Indian Education System

The Technology & Economic Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to Technological and Economic developments in India. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

The Top American Research Universities

This is a good annual report that ranks the top American Univs on 9 research parameters.

Surprising that # of patents, # of research papers are not among the research parameters considered here...but average SAT score of students is.
Many indicators serve this purpose, but most observers know that research matters more than anything else in defining the best institutions. In its annual reports, The Center provides both the total research and development expenditures and the highly-competitive federally sponsored research and development expenditures as indicators of research scale. While the dollars give a good approximation of research activity, it is the faculty who provide the critical resource for university success, and The Center reports the number of members of the National Academies among an institution's faculty along with the number of significant faculty awards earned as indicators of faculty distinction. Students provide a double indicator by reflecting both the externally perceived quality of the institution and providing with their own credentials an important contribution to that quality. For the graduate and research instructional dimension, The Center provides the number of doctorates awarded and the number of postdoctoral appointments supported; and The Center offers median SAT scores as indicators of student competitiveness.

Both private and public universities live on the resources generated from many sources, but critical to their success are the size of their endowments and annual giving . Endowment reflects the long-term strength of accumulated private support and in some cases institutional savings that delivers an income to important purposes every year. Annual giving provides an indicator of the current level of an institution's private contributions both to current expenses and towards increased endowment. By including both indicators, The Center gains the opportunity to note historical and emerging strength in private support for research universities.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

Most research funding comes from two major sources, corporations (through research and development departments) and government (primarily carried out through universities and specialised government agencies). Some small amounts of scientific research are carried out (or funded) by charitable foundations, especially in relation to developing cures for diseases such as cancer, malaria and AIDS.

In the OECD, around two-thirds of research and development in scientific and technical fields is carried out by industry, and 20% and 10% respectively by universities and government, although in poorer countries such as Portugal and Mexico the industry contribution is significantly less. The US government spends more than other countries on military R&D, although the proportion has fallen from around 30% in the 1980s to under 20%[1]. Government funding for medical research amounts to approximately 36% in the U.S. The government funding proportion in certain industries is higher, and it dominates research in social science and humanities. Similarly, with some exceptions (e.g. biotechnology) government provides the bulk of the funds for basic scientific research. In commercial research and development, all but the most research-oriented corporations focus more heavily on near-term commercialisation possibilities rather than "blue-sky" ideas or technologies (such as nuclear fusion).
from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_of_science
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10372
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Mort Walker »

Singha wrote:breakup of industry r&d spending in 2007 (usa)
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObj ... tion=PNG_M
chemicals + pharma get 40% of industry spend

breakup of federal govt r&d spending in 2007 (usa)
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObj ... tion=PNG_M

military r&d consumes 50% of federal r&d spending and NIH gets 25%
NSF gets 3% , NASA 7%

so it would appear fields like biology, chemistry, chem engg, automobiles, medicine and the military cos is where most of action is and physics/maths attracts little to no funding from industry and govt.
Which explains why the US is falling behind its former self.
Military R&D is very heavy on the physical sciences.
kasthuri
BRFite
Posts: 411
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 08:17
Location: Mount Doom in Mordor

Re: Indian Education System

Post by kasthuri »

Singha wrote:imo some posters who work in sciences are falling prey to the assumption that the best n brightest always need to work in sciences. in No other country or system is this the case - people go into sc, engg, finance, business, teaching ... so in that sense we can expect IIT UGs to be distributed across the spectrum too. no one vocation is "better" than the other and just because a presidents gold medalist chose to join google doesnt mean his work or contribution there is "inferior" to that of a gold medalist working in physics somewhere. there are challenges in all fields. a physicist might do one big thing in a career spanning decades or none at all. a engineer can atleast take some satisfaction in producing something that reasonably works and is useful to humans periodically :mrgreen:

given the relatively smallish number of pure science r&d and teaching jobs at tier-1 places worldwide vs that in engg/finance we should anyways expect and will get far more IIT UGs in these vocations.

even soviet union with its command driven system channelled its best into sciences, aerospace and some other areas considered crucial, not just sciences.
Singhaji,

You are absolutely right that challenge is in all fields no matter what. And we *do* need as much good quality engineers as scientists. But finding relatively large number of engineers than scientists (which is inevitable) the thrust could be on the science as engineering will continue to build up. And they are not mutually exclusive - Shannon was an electrical engineer before he came up with information theory. Good understanding in any field will only strengthen and contribute to the fields that are outside of it. In the space of knowledge, it is a real wonder that as we dig deeper, we actually move broader!
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

Booz comes out with an annual study of the top 1000 corporate R&D spenders. The latest report here

The top 3 industries for corporate R&D: Computing & Electronics, Pharma & Auto.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

military r&d consumes 50% of federal r&d spending and NIH gets 25%
NSF gets 3% , NASA 7%

so it would appear fields like biology, chemistry, chem engg, automobiles, medicine and the military cos is where most of action is and physics/maths attracts little to no funding from industry and govt.
Even 3% is a large figure in absolute terms, also DOE spends a similar amount too in the physical sciences in addition to NSF. All those colliders and detectors are all built with this funding source and runs into billions of dollars.

Where do the 99% of BS/MS/PhD from pure and applied physical sciences end up in, but defense or space related projects in the long run. What happens in massa is all that talent is not drained out post BS into MBA entrepreneurship routes from the very beginning itself. The mango men and women from the physical sciences/engg do their time and very slowly migrate out to applied or other activities as the pyramid gets narrower at the top. This is why the base is so strong in masa and will remain so for a long time. It can be filled with immigrants too as is now the case.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

Arjun wrote:From my vantage, JEE is probably the least susceptible to coaching in comparison to GATE, IAS or other such tests. So I would be far more concerned about the quality of our M.Techs and bureaucrats, if I were to go by this metric.
Unless you tell us what your vantage point is it is hard to judge. The only thing you have and keep saying is JEE is somehow superior to any other kind of a test, with little real evidence to support it. This is not going anywhere with this line of thought that "all is well", when even IITs themselves have made statements about the quality of incoming stream. I think it was you who had quoted an article where Infy's Murthy made the 20:80 ratio of quality to average comment as I recall.

