people so concerned with cutoffs. they start at the top and admit candidates until
all seats are exhausted.

No, this is not true of JEE. They dont admit everyone till the last candidate irresp of their JEE score. There are subject-wise cutoffs and aggregate cutoff above which people are ranked. Else they are not even awarded ranks. Some of those ranked ones go on waiting list in case those who got AIRs dont turn up for counselling cos they have a better thing to do.

The subject-wise cutoffs used to be around 35/100. And overall around, 100/300. That was ages back. I remember checking this trend with the rank 2000 odd folks long back. {For the record, the rank 200 odd said he will get 220/300. Ranks < 50 were all statistical anomalies. There is a good Gaussian fit and a smooth rolloff from 200 odd to say 1600 odd. And the gap is 100 marks. The extremes were bizarre. Thats my uneducated and super-biased survey.}

Now that there are more seats than good quality people, the cutoffs have plummeted to ensure a match. It may have been forced on the IITs because GoI wants to show that no seats are going empty. I would nt be too surprised. But this is very temporary. The cutoffs will rise once the GoI prodding in IIT matters reduces. The last 10 yrs has seen so much GoI meddling on IITs/IIMs. Once the OBC stuff gets implemented in action, the IIT system may heave a huge sigh of relief. God willing.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 17 Jun 2008 11:12

it is rumoured that one guy named "vineet buch" more than a decade ago managed something
like 297/300 in this 3rd try (or 2nd try) after appearing again to improve rank. there was another
guy around 1993 with AIR#3 who reappeared next yr god knows why and got a slightly lower but
still top10 rank.

common logic you are right doesnt apply to the upper extreme.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 17 Jun 2008 17:29

So far no Review suggested for those other 8 general category students.

IIT-D to review SC/ST students' expulsion

New Delhi: The National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has asked Indian Institute of Technology-Delhi to review the expulsion 12 undergraduate students belonging to SC category.

IIT-Delhi will send a report on the review back to the commission in two weeks.

Earlier, on Tuesday morning the 12 expelled students met the Chairman of the SC/ST Commission Buta Singh.

The Director of IIT-Delhi Prof Surendra Prasad was also present in the meeting. He had been summoned by the commission on Monday and was asked to explain why the students were expelled.

All the expelled students claim that they have been discriminated against as they belong to the SC community.

They say that instead of the extra coaching that they were to receive, they were diverted to extra curricular activities.

A student also alleged that a professor at the institute told him said he wasn't doing well in his studies because he was from the SC/ST category.

The institute’s Deputy Director, Prof Bijendra Jain, had rejected the allegations and insisted that the students were asked to leave solely because of their poor performance.

"If certain students cannot perform then we cannot have them," said Jain

Interestingly, the institute has never asked so many students to leave because of poor performance.

Jain said IIT-Delhi does its best to help all students in their studies. "Before they enter IIT-Delhi, SC/ST students receive coaching in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. At the end of every semester and sometimes in the middle of semesters we monitor the progress of all students."

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 18 Jun 2008 23:02

IIT admissions faulty, deserving students fail: Prof

New Delhi: A Right to Information (RTI) query filed by an IIT Kharagpur professor has revealed that deserving students have not been able to make it to IIT.

In 2006, nearly 994 deserving students did not make it to the IIT merit list because of complicated and faulty admission procedures.

To clear the IIT-JEE examination, a candidate has to get a minimum cut off in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics because these subjects form the basis of the IIT Curriculum.

The top aggregate scorers then qualify for the 5479 seats. However, professor Arvind Kejriwal who himself is from IIT Kharagpur filed an RTI wanting to know how these minimum cut-offs were calculated and the marks of all the two-lakh fifty-thousand plus students who appeared in the 2006 examination.

The computer engineering professor then computed this data using the IIT's own formula and found that the cut off's for the three subjects come to seven, four and six. Two other independent statisticians verified this as well.

However, the cut-off's that the IIT's used were strangely, much higher at 37, 48 and 55. And it is somewhere between this gap of the IIT and the professors calculation, that the 994 deserving students lost out on their chance to get in the premier institute of technology.

