“ a compromise formula which includes a proposal to take top 20% students based on percentile ranking of respective boards for preparing the merit list”

How meaningless is this solution ?. Higher education in India will become the domain of the school toppers and Children of affluent parents and we wonder why half a million students leave India to study undergraduate courses overseas. Children who will never return to a country that shunned them.

Is this is what we call inclusive in RTE ?.

God Save India

Inclusive education does not mean that everyone must enter, or pass out from, an IIT. It only means that if you wanted to, you could have a shot at it. The child labourer is excluded because she can never dream of entering an IIT; she may absolutely hate IIT, but not trying to join an IIT should be her decision. Even if there is only one IIT train, every child must have access to the platform where the train comes. Of course, not everyone will get on to the train but everyone knows what to do to have a shot at the train. This is called inclusion in education. Everyone must go to school till class 12; those who work hard, and are willing to work harder still, will join an IIT. Others will, by choice, decide not to work that hard and become economists.

Shubhashis Gangopadhyay


All children are born equal and mindless politicians are trying to grade the children and youth of the nation and create a new Brahamanical Caste system in Education, which is pandering to the neo rich who can afford to send their children to elite private schools and Coaching schools.

"HRD Ministry of India wants to build castles of higher education on the bamboo scaffoldings of its schools" ~ Satish Jha

Search This Blog

"Do you support the effort of Government of India to introduce a Common Engineering Entrance Examination scrapping IIT-JEE which would eventually dilute the IIT Brand?"

Showing posts with label 13 - PROF.IDICHANDY. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 13 - PROF.IDICHANDY. Show all posts

Friday, April 6, 2012

84 - Prof. Idichandy: Exclusive interview – Part 1




3 FEBRUARY 2012


Prof. V.G. Idichandy is one of the most recognizable faces on campus. In a career spanning more than 40 years at IIT Madras, Prof. Chandy has held numerous positions in the campus administration – Dean of Students, Deputy Director, Chairman – JEE and many more. He has played an instrumental role in setting up many of the institution’s current systems and is widely known for his camaraderie with students of the institute. He retired from the role of Deputy Director in October, 2011. He is a Professor in the Department of Ocean Engineering, IIT Madras. In this extensive interview, he shares his experience with the institute with T5E members Vinay Sridhar, Midhun Unnikrishnan and Nitish Garg.


On Formative Years

Prof. Idichandy began his career with the establishment of the Structures Lab in Civil Engineering department, around 1970. He was working with two German professors in this regard. Shortly afterwards, he went to the Universities of Hanover and Stuttgart for they both possessed renowned construction material and model testing facilities. He spent nearly a year in both these places. In Germany, every lab has a physicist associated with it – to help in instrumentation and measurement. He too worked in this capacity in the Structures Lab.
“Basically I’m a physicist”, he says.
Having completed his MSc Physics from Kerala University, he joined here as a senior technical assistant – a position he held till 1977. During this time, he started pursuing his MS even while working. There was some opposition to him doing an MS in Civil Engineering because, in his words, “they felt that only concrete and steel constituted Civil Engineering”. He also remembers that his Physics background was not appealing to them.


As a result he worked in the Applied Mechanics department. His tenure there saw many unique projects. The AM department was glad to allow him to register for an MS. He recalls meeting one of his professors and giving him the news, to which he replied “you will definitely do your MS in Engineering Mechanics.”


It did happen – he finished his MS in 1980.
He later went on to register for a PhD in Ocean Engineering, where he was offered the position of a Scientific Officer, going on to head of the German assistance program. Thanks to the extraordinary efforts of Prof.Idichandy and his colleagues, the Ocean Engineering department now boasts of many excellent experimental facilities.


After completing his PhD, he went abroad and did post-doctoral work at the department of Naval Arch and Ocean Engineering, TU, Berlin till 1987. By then the German assistance was through and he was made the chairman of the task-force for facilities building. His team was responsible for the introduction of 8-bit Apple systems for data acquisition.
“Ours was one of the best measurements lab among all labs in IIT” , he recalls with pride.


In his early days he served as the assistant warden of Godavari hostel and later in the early 90s he took over as the warden of Mandakini hostel. With the messes attached to the hostels and the students and mess workers having lot of issues, it was a challenging job. 


Remembering his days at Godav, he said “There were a lot of cultural changes over these 15 years. During those days student-staff relation was more personal – everybody knew each other, even by name. When I took over as Mandak’s warden, I observed a change – nobody talked to each other. The personal touch was missing. The atmosphere was very charged – never friendly. “


In 1993 he handed over charge to Prof. Krishnaiyah, and went for a brief time to Singapore. He went on 2 years leave, but returned in 9 months for he did not deem it to be worthwhile.
“There was good money there, but not on a single day did I experience the professional satisfaction that I had, having been here, in charge of building up facilities.”


After returning he got engaged in many defense projects. His association with the DRDO goes back to 1972. At that time the Indian Field Gun Mk 2 was being developed to replace a World War era rifle being used by the Army. The manufacturers wanted analysis of a support structure which had developed cracks. Later with support from Dr.Abdul Kalam, 


Prof.Idichandy’s team contributed towards building underwater missiles.
“Eventually the country succeeded in firing a missile from a submarine, right in the first attempt. And most of the work was done at IIT Madras.”