Bringing in IAS is less relevant, since the number of aspirants for those positions are not in the lakhs and all that is post BS anyway, where only the most driven would want to apply for something like that. There was a trend some time back of IIT-K UGs going in for IAS in large numbers.

As for MTech admissions, it is news to me that GATE has coaching now. Not in my time. We all took GATE and scored high percentiles. Some did MTech post MSc went for a PhD and are doing fine by all yardsticks of success and quality, since most anyway ended up at the same places where IIT BTechs too have, in MNCs. In fact there is an MTech from IIT-M who is a Bhatnagar fellow and is not a IIT-UG. If you look at the list of Bhatnagar fellows it is only very recently that IIT UGs have made the list. And this is definitely a metric to consider in the Indian context for pure as well as applied research.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

Bade wrote: The only thing you have and keep saying is JEE is somehow superior to any other kind of a test, with little real evidence to support it. This is not going anywhere with this line of thought that "all is well", when even IITs themselves have made statements about the quality of incoming stream.
Its the other way around. I am asking you for statistical (as opposed to anecdotal) evidence to your assertion of problems with the JEE system- so we are not unfair to the lower ranking folks who enter the IITs today.

Believe me, it's the easiest option for me to take a stance that there are problems on account of the 400% increase in intake with 'mediocre' folks flooding the IITs over the last few years. I just think that is succumbing to the pleasure of being elitist. Would rather not take the easy way out - I would like to see statistical evidence. I also think its being fair to the lower rankers, who will be the ones to be blamed for any 'lowering of standards'.

Let me give you some more context...Even when it was a 2000 seat system, there was an unstated belief among some in the highest-ranking branches that I was part of, that the folks in the 'lower ranked' branches were in some sense less 'academically endowed' in comparison. As for faculty - there were a couple (not all) who, even as far back as the eighties - consistently adopted a 'not as good as the old times' mentality - so the eighties batches was not as perfect as the seventies, and my guess is they would have said the same to the seventies batch ('not as good as the sixties'). With the massive increase in intake over the last several years - I have no doubt that there are strong feelings of elitism in some quarters and this refrain from both students and faculty will be heard. Any determinations, though, should be made on the basis of strong statistical evidence.

Coming back to the context of coaching- that is a problem that afflicts all of the elite tests today. The JEE is a test of advanced analytical aptitude in PCM - and involves less of 'mugging up' of subject-specific information in comparison with the GATE. 'Coaching' is always easier in a situation such as the latter. Given the huge increase in coaching for GATE entrants, and the fact that sample size is smaller than for JEE - there can be similar concerns on quality.
I think it was you who had quoted an article where Infy's Murthy made the 20:80 ratio of quality to average comment as I recall.
One can't rule out the possibility of business agendas behind statements of that sort...software services firm in India are quite often asked by their Western costumers on the percentage of IITians among their recruits. This particular statement may be a way to rationalize a weakness. So, I wouldn't necessarily take it as gospel.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

duplicate
Last edited by Bade on 07 Jul 2012 00:52, edited 1 time in total.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

There are two separate issues being mixed up here I think. If you go back in time a very long time even before the 80s or so, there is a case to be made that the best did get in as the test was fair with little coaching. OK, maybe the city dwellers had an edge as resources or access to information and good schools can make a difference in how prepared one is to come out successful. Even then a few really brilliant ones would have made it through the cutoffs irrespective of their backgrounds. This was an era of no coaching classes. I am sure some of the talented ones who did not make it high in the list of even the 2000, went somewhere else and also did fine.

These samples from the older era cannot be compared with coaching era list of 2000 or 10,000. In the absence of extra coaching, I would wager that even if the list was expanded to 10,000 most would be good.

Compare with the idea of a POP quiz and I am sure being from IIT you must be familiar with it. Many profs used to do it and sometimes even the time of the test within the class hour is random. This reduces any bias due to extra preparation on part of the student to beat the test.

If the lower ranked entrants to IITs of yesteryear were much better than lower ranked entrants of today, the reason for the fall in quality is predominantly coaching and not necessarily the larger input, as the number of aspiring potentially talented students today would be much higher in any case than in those days due to the overall improvement of many factors or life in India.

But coaching can definitely dilute this pool. Coaching will have little detrimental or incremental effect on the top 5% as is the case anywhere.

If I hear you right, what you are claiming is that the JEE cannot be gamed. It is for you to prove it and not me.
SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2266
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Indian Education System

Post by SriKumar »

Arjun wrote: Some areas are probably heavily dependent on government grants - whereas others may have moved to a situation where they are largely funded by corporates. IBM may be doing far more high-end research in the area of computing than say many Ivy League Univs, excluding areas like Theoretical Computer Science.
From my vantage point, I would opine that generally the research sponsored within corporate labs is quite applied, as compared to research in a university. Consider this: for the corporate R&D outfit, their purpose is to serve the parent corporation because that's where the funds are coming from. And the dispenser of funds is looking for an ROI, and is not willing (IMO) to wait for years and years. He (VP of R&D) will have to answer to his boss, da Prez/CEO/big chief/head honcho who in turn is answerable to the 'shareholder' so that he can 'beat quarterly profit expectations' and get his big bonus. I dont mean this too literally but this conveys the culture and environment within which this 'research' is taking place. Focus is on 'short term' and 'appled' (relatively speaking). In other words, R&D is subject to the same capitalistic pressure that the rest of the company is, the degree of this pressure differs from corpn. to corpn. So, (from a simplistic point of view), the research tends to very focused, product specific, and something that is expected to yield an ROI in a matter of a few years. (Of course, there are exceptions).