Strangely enough, the RTI revealed that there was one candidate who should have figured in the top 500 of the merit list, however, did not manage to get in.

“This shakes the faith of people in the best institute of technology. Now, one should investigate as to why such a thing happened. The best way to deal with this is to make the admission procedures completely transparent,” says RTI activist, Arvind.

Interestingly enough in 2007, the IITs tried not to repeat their 2006 mistake. They changed their formula to compute the minimum cut-off and based it on the highest marks of the bottom 20 per cent students.

However, again by this calculation the cut off's came to be ridiculously low at one, four and three in Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry. This year a candidate who scored twelve in mathematics but scored high marks in Physics and Chemistry got in.

The IIT'S have, however, refused to comment on the admission procedure.

For the last 40-years, IIT's admission procedure has been a closely guarded secret. However, because of the Right to Information, its is apparent that the toughest exam in the world may have been going terribly wrong in it's selection procedure.

However, what is even more worrying is talks of the procedure being deliberately flawed to accommodate influential candidates. Perhaps, it is now time for the HRD ministry to verify facts and set right a mistake that has repeated itself at the cost of thousands of meritorious students.

R_Kumar · Post by **R_Kumar** » 18 Jun 2008 23:41

I don't see anything wrong here. Of course you can say its not a transparent system. Cut-off decision belongs to institute. They may be having formula, but they might have decided that group of professors will decide cut-off depending upon toughness of the examination paper.
What if they say from this year we won't use our formula and instead our professors will decide. Since toughness of questions have gone down recently, I think they should have higher cut-offs for individual subjects.
I think nowadays media just want to pick any news related to IIT.

However, the cut-off's that the IIT's used were strangely, much higher at 37, 48 and 55. And it is somewhere between this gap of the IIT and the professors calculation, that the 994 deserving students lost out on their chance to get in the premier institute of technology.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 19 Jun 2008 04:33

Guys, this bickering is too much. I am taking the liberty to post the response of Prof. Sriram, a respected and respectable IITM professor, who wrote this in our alum group. If Prof. Sriram sees this, I hope he accepts my apology for taking undue liberty in posting his email meant for internal purposes. I meant it to clear this air and the sensationalization of the toilet paper of India (ToI) rag. toI is known for being a sensationalist crappy rag. i am amazed by how much credence posters here give to news they "believe" whereas in cases of defense matters, they dump it to the trashcan just as quickly. why selective respects to ToI?!

cited from
[url=http://www.ibnlive. com/news/ iit-admissions- faulty-deserving -students- fail-prof/ 67331-3-1. html]Clicky[/ur]l

it is jee counseling time and so, there are more of these. for example, the lead article on tuesday (june 17; also the first day of jee counseling) times of india chennai edition is about the same issue. i can only describe these articles as fud (if that term is unfamiliar, look up [url=http://en.wikipedia%20.org/wiki/%20Fear%2C_uncertainty_and_doubt]fud[/url]). i have also written to the editor of times, lets see if that is publicized. i must admit that unfortunately, iits are not helping in that they are not putting out authoritative replies that clear the air. i will try some here.

so, how does jee scoring and ranking work?

well, all the scripts are scored, of course, including the negative marks for incorrect answers. every candidate then has a score in math, physics and chemistry and an aggregate score. ranks are given based on the aggregate score. the maximum aggregate score is about 500 (nobody gets this, by design), so there can be only 500 ranks for all the 300,000 who write the exam, right? so, the following procedure is used to split tied aggregate scores into separate ranks. whoever has a higher score in the 'tougher' paper is given a higher rank. so, if two candidates have the same aggregate score and that year physics is the tougher paper, whoever got higher in physics is assigned a higher rank. if the toughest paper score is identical, the second tougher paper score is used. if both these are identical (meaning the candidates got identical scores in maths, physics and chemistry) then (and only then) the candidates are assigned identical ranks. it might appear that lots of candidates should get identical ranks, but in practice, identical ranks are rare. note that this procedure is used only to split ranks on tied aggregate scores - a higher aggregate score always yields a higher rank.

