topics: |  iit | india | education

The decaying IITs

The IITs are in a sorry state, according to Gulhati who after graduating from MIT, taught at IIT Delhi for forty years. There isn't enough good research, the student intake is lopsided and demotivated, the faculty have lost their idealism. The main problem, feels Gulhati, is interference from the government, particularly the Joint Secretary in the ministry that oversees the IITs - the MHRD.

Governmental control of education institutions is a problematic issue. Throughout history, the best research has always required state patronage. At the same time the process in India has seen its ups and downs.

The vision of the IITs as autonomous institutions is enshrined in the IIT Act and original statutes have a broad, empowering vision. They are largely autonomous bodies, governed by a board whose members are people of outstanding technical or industrial experience. But reality lies in the nuts and bolts, and the fact that funds for the IITs are channeled through a government ministry -- the Ministry of Human Resource Development, MHRD -- has resulted in officials exercising considerable influence.

At the IITs things haven't quite gone as far as AIIMS which is at constant
loggerheads with the political bosses in the ministry for health; in the
1970 the AIIMS governing board was reconstituted (by the then minister Raj
Narain), so that politicians and bureaucrats now outnumber medicos and
acadmics on the board.  The yes-men of the ministry will get any measure
passed, often opposed to the the faculty and the director, as happened
during the tenure of Ambumani Ramadoss as health minister.  

In the early decades, the IIT boards had true luminaries, with notable
industrialists often serving as chairman of the boards.  Today every board
has some ministry officials.  while many of these IAS officers are IIT
graduates themselves, it would be hard to argue that they are people of
technical eminence.  Gulhati's stories about the selection process for
directors is clearly a sad indicator of what may lie in store for the IITs
if this governmental interference cannot be mediated by a broad societal
intervention.

Too much government interference?

Gulhati feels that the IITs did well in their early years, when there was a
lot of idealism in the system and the government gave a free hand to the
academics.  Writing some four decades after the IIT system was founded, he
feels that there is too much politicization, directors are worried that the
Ministry may not approve their leave plans, and autonomy is largely
infringed by a desire to toe the line set by the ministry.  The way out, he
suggests, may be private ownership; several groups, typically
alumnus-driven, have in recent years proposed a "buyout" of the IITs from
the government...

Particularly damning is Gulhati's discussion of the opaque process by which
directors are appointed (based on an interview at the MHRD - selected
essentially by the all-powerful Joint Secretary - an officer officially
ranking below a director in the rank of babudom).  

Gulhati has been a candidate himself, and describes the experience which is
based on "nominations" from a select few and does not take into cognizance
any inputs from the faculty or other stakeholders.  The final interview, at
the minister's office, can be quite humiliating.

This is a book that needed to be written in these times when the burnished
IIT image is shining brightly, but the hallowed institutions are perhaps
not quite what they used to be.  Government decisions, such as the sudden
move to open eight new IITs, taken practically without any input from
academia or others, and the continuing shortage of good faculty, may not
help much in the long run.

The director of IIT Madras, M. Ananth, tells a relevant joke in connection
with government interference at the IITs.  It seems E.M. Forster once wrote
Natwar Singh:

EM Forster: the condition of the Ajanta caves were getting worse.
NS's reply:  But no, the Archaelogical Survey has formed a group and is
	taking good care of them.
EMF: the caves which were thriving in neglect are now dying from the
	attention.

Perhaps the IITs could do with more benign neglect.

Excerpts

Kanta Murali, Frontline, Feb 2003: The IIT Story
Sarkar Committee: 1946 22 member committee headed by N.R. Sarkar
presented interim report in 1946

The Sarkar Committee never submitted a final report, but IIT Kgp set up in
May 1950. 

Indiresan / Nigam: 1% of IIT B.Techs do their PhD in India, p.11.
	2% do it abroad
Among IITians migrating abroad, 90% are UG and 10% are PG
Laboratories at IIT - in very bad shape

Joint Secy at MHRD:
	have gradually become powerful, since directors are weak.
	directors are constantly worried if their leave requests to attend
	conferences etc will be put up by the Jt Secy on time.

Director Selection

At any organization worth its salt, e.g. in  private corporations and
at MNC's, there is considerable thought given 
to the  grooming of potential leaders.  

At the IIT the crucial leadership post is that of director.  
A director has wide powers, and serves as a one-point conduit between the
academic work at the institute and the government and nation outside.   