By contrast, research in a univ. dept. answers to a completely different culture/mindset. The student who expects to graduate has to show in his Ph.D that s/he has contributed something to the field over and above what is known currently (which is dutifully determined via a literature survey at the beginning of the research). And the prof. funding the student wants a super-duper new theory/finding that will make him a star and get him to a chaired professorship. The results of the research have to be published in peer-reviewed journals, and if the papers are of 'low' quality, either they are rejected, or worse, they are published and the evidence is there for all to see, forever. So, by definition, the research coming out of universities is qualitatively different and more fundamental (by and large) from what comes out of corporate labs (unless the CSE types here opine differently). Corporates (in my biased opinion), are not likely to fund this kind of open-ended research work where the exact benefit to the corporation is unknown. I hate to say this but these days, I think only the govt. has enough money (or perhaps the willingness) to fund research that explores basic areas which may, or may NOT, yield a benefit 10 or 15 years down the road. The 'may not' part is very important because we have no idea whether something being researched today has a commercial application 10 years from now.
We are moving to a world where even high-end research will increasingly be conducted by corporates...budgets for research, broken up by industry, may offer a clue on where the demand lies.
If we are, then I fear the fundamental research in engg. and science will suffer (but I have no idea of what bigwigs like IBM, Intel do i.e. to what extent is their R&D more R than D). I think at some level, US govt. is well aware of the importance of basic research, and in spite of cuts, will keep a core amount of working ongoing. They cannot leave everything to private sector.
Last edited by SriKumar on 07 Jul 2012 09:53, edited 1 time in total.
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Singha »

India does not have the luxury of large r&d oriented corporates like ibm, du pont, 3m, GE and so on...for the most part they will keep their highest end r&d activity inside the US itself , same for germans or japanese they will be even more insular about it.

so even if we build a couple of Caltechs and Princetons' here in terms of basic sciences where will all the people go? the univs cannot absorb people yr by yr , looking at the grandfatherly scientists in the CERN melee they tend to work for a long long time, almost all their lives.

in the US , Bade says they can migrate slowly to DOD funded projects or cos. here also DRDO/CSIR/ISRO would be having some reqs but we cannot match the spending power of khan for sure.

so in the end wont they all migrate again abroad ?
SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2266
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Indian Education System

Post by SriKumar »

Arjun wrote:The Top American Research Universities

This is a good annual report that ranks the top American Univs on 9 research parameters.

Surprising that # of patents, # of research papers are not among the research parameters considered here...but average SAT score of students is.
There is a lot of good stuff in this report. I think your above statement is an over-simplification. The quote below speaks directly to the matter of 'research distinction':
In the United States, research universities share a number of characteristics. They have high quality undergraduate student bodies and faculty who win national and international awards for distinction and recognition by their peers. They produce a large number of doctoral graduates as part of their research commitment and of course, they produce large volumes of quality research. They generally have engaged alumni and private supporters who contribute annually and whose gifts build endowments.
High quality UG is one of the parameters identified, but he also mentions 'large number of doctoral candidates' and 'large volumes of research' which directly translates to paper publication (most programs will not allow a Ph.d to graduate unless they have a certain number of publications). The author gives the reason why he did not discuss the number of papers (where is it published is also important but difficult to quantify in the scope of this study). The faculty quality is also mentioned as a primary factor. Patents is a gray area.....a lot of tinkerers get patents for simple modifications of existing products, so, a patent issued to, say, an inventor of a autorikshaw with 5 (vs. 3) wheels is an entirely different proposition than some arcane research paper coming out of a university. Patents carry more weight and H&D factor in industry (IMHO). One key statement from the author:
This perspective illustrates that academic research is usually not an isolated individual product that stems from the independent work of a creative research scholar but is instead an institutionally supported enterprise built around the creative researchers.
One needs to create an institutional ecosystem and not try to depend on a few super-achievers. The study spends a lot effort getting info. on research funding for the univ., the lifeblood of any research program.

Finally, yes, SAT scores were reported, but the context seems a little blurry as to what is intended. But one thing is clear.....most (if not all) US technical universities do not look at SAT scores for post-graduate admissions which recruit candidates into research programs. They look at GRE, performance during under-graduate classes via grades in courses, plus other factors like reco letters etc. This information is in public domain as evidenced by a casual look at the admissions requirements for PG study at
MIT: http://meche.mit.edu/academic/graduate/applying/
Caltech http://www.gradoffice.caltech.edu/admissions/checklist
Stanford: http://cs.stanford.edu/admissions/appli ... quirements
or any other technical madrassa one looks at. Nowhere have they asked for SAT scores (which have to be reported by the ETS, and not the student). They look at the performance of the student over a period of 4 years of UG work, in addition to other factors.
Last edited by SriKumar on 07 Jul 2012 10:17, edited 4 times in total.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

Singha, the univs alone cannot absorb all its output. This is a given which I find people in India have a hard time digesting. I used to visit the various symposiums/conferences in India where used to get the opportunity to meet young PhDs. All were looking for faculty jobs somewhere, even in small colleges. This is due to lack of similar opportunities as in massa if a faculty position is not in your destiny. The filter rate is like 1-2 % in the US. It would be worse in India since top class Univs are even less in number other than in generic engg. At least these days many can migrate to IT-Vity and netzilla/Lucent/IBM/Infy like companies also do absorb some even in India. Know some who went that route following a PhD+PostDoc at the grahastha stage when the urgency to get food on table with some certainty does become important. This is true for both immigrant and native born and I did not see much of a difference. It is usually the single for ever natives who had an edge, since social pressure would be less in their case and it would be easier to keep status quo and chug alone on a single engine. ;-)

The hope is in today's India, after working in academia and research over a decade or more such people can still find gainful employment in India in the emerging industry there where their skills can also be applied and perhaps needed too.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

Bade wrote:But coaching can definitely dilute this pool.
This is a hypothesis - and let me say, it is a good hypothesis. I guess I just am not the kind of person to be satisfied with passing judgements on others based purely on hypotheses. And this is despite my long-held personal disinclination towards coaching of any kind.