and now, for the issue in the cited article. this is something iits have been worrying about for some time, but there is no simple answer. the issue is, how do we compare two candidates a and b with a having scores of, say, 60 each in math, physics and chemistry vs. b who has score of 90 each in physics and chemistry and zero in maths. a is clearly a good all
rounder, but b is clearly far superior in her subjects of physics and chemistry. suppose b wants to be a bio-tech engineer or metallurgy and materials engineer, the poor math score is likely not of much significance, but if b wants to do electrical or aerospace engineering, the poor math skills might be a terminal handicap. so, the question becomes should one have minimum per-subject scores and what would be an appropriate minimum score? by the nature of the exam, the jee cant use a fixed number as a minimum score; the jee is an annual creative endeavour and that introduces significant year to year variability. so, a percentile measure is used as the per subject minimum requirement. in the past, 50 percentile was used. the last two years, 80 percentile is in use - meaning, for a candidate to be ranked, the per subject score should be in the top 80 percentile; else, the student is treated as 'failed' and not considerd for ranking, irrespective of the aggregate. this percentile is based on the entire test taking population; however, sometimes we have thousands of negative subject scores and to avoid having a bizarre minimum required score of zero (or even negative!), the percentile has been reckoned based on the population with positive scores. if there is a systemic fault, it is that this cutoff percentile and population basis are done on the fly, after that years raw scores are tabulated (but obviously before the ranks are assigned). but from here to make the leap and proclaim "However, what is even more worrying is talks of the procedure being deliberately flawed to accommodate influential candidates. Perhaps, it is now time for the HRD ministry to verify facts and set right a mistake that has repeated itself at the cost of thousands of meritorious students" is a bit too much. craftily worded inuendo, is what this is. notice how it is only "talks of", no facts, only insinuation. and it is not clear how influential candidates can be "accommodated" - they still have to score very high. besides, no one knows the identity of the candidates. jee uses dummy numbers in all the processing. those who have access to the scores (approximately 5 people per iit) know only the dummy registration numbers. those who handle the actual applicant information (about 3 people per iit) do not have access to the scores. some of it may sound like security by obscurity, but that itself does not make it wrong. some more transparency will help and it will come. this is an ongoing process. for example, for the past ten years or so, candidaes actually get a score report showing what marks they got, not just the rank like in the good old days. when everyone has marks, they can compare and satisfy for themselves that higher marks mean better ranks without exception. iits are also considering multi-part answer sheets, so candidates can carry back with them a copy of their answers and score it themselves.

My 2centsa request.. please treat ToI for what its worth, even if they sensationalize bullshit. Please.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 19 Jun 2008 09:50

Stan,

If I post something that doesn't mean I support whats written and much less the news agency responsible for it. In any case its good to have them analyzed over here for whatever its worth. We do this typically in the defense forum. Criticism of incorrect news is a must in my opinion.

secondly, that report is from IBN and not ToI.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 19 Jun 2008 10:23

Sumeet wrote:Stan,
If I post something that doesn't mean I support whats written and much less the news agency responsible for it. In any case its good to have them analyzed over here for whatever its worth. We do this typically in the defense forum. Criticism of incorrect news is a must in my opinion.
secondly, that report is from IBN and not ToI.

ToI also had a similar report. I am not blaming you. Peace.

I am just saying that people many a time have poor inside information and froth at the mouth based on innuendos and newspaper articles which selectively exhibit one side of the story and make sensational headlines. The idea seems to be to get people to buy their papers and magazines in panic.

Completely atrocious. I am actually pissed at this stupid fart bogus job of selective journalism. What is NOT clearly reported is the following news article, which also was pointed to by Prof. Sriram. Henceforth, I will stop posting Prof. Sriram's responses in respect of normal decorum (as these are meant to be internal emails, but I believe Sriram would nt object to my intentions).

ok, the plot can be thickened. part of the press coverage follows a court ruling that actually upheld the procedure used by the iits. see the following link for details (provided by former iitm jee chairman prof. karmalkar)

"IITs win court battle over 2006 merit list"
Clicky

is it that the losers of the court battle are trying to retry the case
through the press?

