^{Knowledge Economy and Technical Education}

^{M.A.Pai* 
Part I   Undergraduate Technical Education}

^Home

^{The Indian media is full of news these days about the country becoming a knowledge superpower in the twenty first century. This rhetoric starts from politicians down to the common man. Once in a while we hear an opposite viewpoint. This is one such viewpoint.} 

^{If one takes a look at the industrially advanced countries like US, Russia, Japan,  S. Korea and EU countries,  all with similar political systems such as our country, and China with a different political system, all of them seem to have a stable growth not just in terms of GDP alone, but in education as well as infrastructure. (Electricity, Roads, Airports, Sanitation, Water).}

^{In India we have had a decent GDP growth in recent years due in part to manufacturing, IT and perhaps agriculture, but a reliable metric has yet to emerge. The education and infrastructure are perhaps the weakest links in the whole developmental process. Unemployment is still very high and the IT success giving employment to nearly a million people has not been matched by bold initiatives in Science and Technology education sector.}

^{In this article, we shall talk about education, more specifically technical education, which is the driving force behind all advanced economies. In India it is numerically healthy but quality wise it is very poor across the board. Last year India produced 350,000 engineers, US 70,000 and China 600,000. The numbers from India and US are roughly in proportion to their population whereas China seems to be in an aggressive mode. These numbers are quoted over and over again in US media in connection with a National Academies report, which came out recently, saying that the US strength in Science and Engineering is slipping. It proposes remedies to strengthen US Science and Technology education all the way from K-12 through Ph.D. [1]}

^{Coming to the Indian scene, the output of graduate engineers is healthy but two things are missing, namely the quality and the level of training. As the VP of Microsoft pointed out recently in Bangalore, India produces about 50 PhD’s in CS per year, which is a normal number in an average US public university. [2] In other areas of engineering, the picture is no better. Most of us know that except for IITs and a few other Institutions, the quality of undergraduate training is poor although the intake from the 10+ 2 system is good. Basically we not only need large number of graduates but good in quality as well. The recent U.R.Rao committee report has highlighted this issue clearly [3].}

^{How do we address this problem? Unfortunately officials at HRD as well as academicians seem to have avoided this problem all these years. Instead we hear of efforts at e-education, distance education and education via satellite and taped videos from IITs. All these modes of education have not succeeded in other countries but result in waste of human and financial resources which India can ill afford. We need to concentrate on giving quality education in the traditional way to a large number of students. Are there options besides opening up new IITs? Opening new IITs is always the first option. It is a costly option. But it requires long gestation periods, acquiring land, infrastructure, faculty etc. and cannot be a viable option at the moment unless the private sector comes up with a proposal.}

^{The second option is to upgrade existing Institutions with a proven track record to the level of IITs. Since the intake beyond the first 4000 from JEE up to the next 10,000 is comparable, this option should be considered very seriously. It is now well known that the 10+2 students coming to good Institutions to this country and also undergraduates from non IITs coming for graduate study perform very well. Hence the country must expeditiously move to make room for students beyond the first 4000 to impart an IIT brand education. [4] People in the Academia know which institutions can meet the criteria for elevating some of the Institutions to an IIT status. When regional and political considerations come in the picture, it presents a problem. Hence bold policies in this direction must be examined right away in order to be effective from June 2006. If a state like California can have Ten University of California campuses giving comparable UG education, certainly a country of one billion can have at least 20 IITs. The eligible institutions must be able to teach IIT type UG curriculum and that is a prerequisite. Many of them have a high percentage of Ph.Ds and simply have to be challenged to deliver an IIT type education. I think the country is ready for such bold initiatives. Perhaps the politicians are not. Just as the JEE format was changed within a matter of months, a similar bold initiative on this can be taken.}

^{A third alternative, which the writer has been advocating for a long time is the upward scalability of IITs, i.e. increase the intake at all IITs for the 4-year programs. Dual degree programs and degree programs in new subjects outside of the science and technology area are not the mission of IITs. Currently the student to faculty ratio at many IITs is more like 10:1, which is a luxury, compared to the 20:1 in most US public universities. In China, Tshinghua University alone turns out more than 2000 undergraduates in engineering according to their web site. This scalability of IITs is something that can be implemented right away. This can be done in many ways. Except for PhD scholars, rest must share rooms. If it is already the case in some places, quick hostel facilities from govt. or the alumni can be created. The IITs have vast space and it must be utilized optimally. The Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore can also join the four year undergraduate program with perhaps a greater share for Science graduates. This is one way of exciting young minds about science since they will be in the same campus as our top notch scientists. The experience at IIT Kanpur in the 60’s of having an integrated 5 year science degree program where excellent research was also done should be a convincing factor. There are very few world class institutions excelling in research without an undergraduate program. As for classroom space, there is plenty in all the IITs and IISc since one can have classes in the mornings and afternoons and same method applies to the laboratories. This is the normal practice in a US university. The old practice of tutorials must be done away with. It was introduced in the 60’s when the country did not have enough textbooks. There are many inexpensive text books now for a course and also the internet. The students are more mature. Instead of tutorials one should use post graduate students for grading home work and the office hours by faculty and the post graduate students should be enough for the students to have access. The Internet can be used effectively to communicate with students about home work etc., there will be opposition to this third alternative from Faculty at IITs since disturbing a status quo is always difficult in a democracy. But in the larger interests of the country the Faculty will rise to the occasion.}

^{The area of engineering research will be examined in Part II of the article.}

<sup>_____________________________________________________________________________________  

[1] Rising above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future  

[2]  'Microsoft official wants India to revamp curriculum' 

[3]  The committee's report "Revitalizing Technical Education" is a review of the 
      performance of the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), ... 
 
[4]   'Thinking beyond IITs'    M.A.Pai Silicon India Nov. 2000  

*The author is Professor Emeritus at University of Illinois and was formerly at IIT Kanpur (1963 - '81)</sup>