The question then really becomes, are there measures by which this hypothesis can be either proven or disproven ? I think there is one objective measure - and that is to see the correlation between performance on JEE and that in other kinds of aptitude tests.

At the highest levels of course, it was always true that the top 500 or so ranks at JEE pretty much includes the same pool that rank among the highest in most other engineering entrances (Roorkee etc of yore)...as also subsequently in tests like GRE, CAT. If UGs had started becoming interested in GATE - they would have probably taken the bulk of the seats at the PG level. Its the UG eagerness for overseas PG that has always provided opportunity in GATE to those from other colleges.

As for the broader UG population - the correlation metric would be check the average performance as well as band in SAT-equivalent test at entry level and say GRE-equivalent at passout level. Now that the JEE is split into two parts - the first part is more like a SAT-equivalent aptitude test, so that part will anyway be satisfied. As long as the average performance on GRE-equivalent at passout can be benchmarked with some of the Ivy League, I would not see a problem. Of course - we don't have the data on that yet.

However, at the PG level - the best measure of whether we are getting the right type of candidates is by judging the research output in subsequent years. And that unfortunately is the area where India has consistently had a very poor track record.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

SriKumar wrote:Finally, yes, SAT scores were reported, but the context seems a little blurry as to what is intended.

Was looking for that myself, and came across this excerpt which offers a good explanation:
It appears that high quality undergraduate student bodies, for example, provide an important context that helps attract and retain the best researchers, or at least create environments in which these people choose to work.
Effectively, quality researchers and Faculty are attracted by the prospect of teaching to a high-quality undergraduate body. Hence the emphasis on SAT scores.

As for patents & research output, I had noticed this excellent explanation provided by the document...that these parameters are captured by extent of Federal funding- since the funding process in itself closely evaluates research output:
This element, as mentioned above, looks primarily at publications and citations to determine how much research each University’s staff produced and published, and how significant the community believes this research to be. The benefit of this measure is that it identifies an internationally accessible metric.

The disadvantage of this measure, besides some technical issues with the construction of the measure itself, is that it focuses on what individuals do, without additional indicators that would speak to the institutional context within which they do it. The publication/citation measure may represent a good proxy for the effectiveness of the institutions that house the individuals who publish, and for a simple won-loss record, this could be true. However, for a fuller understanding of the context that produces high quality research, it helps to have additional indicators. While it is certainly correct to assume that what matters for high quality universities are high quality faculty, the ability of a university to attract and retain internationally competitive personnel requires an elaborate and expensive institutional support system.

The United States has another, perhaps more direct method of sorting research productive faculty and programs in American universities. This occurs through the federal review process for grant awards. The panels assembled for these reviews include expert faculty from all over the country. The individuals chosen are recognized research faculty, and they must do their reviews in accord with specific guidelines with the results of the scoring made available to the applicants. These measures limit if not eliminate the opportunity for favoritism to influence the judgments. At the end of the process, each year, the federal agency makes awards to deserving research proposals, either to continue ongoing work or start new work. The bulk of the awards are for science-based projects although considerable opportunities exist for social science and some humanities research. However, as all participants in this process know, the application-reward cycle does not easily match the productivity cycle of research and as a result the Federal government also collects data on the amount of federal research dollars spent by each university each year, evening out the award data that may reflect projects with durations from one to five years. The expenditure data show the funds spent to do actual research (and are audited and therefore reasonably reliable). This indicator of annual research expenditures from federal funds serves as one of the most reliable indicators of research activity. Federal agencies will generally not renew grants without publications that demonstrate achievement or award new grants to scholars who do not publish, and consequently the annual expenditure of federal funds is a stable, reliable indicator.

An additional benefit of the federal funds indicator is that it reflects not only the ability of the researcher to design a worthy project but also the ability of the university to support this research. Every successful application includes indications of the institution’s contributions, the resources of the institution available in support of the project (equipment, space, collaborative activities, instructional programs related to the research), and similar items. This perspective illustrates that academic research is usually not an isolated individual product that stems from the independent work of a creative research scholar but is instead an institutionally supported enterprise built around the creative researchers. In this model, it becomes clear that even before a proposal reaches a funding agency, the sponsoring institution has made many choices to sort out the high quality productive researcher from the rest of the faculty. This institutional sorting is one of the major contributions of the university to the development of a national
research capability.

The sorting occurs at various points in the career of an individual faculty member. At the point of hiring, the university first expresses its standards relative to research productivity by employing only those who show significant promise and past productivity in research. The promotion and especially the tenure process at American research universities also establish the standards for performance by keeping those who can perform at a competitive level and discouraging or dismissing those who cannot. An additional level of sorting occurs in the distribution of internal university funds and assets in support of research. Not all aspiring faculty members can have the labs they want, the support staff they need, the time for research work required. When the university chooses to provide internal funds and resources to support the work of one faculty member more than the work of another, it makes a bet on the research productivity and competitiveness of the faculty. The best research universities make the best bets on future performance and they invest to make sure their bet is a winner.