At this opportunity, I would like to reiterate the following based on my own experiences and having seen and heard much: If the JEE-taking population is smart, those teaching them and organizing and conducting exams are infinitely smarter. This is called Polya's axiom.

"The first rule of discovery is to have brains and good luck. The second rule of discovery is to sit tight and wait till you get a bright idea. The first rule of style is to have something to say. The second rule of style is to control yourself when, by chance, you have two things to say; say first one, then the other, not both at the same time. The first rule of teaching is to know what you are supposed to teach. The second rule of teaching is to know a little more than what you are supposed to teach." - George Polya in "How to Solve it"

Eshwar · Post by **Eshwar** » 24 Jun 2008 03:21

A very sad development

From Deccan Chronicle (June 24, 2008)

Quotas cover IIT faculty

New Delhi, June 23: It’s now going to rain quotas for faculty positions too in the Indian Institutes of Technology. This comes soon after Other Backward Classes quotas were introduced for IIT students. The Human Resources Development ministry recently issued orders directing all IITs to strictly implement quotas for SCs, STs and OBCs in their faculty too.

This means that 49.5 per cent of IIT faculty posts will be reserved for these three categories, the same percentage as seats for students. While 27 per cent of the quota will be for OBCs, the creamy layer not excluded, 15 per cent will be for SCs and 7.5 per cent for STs. The creamy layer among the OBCs might gain the most from the move. For HRD minister and quota messiah Arjun Singh, this is a fresh victory.

The IITs had been under pressure from the ministry for months to implement faculty reservations. Though SC/ST and OBC quotas were applicable to IIT posts at a certain grade earlier too, this was not implemented. The earlier order for SC/ST and OBC quotas in teaching posts applied for those at the lowest level of Group A in the faculty. The IITs did not have to implement this as posts at this level had been abolished.

An HRD ministry source said: “There were no posts, so there was no recruitment in these categories.” So though on paper there was reservation for SCs/STs and OBCs in some teaching posts, it was not being implemented. The quota requirements will differ in the humanities/social sciences and the science/engineering streams. In the former, all teaching posts will be covered, while in the latter quotas will cover lecturer and assistant professor level, and exclude full professors. The Supreme Court’s verdict upholding OBC quota in IITs and AIIMS may have emboldened Mr Singh to come with this move.

Tech that

l 49.5% of faculty posts will be reserved.
l 27% will be for OBCs, 15% for SCs and 7.5% for STs.
l Big victory for quota crusader Arjun

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 24 Jun 2008 13:27

Clicky

The Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) and Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) have decided to create more chairs in the institutes to help professors top up their salaries. The money that comes to these chairs from corporations will be the additional incentive for the professors.

In order to attract and retain quality faculty, the institute will provide a 'signing bonus' of Rs 3 lakh over three years --Rs 1 lakh over each year to its new professors. The professors would have to sign a three-year bond with the premier institution to avail of the same. Faculty members who joined the institute from January 2008 will also be entitled for the signing bonus.

Dont know how true this news is

Out-of-state students will no longer be admitted to the country's 20 prestigious National Institutes of Technology (NITs) on the basis of their state rank in the All India Engineering Entrance Examination (AIEEE). From the 2008-09 academic year, the out-of-state students will be admitted based on their national ranks.

KarthikSan · Post by **KarthikSan** » 26 Jun 2008 03:42

Outlook has released it's list of India's top professional colleges

Links:

Top 35 Govt Engineering Colleges

Top 35 Private Engineering Colleges

Top 15 Medical Colleges

More: The Rank The File, And A Whole New Chapter

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 26 Jun 2008 06:44

the print edition has some more details like % of Phds is faculty. all the IITs have >90% most around 95%.
the leading few of NITs have around 65%.

vsunder · Post by **vsunder** » 26 Jun 2008 09:55

I have sat on several NSF panels that award grants in the Sciences. If you are a young person that is writing an NSF proposal let me indicate a few pointers.

1. In Biology the chances of getting funded are much higher about 40% of the proposals submitted are funded.

2. In Mathematics it is about 25%. In Physics its about the same.

3. Do not take the human resources statement in your proposal lightly. Panels I have been in
rated proposals lower eventhough the proposal was generally strong, because the proposer was casual in the human resources part.