The main criterion for being selected as director appears to be an ability to
appease higher-ups.  Initially, one needs a mentor, someone high-up in the
science hierarchy, who serves on various selection boards etc.  Subsequently,
one needs to satisfy the whims and fancies of the minister, conveyed via the
officials of the MHRD.  There is no "grooming" of course, except at
administrative posts within the institute.

The process of director selection is controlled by the ministry, and there is
no transparency.  The key steps are:

   a) Ministry (MHRD) asks for nominations.
   b) Candidates are asked to send in their resumes.
   c) Someone in the ministry shortlists the candidates. 
		[This is where the joint secretary becomes crucial.]
   d) The shortlisted are then called for an interview at the minister's
	chamber.

Gulhati himself was a candidate once and found the experience humiliating:
	I was asked to present myself at the office of the Minister of HRD at
	some specified time.  I did.  There were another seven or eight
	similarly invited.  We were asked to wait in the office of the PA
	which neither had sufficient room nor furniture.  I was appalled to
	see the then Director of my IIT also seated there. .. they had seen
	him functioning as Director for 5 years... he was not re-appointed.

	At my turn, I went into the Minister's office.  I knew some of those
	who sat there as members of the selection committee - all very
	illustrious people.  The minister did not ask any questions - just
	graced the occasion with his presence.  The discussion was totally
	pedestrian.  No one asked me what I thought was amiss in the IIT
	system etc.. Someone asked me, "How many phd students have you
	guided?"  60-61

[AM: But I think that despite its weaknesses, the IITs have one shining
possibility - and that is that the quality of faculty - at least in the older
IITs - is quite high, and gives us hope that change is possible. ]

Gurcharan Das, ToI:
	India's greatness lies in its self-reliant and resilient people.  We
	are able to pull ourselves up by our chappals and survive, nay, even
	flourish, when the State fails us at every turn. - ToI Sunday column
	2006 feb 26

When our govt realizes that it doesn't have to run these schools and clinics,
but only provide for them, will we achieve the Indian way to greatness. p.55
b%
From Sandipan Deb, IITians:

Rajat Gupta, ex MD McKinsey & Co: I remember a few profs. There were some you
stayed in touch with even after you had graduated. But.. most of my memories
are from outside the classroom.

Nandan Nilekani: I hardly ever went to class, and I don't remember a thing I
was taught.

JEE: 2006, nearly 3 L candidates, for 4000 seats at 7 iits

McKinsey & Co study: Shaping the Knowledge economy in India, 2001, in
"Changes required in Faculty compensation and evaluation":
  * de-link faculty salary from current govt scale and create a new category
  * introduce significant performance-linked component in compensation
  * allow direct compensation from industry without limit
  * provide a high standard of research and personal infrastructure

Student admission and JEE

The book repeatedly highlights problems with the JEE system.

Top Universities worldwide select students by considering a large number of
factors, including academic competence, social interaction history, other
talents like music or sports, the amount of diversity they will bring to
the student body, etc.  Students who meet some of these criteria are
interviewed, typically by alumnus in their home cities, and are then
finally evaluated.  Consequently, the students have varied backgrounds and
interests, and shine in different areas.

On the other hand, IITs are constrained to look at a single measure, the JEE,
which has been corrupted by the coaching centers; consequently the student
body coming into IITs (who have often spent a year or two away from home at
the coaching center) are all similar - they have very strong examination
skills, but little other interests.

Often the students thus admitted, after years of grinding preparation, find
themselves in a completely unexpected situation where they don't know what
they are doing.  Studentsa re assigned a discipline right at admission time
(at age 16), based on JEE rank.  Many of them find their courses uninspiring,
and would rather be studying humanities.  Many students, in traditional
engineering branches, know that their courses are completely useless because
ultimately they will be hired by an IT firm.  The number of suicides at most
IITs (about 1 every year) is quite staggering.

Alternative proposals and why they won't work

An alternative Student admission proposal:
   - Let JEE sift top 10K students.
   - These students are asked to submit additional material, portfolios,
	     writeups etc.
   - Everyone is interviewed by some local alumnus groups
     - Students from weaker schools, weaker geographic areas, and whose
          parents are in a weaker social strata, can be given preference.
     - final evaluation can still be anonymous, as it has been, via a roll
          number coding.  However all these factors can be taken into
	  account.
     - after the process, students records and his evaluation comments
	  can be made available to the candidate.

Similar measures have been proposed a number of times...
Part of the reason why such a system cannot be adopted is that any degree of
subjectivity in the process is likely to be manipulated by the ministers and
their babus to get their own wards admitted.

In other words, we cannot trust ourselves to make the "right" decisions. 

An institution that cannot trust itself probably does not deserve to be
great.