Finally, in the American university, all research, however well funded, operates at a financial loss to the institution. If a faculty member receives a grant for $100,000 to perform a research project, it will almost certainly cost the university at least $150,000 to fulfill the research obligations contracted when accepting the grant. The external funding covers only certain direct and indirect costs of performing the research and fails to account for many other costs. The university picks up the other expenses using funds from other sources. As a result, the amount of money the university has available to invest in research is a key competitive advantage in achieving high levels of research performance.
Mort Walker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10372
Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31
Location: The rings around Uranus.

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Mort Walker »

Arjun,

In the US, the SAT is only part of the measure for UG admission to the top univs. In high school, a top student must:

1. Score high on the SAT in the 90%+ range.
2. Score high on subject SATs of English, Languages, Social Sciences, Math and Sciences.
3. Score high on at least 8 college board advance placement (AP) exams above 75%.
4. Have high grades on at least 8 college board AP subjects. A or A+.
5. Rank in the top 5% of your graduating class based on overall grades on a 4.0 scale.

In the 8 Ivy Leagues + MIT, Stanford, CalTech, and Univ. of Chicago. There is a 13% quota on Asians, but outside of grades and marks the student must demonstrate excellence in some vocation they are interested in. This could be in music, the fine arts or sports. Each of these univs. accept about 1600 kids each year for admission. They are looking for well rounded students. True, there are some legacy admissions, like George W. Bush at Yale or Rahul Gandhi at Harvard, but those are much fewer today.
kasthuri
BRFite
Posts: 411
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 08:17
Location: Mount Doom in Mordor

Re: Indian Education System

Post by kasthuri »

Nothing new but in the front page of Wapo today:

U.S. pushes for more scientists, but the jobs aren’t there
SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2266
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Indian Education System

Post by SriKumar »

Arjun wrote:It appears that high quality undergraduate student bodies, for example, provide an important context that helps attract and retain the best researchers, or at least create environments in which these people choose to work.
I went through some of the report...they authors make an honest attempt at what is a difficult and controversial task (universities typically do not like ranking etc.). The first volume of this series of reports (2000) discusses the 9 indicators used for measuring research universities (http://mup.asu.edu/research2000.pdf). They are :
•Total research expenditures; • Federal research expenditures; • Endowment assets; • Annual giving; • Faculty members in the National Academies; • Faculty awards; • Doctoral degrees; • Postdoctoral appointees; and • Entering freshmen SAT scores.
That they stuck with these indicators for over decade means that this is a reasonably mature set of measures to assess research output of universities. Page 9 has a footnote that speaks to a statistical correlation between research volume and each of these indicators: Federal research and postdoctoral appointees correlate at .544 for all universities in this group; for federal research and doctorates, the correlation is .464. However, federal research and SAT scores correlate at only .287, a level that is not significant for either private or public universities at the .01 level.
Effectively, quality researchers and Faculty are attracted by the prospect of teaching to a high-quality undergraduate body. Hence the emphasis on SAT scores.
A comment about high-flying research profs. and teaching. One would think that profs. take up university jobs to teach but generally this in not exactly how it turns out in practice. There are some who like teaching, however (and this is true for all), time spent on teaching is time not spent on research. 'Publish or perish' is the mantra, atleast in the US university system where professors are measured mostly by their research output (=publications, how many grad. (i.e. Ph.D) students they have, how may post-docs, how much research funding they can bring in etc.). They could be teaching the best UG students in their classrooms but that contributes zilch to their research which is done mainly, if not entirely, by graduate (M.S. and Ph.d) students and post-doctoral research associates, all working 70 to 80 hours a week (and oftentimes more)). Being a prof. in the US means spending a lot of time trying to get funds; even govt. funds (NSF, NASA) are not easy to get...there are tons of profs. vying for the same pot of money; and Low funds = Few/no students to do your research = few publications = no tenure = end of story. In fact, it is something of a well-known complaint of many students who get little time with their profs., and more and more, it is the T.A.s who work with the students. (I am speaking about the US situation here. It may not apply to India where profs., by comparison, probably dont have to spend as much time/effort to raise funds for their research, and this would be certainly true if their jobs/tenure did not critically depend on having a certain number of research publications. This is added goodness for the UGs who get quality time with their profs).

The report itself is quite good and has a lot of good information. They've been doing this for 10+ years and so I have to believe the document has some degree of consensus across US academia. Some random cut-pastes:
Undergraduate teaching, for example, is a core activity of almost all universities, but its purpose is to convey and teach critical thinking about knowledge and to teach the process for creating and evaluating knowledge, sometimes through research-focused course work. Students learn the current state of the art, the skills and content associated with a wide range of disciplines and methodologies, and the general skills of an educated and engaged citizen.
UG Education is defined, atleast on paper, within a larger context of an engaged and productive member of the society. I also think 'the process of creating and evaluating knowledge' is a very important portion of any Bachelor's education. It cannot be left to Master's and above.
In America as well as in the rest of the world, the most important element in producing good research is the availability of money. New knowledge is expensive to produce and requires consistent investment over time.One of the characteristics of much new knowledge is that it has no useful application at the moment of its creation. When we identify something new, some characteristic of the physical, biological, or cultural world previously unknown or imperfectly understood, the discovery may appear trivial or bizarre to some observers.
but, on BR we already know this... :)
Success ...(in research) requires a continuous process of quality control and improvement to sustain long-term research productivity. Individual researchers will come and go and display bursts of brilliance, but the organizational structure of the research university offers the best mechanism for sustaining national research success over the long periods required to move from discovery to competitive product delivery.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

R&D Statistics at a Glance

Seems to be the official Indian survey on governmental R&D..for some reason the latest one is dated 2008.

Also a 2006 paper on the possibility of India becoming an innovation powerhouse here
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Vipul »

Zero in exam can still get you admission in Andhra Pradesh.