4. Do not expect the panelists to completely understand your problems by being sketchy.
Motivate the problem well and connect it with other areas, inter-disciplinary proposals invariably find great favor. Do not be bombastic. Give good pertinent references. Remember
there is no page limit on them. A famous Fields medallist does not get funded because he habitually is very sketchy with his proposal and so since YOU are not one it goes double in spades that you supply some sort of ansatz for your problem, a method that is plausible and dont think that you are a smart aleck, it is easy to spot such tricks!!

Happy proposal writing, use your summer to think about your proposal and what you want to
write. Spending two weeks in the Fall just before deadline time will I can assure you produce a proposal I can safely tell is all "jugaad". I start thinking about my NSF proposal come May
and jot down things as the summer progresses. Come early September I am typing it out.

I have been asked to review many applicants at IIT, Bombay. Institute of Math Sciences Chennai (DAE institute), and Chennai Math. Institute.

http://www.imsc.res.in

and TIFR establishments at Mumbai and Bangalore as well. Unfortunately the quality
of applicants who are returning to India is not all that great. In two instances I wrote
a negative report and others were lukewarm. In the private sector there are applicants applying to

http://www.cmi.ac.in

Panels begin to meet at NSF headquarters in late January. Typically we all assemble on a Friday night, panel discussions go on all day Saturday and Sunday morning. Each panelist is responsible for reading 3-4 proposals in great depth. The program officer informs a panelist in mid November of their decision to appoint people on the panel. Electronic access is granted to all proposals that will be reviewed and one is informed which 3-4 one is responsible for. In the panel meeting each reviewer makes a statement and ranks the proposals they are responsible for which the other panelists about 10 others listen to and ask questions. The reviewer usually types their review in for the 3-4 papers under their responsibility at home and prior to the panel meeting panel meeting
is a forum for panelists who did not have the 3-4 papers as their primary responsibility to ask questions. After some sort of discussion the proposal rank is put up on a blackboard as:
Absolutely priority funding, needed to be funded, needed to be funded if there is money and do not fund. Proposals usually do not get funded after the mid-point of the needed to be funded category. The panel is an advisory board in the end and the program officer can alter things but rarely does.

Hope this clears up some of the rubbish one hears about the panels and job applications in India.
Oh by the way if you apply to DAE places in India and IIT's or IMSc just say I am a BR member
maybe I will write a good letter if they ask me to take a look, hehehehehe.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 26 Jun 2008 10:32

edited..

Sanjay M · Post by **Sanjay M** » 26 Jun 2008 10:53

Indians are now helping Brits with their education:

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/c ... 759536.htm

By doing their course work for them, for a fee!

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 26 Jun 2008 22:23

A dam for every flood.

Indian cities which churn out doctors, engineers. Is it all good?

Chennai About 100 engineering colleges within the city and its periphery, largest concentration in the country

Hyderabad Has 70 engineering colleges in and around the city out of the state's 340, as well as 6 medical colleges

Bangalore Widest variety of colleges-25 engineering, 14 law, 11 medical and 17 dental, 18 for pharmacy, 7 for nursing etc

Pune Has over 60 engineering colleges out of state's 1,350; 20 medical colleges, including for homoeopathy, nursing

Kochi It has 10 engineering colleges out of the state's 84, nine medical and dental colleges, and 12 nursing colleges

But the biggest concentration of engineering colleges by far is in Maharashtra, which currently has over 1,300 engineering colleges approved by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE)

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 28 Jun 2008 09:05

GoI has sent a letter to IITs to start reservations for teaching staff at lecturer and associate prof level.

directors are said to be livid at this because quality of teaching staff is one of the core
things to maintain stds.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 28 Jun 2008 20:11

A 'board exam' is perhaps required for *all* engg and medical students in the 2nd and final year of their courses.

Will ensure one std of testing and performance for all engineers regardless of parent college.

Or one patterned on GATE + GRE perhaps. Computer test taking round the year, maybe, to reduce congestion and all.

Just a thought.

If privatization of higher edu is a must, let some common tests and standards be around. The CAT scores that are mailed in percentiles (GMAT style) to all test-takers regardless of who gets a call to interview with any IIM is a good step fwd, Can something similar be done with JEE also?

JMTs.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 28 Jun 2008 20:40

vsudhir wrote:A 'board exam' is perhaps required for *all* engg and medical students in the 2nd and final year of their courses.

Just my opinion. Seems like all this "common" bizness is a shortcut to stuff thats abs necessary thats missing. What I sorely find lacking is good infrastructure for >99% of the engg colleges in India. Where do you find good teachers, good labs, good facilities etc which in turn will motivate students to focus on the educational aspects? Having a common exam without having good teachers is like an apology for a defeatist cause. If we cant fix the number 0 problem, what will other matters like a "good syllabus" and "a common exam" achieve? If you have looked at the syllabus of some of the local engg colleges, they are as comparable with the IITs and RECs. So what separates the IITs and the RECs from the rest? IITs and RECs have at least a good fraction of sexy teachers who can motivate their students. While there may be some pangs of pain inside the IIT/REC system about good profs and bad profs, it is a given that a good majority of these folks who are supposed to teach are decent, if not good. That apparatus is missing in local colleges.

That said, I have heard of stories where many engg colleges bring in "fly by night profs" who stick around just when the accreditation committee makes a "surprise" visit to the campus. Guess what, some, if not all, of the acc members from AICTE are IIT profs or retired IIT/REC profs. And most realize that something is amiss etc. But unless their visits are strictly held "surprise", which is hardly possible given the coordination required and the deep nexus the engg college owners {most of whom are connected 2 political honchos} wield with the administration, how can they cull out cheats from the rest? If we cant fix all this stuff, which I believe is the rate-limiting step, others definitely cant.

----
This GoI seems so hell-bent on fcking the system heads up. This "quota for teachers" is a long held demand of the SC/ST associations and parties like PMK/RJD. The mojo seems to be that, "if they have folks who understand what it means to be 'discriminated against', then the quota students may have more sympathy from the professors." The often-quotes statistics is that of IITM where FC names {or seemingly forward sounding names

} dominate the faculty roster. When I was around, I have seen/heard of one or two protests by SC/ST association and "Daleeeeeet" groups about how all this discrimination will not end unless they have quotas for everything, from peons and ayahs to faculty and deans. The often-missed fact is that there is no institutional discrimination in hiring, you are good you get hired. Of course, the folks who decide who is good may have some small degree of bias, but that is usually nothing to do with the caste of the hire, it has more to do with quality of work. Boy, I for once thought there was some kinda "return back" that may sweep sometime soon. Dream fcking world.. The proportional wield PMK has in this government with ~5 MPs is infinitely more than what we whine about as the left influence in the nuke threads. How come all these minority groupings determine the course of action of the GoI? Seems so bloody awfully strange.

Seems like there is a fear factor that pervades the ideological fountainhead of casteist groupings. Yeh log kya karenge if they dont get hired after say a Phd, etc. Guess this fear factor is translating in the form of creation of a supply chain. If I can vouch a guess, this must be PMK's brilliant idea. They have some serious thinkers on this direction.

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 28 Jun 2008 22:09

Stan,

While you make strong points, IMO you miss my basic point.

I'm not for penalising the good, hardworking, self-motivated students. We know that within the same class, same school, same infra and same faculty, some students are motivated and work hard, do well. Others don't.

Trouble with the demand-supply situation now is that many good students are having to goto some really shady places to study engg/ medicine and the poor rep of these shady schools is unfairly inhibiting their chances in the outside world.

Just like the board exam is supposed to take away the local level bias and varying standards that school teachers may have in grading their students, similarly, a common exam is nothing more than a mechanism to spread opportunity to prove oneself in his/her chosen subject of study to the good, hardworking, sincere students.

Of course, it may become another industry with coaching centers and so on for these board exams but that is another topic altogether.

Hope my point is better communicated now.

JMTs etc.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 29 Jun 2008 02:05

vsudhir wrote: Hope my point is better communicated now. JMTs etc.

Makes more sense now, thanks.