They may have handed over blank papers but they have still qualified for admission into professional degree courses in Andhra Pradesh. Unbelievable but true, say officials.Twenty-two of 78 students who scored zero in the entrance test this year will get admission in engineering and agriculture courses as they belong to Scheduled Caste (SC) or Scheduled Tribe (ST) communities.

According to officials in the education department, despite scoring zero in EAMCET (Engineering, Agriculture and Medical Common Entrance Test), these students have qualified as they got the minimum 40 percent marks in the qualifying Class 12 exam.

While nine students will get admission into engineering colleges, 13 can pursue other courses except MBBS. Even this was possible till 2008 when the Medical Council of India (MCI) tightened the norms.

The Dalit/tribal students who qualified despite scoring zero in the medical stream in EAMCET can get admissions into agriculture, veterinary and horticulture courses.

The Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU), Hyderabad, conducts EAMCET every year for admission into engineering, medical, dental and agriculture courses both in government and private colleges in the state. The results of EAMCET 2012 were announced last week.

Of 90,917 students who wrote EAMCET in the medicine stream, 83,686 qualified.

For the general category students, the competition will be tough with only 4,950 seats available in 37 medical colleges and 1,870 seats in 21 dental colleges.
Andhra Pradesh has the highest number of engineering colleges (671) in the country.

Of 283,477 students who wrote engineering entrance, 223,886 have qualified. This number has come down to about 200,000 as many students did not pass the XII exam.This means over 100,000 engineering seats would still go vacant in the academic year 2012-13. The state has 321,000 engineering seats.

Academics say the number of vacant seats in engineering colleges would be even higher as the top rankers will opt for the Indian Institute of Technology.
Till 2010, passing the Class 12 exam was enough to get admission into engineering college even if the students score zero in EAMCET.

Last year, the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) prescribed a cut off percentage of 50 in 12 Class for general category and 40 percent for the reserved quota students.The total marks in EAMCET are 160, and for the general category and the qualifying marks are 25 percent of the total.

Governor ESL Narasimhan, who is the chancellor of all universities in the state, is unhappy over the state of affairs.Addressing JNTU Hyderabad convocation in May, he disapproved of the trend of giving admissions to students who don't score a single mark in EAMCET.

"There should be some minimum qualifying marks. What do you expect of such students, who score zero, to do in classrooms? Do you want to develop an inferiority complex among such students?" he asked.

Last year, 26 out of 73 students who got zero marks in EAMCET were declared qualified. Of them, 17 got admissions into engineering and nine in agriculture/veterinary colleges.
SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2266
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Indian Education System

Post by SriKumar »

Booz comes out with an annual study of the top 1000 corporate R&D spenders. The latest report [url=http://www.booz.com/media/file/BoozCo-G ... ebinar.pdf[/url]
The top 3 industries for corporate R&D: Computing & Electronics, Pharma & Auto.
Pharma is expected....they have deep pockets, search for new drug molecules and the several levels of trials over years to bring it to market is expensive. Figures for auto industry seemed a bit surprising(ly high). I am not sure what is counted as R&D spending...perhaps any activity towards design of a new model (including aesthetics) is accounted for as R&D spending? I mean, looking at vehicles 5-7 years ago vs. today, it does not seem like there's anything earth-shatteringly different to justify about 25 billion $ of spending (avg. of 4 billion per year, over the last 5-7 years) per company. The only basic innovations (as far I can see) are improved fuel economy (via hybrid technologies) and perhaps improved crashworthiness. Most other improvements seem closer to technology integration (of pre-existing technologies), and that too, of electronics...e.g. adding blue tooth, GPS navigation, touchscreen controls, rear-looking cameras etc. Perhaps there is some engineering that is invisible to the average user. This, to some extent, describes the R&D in industry- it is more of development (dont know about the computer hardware & electronics). The improvements will likely be incremental, and linear. In this respect, industry R&D is fundamentally different from univ. research. Slide # 3's first point is ROII (return on innovation investment). With such close financial scrutiny, one cannot take long leaps. But in many respects, this is absolutely fine.....steady improvements in product over time does give a competitive advantage. It is fine for industry and desi industry can/should take this path.

US govt. has a program called SBIR (small business innovative research). The govt. gives a certain amount of money to small companies that have a R&D type technology that can be commercialized. The company could be something basic, like a group of Ph.Ds with some research ideas in a particular area. The govt. funding is like 'seed money' for small groups pursuing development activity. The explicit end goal is to commercialize the technology by involving a target company that can benefit from this technology. It is a unique R&D model in that it addresses a gap between industrial research (large scale, incremental) and university research (basic, and a nonlinear, perhaps non-existent, path to commercialization) http://www.sbir.gov/about/about-sbir
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

There's fairly substantial R&D dollars being invested by Auto in Safety Technologies, and in Environment Tech (less emissions, alternative fuels including electric cars and fuel-cell powered ones, battery technology). Toyota, which has the highest R&D budget ($8 Bn) - has promised to come out with a fuel-cell powered car by 2015.

But I would agree with a certain amount of skepticism as to how much of corporate 'R&D' really qualifies for that term. Other than work which is very much at the 'applied' end of things - there could also be tax reasons & general brand / H&D reasons for firms to classify parts of their expenditure as R&D. Given the importance of tracking R&D at all venues, it might not be a bad idea for firms to be required to classify their spend by different R&D accounting categories or by outcome.

I don't see the quantum of University and Institute based research funded by government going down significantly - but as a proportion of all research - it might go down further, ie Corporate research will probably grow at a faster rate.

Corporate structures or rather Fund structures, that have much longer-term outlook on ROI - will also come up. The fact is if Biotech which has high failure rates and ROI can take more than a decade - finds a place in the capitalist economy - there can be place for space missions, new transportation mechanisms or technology of any kind to be funded through corporate entities. Pure Science research will probably always have to remain in Govt hands- though even that may be increasingly funded by private Endowments (though not through a corporate structure).
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

^^^ At least in the US, private endowments play a significant (even though relatively small) part even in Pure Science research, I have personally benefited during a Post-doc tenure with private funds too. The well known private universities with huge endowments from individuals and corporate spend substantially for institutional level infra which also attracts federal funding as a result.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

AICTE's list of deficient engg colleges.
http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/arch ... 40064a.pdf
pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4172
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Indian Education System

Post by pgbhat »

India Ranks Lowest Amongst BRICs in Innovation
This innovation index was released recently by the international business school INSEAD and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) along with the Confederation of Indian Industries (CII), Alcatel-Lucent and Booz & Co. The index ranks 141 countries on the basis of their innovation capabilities and results. Brazil, Russia and China were ranked 58th, 51st and 34th respectively. India stands at the 64th position, two notches below where the country landed last year.
Gopichand Katragadda, managing director of General Electric’s John F. Welch Technology Center in Bangalore adds: “The results of the study point to the fact that, in India, the innovation ecosystem (input) is poor while the knowledge/creative output under the constraints is good. One interpretation of this is that we need better government measures on regulations, education and infrastructure to tap the demonstrated potential of talented people.”

According to Katragadda, if India does not get its act together on the innovation front, the country could lose the opportunity “to make this a century of Indian innovation, tapping into the brilliant technical minds of the region.”
Theo_Fidel

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Theo_Fidel »

This is an issue for those who think exam scores determine ability. The last several pages of discussion show that this is not true at all. This is a very upper-middle class media fueled angst. Is reservations the best way to determine admittance, no, but then neither is monkey like testing. Both deserve the rubbish heap.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13877
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Vayutuvan »

nsriram wrote:...that some IITians may have moved elsewhere to Economics or Math or Science or Finance or Social Work or what have you is something that cannot be prevented; ideally each individual should be free to pursue their interests and talents). For allowing individual talent to flower, the IITs could morph into broader based institutes (a la MIT or Stanford). The only way for that, IMO, is to provide more autonomy and let each institute decide their own entry criteria and have decent direction from their board of governors.
nsriram ji, people moving elsewhere not only is not prevented, even actively encouraged. You are absolutely correct in your assessment of broader base. Where I disagree is that autonomy should be limited to entry criteria. It should percolate to the level of professors deciding what to to teach for each course. IISc is in many ways closer to the ideal you talk about.

Regards
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13877
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Vayutuvan »

Arjun wrote:Actually, what is more interesting to me is - where is Research headed? Research can be conducted at Univs, Institutes (like TiFR, CERN) and Corporates.
After the demise of Bell Labs and Xerox PARC, it is an open secret that there are no corporate research labs doing basic research any more. Most of the basic research is done at universities in US. Are IITs ready to don such a mantle as there is no research to speak of (basic or otherwise) by Indian corporates?
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13877
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Vayutuvan »

Arjun wrote:...there need to be multiple institutes each with independance to define metrics for entry and attracting the best as they define it. The market is always the best judge !
Why so much of emphasis on entry? What counts is what happens after the entry.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13877
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Vayutuvan »

nsriram wrote:Have you heard of Amrita University? I had not.
nsriram ji, doesn't mean it is a bad place and in fact it is not.
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13877
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Vayutuvan »

nsriram wrote:Making a SAT like test or subject tests (called APs) is a very expensive business and hard to do in a multi-lingual country. ETS and the collegiate board are profitable ventures though and I have no doubt that they would be looking to expand into India (along with American univs).
nsriram ji, all the engineering education in India, as you probably know, is in English medium. Some kind of accommodation must be made for students from parochial schools.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

matrimc wrote:After the demise of Bell Labs and Xerox PARC, it is an open secret that there are no corporate research labs doing basic research any more. Most of the basic research is done at universities in US. Are IITs ready to don such a mantle as there is no research to speak of (basic or otherwise) by Indian corporates?
About 20% of basic research in the US is performed by corporates - but your point is taken that this percentage is low. Corporates are expected to be more oriented towards applied research and development.

As for IITs and research, the idea that any 'mantle' of research leadership needs to be conferred a priori to IIT or any other institution is faulty. The system needs to be similar to the US where the market for federal funds (as also from other funding sources for research) remains highly competitive - and all government research grants are based off publishing/citation and similar objective research criteria of competing universities. Presumably that's how the current Indian system works now - if not, that's the change to be pushed for.

Within India, the IITs are among the top in research output - but they are obviously low in global rankings. In order for the IITs to compete with the Ivy League at a global level, there are some changes that need to be brought in-

1. A transparent system of incentives that rewards research by Universities, similar to the American model. So (a) the funders of academic research, primarily the government, need to allocate their grants using objective measures of research output. And (b) the Universities themselves need to institute a 'research or perish' system for their faculty - currently not the case in India.

2. The Institutes need to be given a freer hand in entry criteria and compensation for relevant resources (PGs/faculty etc). They also need a free hand in course design, instituting TA/RA models and other academic structures.

3. Funding for academic research globally comes from government, corporates and endowments. Research output is obviously highly linked, even if not linearly - to the level of funding. IIT research funding may possibly a hundredth of what an Ivy League Univ has at its disposal. So, the level of funding needs to go up significantly - I would suggest a growth rate in research funding of at least 2x annual GDP growth.