Motivated students, irresp of where they get to, in some sense, are forced to self-identify themselves these days. And these are the ppl who are usually the power-law tails in the sense that they make far more substantive contributions to society/field than the rest of the gang. What we have to do is to help such ppl, in whatever means that may be necessary for them. The system now is such that these people face loads of institutional apathy. And hence the time lag necessary for these folks to self-realize that they have to do things on their own without much help from elsewhere is a bit too long for comfort.

The problem with common exams is that they are too democratic in the sense that these people can hardly be identified with such schemes. The more extraordinary the level of the exams, the finer you can grade and cull out smart ones, and the smaller the set of folks you will be able to identify as belonging to that set. We dont have mechanisms for such ideas now. All these "catch em young" and "olympiad training" etc dont even reach not-so-elite urban schools, let alone rural areas. In that sense, there is a huge need for change.

Before the IIT system came into being, most of the folks who came to Amrika for higher ed were all such folks. The IIT system, when it was around as a viable option, produced a good fraction of these self-motivated folks. The democrazy of the IIT system was in the JEE

unlike before, when good folks could come from anywhere. And the places they came from were all places incognito on the Indian map. That institutional mechanism was too much of a pipedream to last forever. Now its back to "all over the place". We have come full circle in some sense.

Most of the stuff were unrelated rants. so tifiw.

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 29 Jun 2008 03:11

What we are seeing with this faculty quota systems is the failure from approaching everything top-down instead of bottom-up. If we only had the lower levels of school and college education addressed would this clamoring for quota at the TOP institutions diminish. In an ideal world the best would still closely represent the population demographics largely. Now with this fiat from above, it will surely lead to real dilution of standards for the first time IMO.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 01 Jul 2008 19:25

Choice of toppers: IIT-Bombay.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Jul 2008 01:49

July 1, 2008, Deccan Chronicle

500 want to be vice-chancellors

Hyderabad, June 30: Dozens of junior personnel like professors and readers have made bold and applied for the post of vice-chancellor. The state needs 13 VCs, and the applicants are emboldened by the fact that there are no eligibility norms. Most applicants hope that they would be selected on "political" and "social" grounds.

The government has decided to establish six universities this year at Mahbubnagar, Kurnool, Nellore, Srikakulam, Krishna and Karimnagar. The Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University will be split into four universities. Then, the tenures of the incumbent vice-chancellors of Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Dravidian University and Telugu University will end in August. For these three universities, the government will set up search committees to select VCs. For the other 10, it can straightaway appoint VCs.

"The direct appointment of VCs for new universities gives us a big opportunity," said a reader from Osmania University who has applied for the post. "We know that political and caste equations play a significant role in the selection of VCs," he said. "Though I am aware that in my capacity I am not a front-runner, the political and caste equations in Telangana may favour me."

Officials of the higher education department were shocked to find that they had nearly 500 applications for the VC posts. The applications were landing everywhere, even at the office of the Governor, who is the chancellor of all state universities, and the Chief Minister’s Office. Some aspirants had specifically opted for particular universities while others were ready to work anywhere. "There are no prescribed eligibility norms for appointment of a VC. A VC should be a academician and should have good administrative capabilities. Based on these two qualities, the search committees are selecting VCs for existing universities," said a senior official in department of higher education.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 03 Jul 2008 19:54

IIT coaching classes a Rs 10k cr industry.

Coaching for admission to the IITs and other engineering colleges has acquired the status of a big industry in India. According to the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry, the size of the industry is Rs 10,000 crore.

ASSOCHAM’s conclusion is based on the assumption that six lakh students attend these classes every year and the average cost for each student is Rs 1.7 lakh, a spokesman for the industry body told TOI.

The staggering sum of Rs 10,000 crore being netted every year by private academies who coach students for admission tests can fund 30 to 40 new IITs, ASSOCHAM said. Calling for deregulation of higher education, ASSOCHAM president Sajjan Jindal said the beneficiaries of the current system were those running big educational institutions and coaching centres.

"The amount of money which goes to these institutions is enough to open 30 to 40 IITs with lots of seats that can ensure admission to average candidates," he said. (Doesnt he realize he is suggesting dilution of IIT Standard's? He should stick to making steel rather then making such suggestions)

Those familiar with the coaching industry pointed out that both figures number of students going to coaching classes and the average cost per student seem exaggerated.

The average cost per student cited by ASSOCHAM is too high, they said, pointing out that the cost in smaller cities which have many successful coaching institutes is much lower. They also said the number of students attending coaching classes could be much less than six lakh.

TOI had recently done a survey of the coaching classes at Kota, the hub of the III-JEE coaching industry, and arrived at a ballpark figure of Rs 550 crore for the size of the industry there. At least 50% of the students who appear in the entrance tests for admissions to IITs and other engineering colleges enrol with coaching centres to beat the cutthroat competition, ASSOCHAM said.

The industry body also said that 80,000-90,000 students go abroad for higher studies, leading to a high foreign exchange outflow.

"If quality institutions are provided, a large number of students will stay back and contribute to the nation," ASSOCHAM said. It said that more institutions of excellence should come up and suggested that private players and big industrial groups should be encouraged in higher education.

According to ASSOCHAM, India has over 12 million students in higher education but fewer than 350,000 faculty members.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 04 Jul 2008 03:44

I learned something today about the IITs and it makes me completely nervous, alarmed and worried about the standard of students who are let in through the JEE. Seems like a significant majority of the students have gamed the system prior to entering the IITs. And this has been officially "internally" proved using indicators like scores on exams. performance on Btech projects etc. Not just a BS study, but one that could pass muster in a statistical journal.

Even if this internal news wont make it out very soon, it is a serious concern that the system what it is today was not what it was even 6-7 years back. It has been a free fall for a long time and the rot has truly set in. To give one set of numbers, around 200 of the 500 first year students (not just one IIT, but across most of them the numbers have been fairly similar) failed on a first pass in a subject. After much deliberation, the numbers got reduced. And these are the creme de la creme. Jeezus. The JEE is getting revamped in response to this. You will see the changes shortly. But the desirable impact on intake may take a long while. Till then, we have to tighten the belt and hope for at least a few gems to emanate from here or from elsewhere.

This is probably the dilution in standards that HRD ministry was looking forward to to justify the OBC intake. What a set of losers. We have one set going down due to gaming, and another set taking advantage of that to further game the system. Ya Allah, save this wretched place.

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 04 Jul 2008 18:31

Following up on the NIT news, a whinefest from the Chindu. Read it with a pinch of salt.

Last month’s decision of the Union Ministry of Human Resource Development to fill 50 per cent of the seats in the National Institutes of Technology under the Other States Quota on the basis of the all-India ranking in the All India Engineering Entrance Examination (AIEEE) in place of the State-wise ranking has eliminated scope for Tamil Nadu students to get admission to the other NITs.

The AIEEE ranks secured by Tamil Nadu students have always been low, as in the case of students of many other States. With the AIEEE counselling under way, parents and students see arbitrariness {Why so, dear Chindu? Dont you see arbitrariness in the state engg college admissions? So basically TN students AIEEE ranks are low, and hence they cant get admitted to NITs and hence things are arbitrary. How about a simple solution? Since the AIEEE syllabus is uniformized, why cant the students study well and get better ranks?} in the Ministry’s assurance to create a quota for students of States and Union Territories where there is no NIT. The off-campus online counselling was conducted from June 23 to 29, and the on-campus online counselling will begin on July 4. The decision, teachers of the NIT-Tiruchi reckon, will only benefit a few States where organised coaching is a multi-crore business. {What BS? Dont tell me now that TN does nt have an organized coaching bizness. I would probably agree if the north-eastern states said so. TN, and you want me to believe that loada crap?} They point out that the performance in the board examinations of many AIEEE high-rankers from such States are far below that of students from States like Tamil Nadu.

What intrigues parents the most is that the Ministry has reneged on the promise on admission procedure when the Regional Engineering Colleges were upgraded as National Institutes of Technology. {So they want free loading, and Chindu keeps batting for it} Rajasekaran, a parent, feels that at one stroke, the Ministry has deprived Tamil Nadu of the seats it is entitled to as per the Ministry’s assurance.