4. No country can have an effective research program without a robust indigenous manufacturing industry that is a customer for the research. So its upto Indian entrepreneurs, business houses and corporate managers - to first come up with a strategy for acquiring these industries or attracting FDI in them (eg consumer electronics / semiconductor fabs / advanced materials).
Vayutuvan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13877
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 04:36

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Vayutuvan »

Arjun wrote:...
I agree with all your above four points.
Last edited by Vayutuvan on 17 Jul 2012 01:35, edited 1 time in total.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

While setting up new campuses be it IIT or IISER why the hurry in setting up ad-hoc campuses with limited student intake, before civil works are completed on the new campuses.
Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Bade »

Though the article is about the US system some of the ideas are worth exploring in the Indian context too.
Lawrence Summers: Changing focus to inequalities in opportunity
The leading U.S. institutions must make the kind of focused commitment to economic diversity that they have long mounted toward racial diversity. It is unrealistic to expect that schools that depend on charitable contributions will not be attentive to offspring of their supporters. Perhaps though, the custom could be established that for each “legacy slot” room would be made for one “opportunity slot.”
vera_k
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4487
Joined: 20 Nov 2006 13:45

Re: Indian Education System

Post by vera_k »

^^

Isn't this already the case in India after the Supreme Court's judgement in the Unnikrishnan case in 1993?
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66589
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Singha »

arent we too fixated on the american model as the best model, perhaps because thats all most of us are exposed to?

how does the whole univ-industry-r&d thing work in other nations that produce top flight science and engineering like Soko, Japan, Germany, France, UK and Italy? even Russia seems to be a power in certain areas. germany allegedly has lakhs of SME (<500 staff) who somehow operate at world class level and sit within the ecosystem of giant aggregators like diamler, vw, bmw, mtu , EADS , siemens and many more. how do they get access to or develop world class tech on such small staffs ? where do they train their manpower to such high levels? germans always seem to fly below the radar in terms of hyped up new inventions but look around and a lot of costly high tech products in each sector are german made! they seem to maintain a low profile but carry a big stick. same for japan - compared to GE and GM with their media machine we hardly hear what kawasaki, honda, fujitsu or mitsubishi are working on in their labs.

is it all similar to US or differs ?
SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2266
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Indian Education System

Post by SriKumar »

This would involve looking at a nation's i) education system, ii) scientific and engineering research institutions iii) industrial R&D and iv) industrial production...the nuts and bolts/cars & trucks/computers stuff, and the interaction between these entities.

Picking Germany at random. Their univ. system seems pretty extensive. About 70 universities, for a population of about 81 million,that is 1 univ. per 1.15 million population. From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_un ... in_Germany

Many of their universities are OLD....dating back to 1300s! Quite a tradition. This list of universities does not include the ones focussed on basic sciences, that is a separate system/list. HEre is a wiki entry on their education system- seems pretty detailed. This para caught my eye:
Germany has high standards in the education of craftspeople. Historically very few people attended college. In the 1950s for example, 80 percent had only Volksschule ("primary school")-Education of 6 or 7 years. Only 5 percent of youngsters entered college at this time and still less graduated. In the 1960s, 6 percent of youngsters entered college. In 1961 there were still 8,000 cities in which no youngsters received secondary education.[14] However, this does not mean that Germany was a country of uneducated people. In fact, many of those who did not receive secondary education were highly skilled craftspeople and members of the upper middle class. Even though more people attend college today, a craftsperson is still highly valued in German society.
Quite stunning, that the industrial powerhouse of the 60s, 70s was built mostly on high-school graduates trained extensively on industrial crafts. (One thing though: the influx of industry/cash from US/UK might have skewed things in their favor).

There are 4 tracks in secondary school (6th class to XII class). After passing secondary school:
...... pupils can start a career with an apprenticeship in the Berufsschule (vocational school). The Berufsschule is normally attended twice a week during a two, three, or three-and-a-half year apprenticeship; the other days are spent working at a company. This is intended to provide a knowledge of theory and practice. The company is obliged to accept the apprentice on its apprenticeship scheme. After this, the apprentice is registered on a list at the Industrie- und Handelskammer IHK (chamber of industry and commerce). During the apprenticeship, the apprentice is a part-time salaried employee of the company. After passing the Berufsschule and the exit exams of the IHK, a certificate is awarded and the young person is ready for a career up to a low management level. In some areas, the schemes teach certain skills that are a legal requirement (special positions in a bank, legal assistants).
Another link: http://academic.cuesta.edu/intlang/germ ... ation.html
Biggest difference relative to India is the emphasis on work-related training during and after high-school.
Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

Re: Indian Education System

Post by Arjun »

Singha wrote:arent we too fixated on the american model as the best model, perhaps because thats all most of us are exposed to?
While there is something to what you suggest, I would caution that American domination is not just an illusion - it's a hard reality in most high-end industries.

In software the US constitutes 60%+ of the global consuming market. Wall Street dominates the capital markets industry worldwide. Hollywood has eliminated most other movie industries (I am not as sanguine on Bollywood btw, unless it massively upskills its game over the next decade). Mckinsey, Booz, BCG, Bain etc completely overshadow global management consulting. There is nothing like the US Biotech, Medtech industries anyplace else. The US University system is superior to all others....

In R&D, the US definitely does dominate but not to as much an extent as in the other examples above. The US is probably a huge leader in pure science research - but engineering R&D domination is not as overwhelming because of American weakness in manufacturing. And this weakness is likely to intensify.

The US accounts for something like 35% of global R&D. In Computing, pharma & defence R&D its an overwhelming leader...but in Auto, Industrial automation, consumer electronics, material sciences - the leadership is going elsewhere.
how does the whole univ-industry-r&d thing work in other nations that produce top flight science and engineering like Soko, Japan, Germany, France, UK and Italy?
I don't know if Germany, France, UK, Italy experiences will be very instructive from an Indian standpoint. Their R&D advantage primarily stems from industries where they had a first-mover advantage more than a century back when these industries were starting up.

But Japan, S. Korea developed R&D strength even without first-mover advantage...that's something to learn from. From a scale standpoint, China (currently #2 in R&D) is the one to learn from.
Post Reply