In 1994 Prof.Idichandy became the Cultural Advisor. He was associated with 2 Saarangs during this time. 


Then in 1998, the director, Professor Natarajan, switched him over to JEE, as the vice chairman; in 1999 he became chairman. 1998 brought a major change for JEE, which until then was conducted in the 60s fashion – without computerization.
“We being the organizing institute introduced a lot of computerization with support from IITK. Today, we’re able to handle 5 lac students only because of that step we took in 1998.”


Immediately after JEE, he was asked to take over as Chairman, Continuing Education. He remembered it to have been an interesting phase. He, along with Prof. Mangal Sunder, initiated web-based courses. From a humble beginning in a small MSB room, it has now  grown into NPTEL.


As Dean Students


After a brief period as the HOD of OE department, he was made Dean Students in 2002.

“I convinced Professor Ananth that we needed more space and he kindly agreed. The new Dean’s office was envied by all other IITs. It had cubicles for secretaries, all organizational work could be done at one place – it was a great thing.”


At that time, parents were unhappy with the state of hostels. With assistance from Prof Ananth,
he started the renovation of hostels. Later the construction of new hostels began along with Himalaya. He observes that once SK, RR and CR got contracts at IITM, it was easier for them to expand elsewhere. In 1997 he took up the cause of popularizing hobby clubs in IIT. With his efforts, slowly the activities in these clubs picked up. Notable among these were the Robotics and Aero clubs.

On CFI


“There were people with ideas, but no proper way to help them, to discuss the ideas, and to realize them. We then thought about CFI.”


The student representatives made a good plan for the construction of CFI, making the layout with an architect who was doing his PhD here. The 1981 batch gave overwhelming support by gathering 70-80 lacs. The site was identified but the Mechanical Engineering department opposed the selection of the site. Prof. Ananth came to the rescue and the site was finalised. But the project could not be completed. Even in that delicate situation, Prof. Idichandy did not reprimand them.
“That is my philosophy – encourage people to do what they want. Even if they fail, they’ll learn from it. If anybody comes with an idea, I never say no. if you have an idea and you want to work on it, why not?”


Views on the Student-Faculty relationship:
“I don’t know if the students have changed or faculty have changed, but the warmth of relation between the two sides is missing. I used to call students to my home to have tea or coffee. No big deal. The students enjoyed it so much, they said they never had such an experience. All that seems so unreal now.”


On the Curriculum in IIT:
Prof.Idichandy considers the Indian education system to be superior.
“In Stuttgart I attended a course which I now teach. It’s a 40 hour lecture, whereas there, it was about 10 hours.
He adds that the curriculums cannot be compared – though the Western system is more disciplined, the teachers have no freedom to ask anything beyond what is taught in class.


On Shaastra and Saarang:
Prof. Idichandy suggests that Shaastra’s primary purpose was not to bring so many colleges at one location and have a competition. It was mainly for IITM students to showcase their abilities.

“You don’t have to compete with VIT or SRM. Competition should be within IIT.”
“Commercialization is also a factor”, he asserts. Though there is much to learn from the stupendous organizational activity, it was not the objective.
“The objective was to make you really good engineers – put into practice something you learnt, bring forward your ideas; to make it an academic learning experience through an informal setting. That is why CFI is there. You have ideas to discuss with your department, undertake a project, and demonstrate at Shaastra.”
He suggests having a competition akin to the Prince of Wales competition in UK in which all IITs put up projects and a huge prize is announced for the best project. He criticized the stagnation that Shaastra and Saarang have been suffering over the past few years, with nothing new happening. He suggests taking a big step forward instead of being content with adding a few new events.
As far as Shaastra is concerned, we need more product-oriented work from our own side. It shouldn’t be about getting people from outside and having fun. You‘re all very capable kids and I’m sure you can do something.”
(In the second part of this interview, Prof. Idichandy talks about his association with JEE, the unified entrance examination, over-crowding in institute, LAN cuts and other issues.)



(This is in continuation with part 1 of the interview.)
Prof. V.G. Idichandy is one of the most recognizable faces on campus. In a career spanning more than 40 years at IIT Madras, Prof. Chandy has held numerous positions in the campus administration – Dean of Students, Deputy Director, Chairman – JEE and many more. He has played an instrumental role in setting up many of the institution’s current systems and is widely known for his camaraderie with students of the institute. He retired from the role of Deputy Director in October, 2011. He is a Professor in the Department of Ocean Engineering, IIT Madras. In this extensive interview, he shares his experience with the institute with T5E members Vinay Sridhar, Midhun Unnikrishnan and Nitish Garg.


On the JEE System

During his association with JEE, he made a general observation that a diligent student with good marks in the 10th and 12th did well after coming in to the IITs but that there was no correlation between performance in JEE and performance at IIT.


It’s a 12th std boy who’s writing the exam, what’s the point in asking him to solve M.Sc. level questions? This way we were purposefully driving them towards coaching institutes.

As the way forward, a suggestion was made that every board should select their top students; that is to say, those who scored more than mean plus two times the standard deviation, and ask them to write the exam.
We also suggested collapsing the two-part examination into a single objective paper that tested your analytical skills and comprehension.

The latter proposal was accepted, but the former was not, because the minister of the time remarked that the cutoff being based on statistical quantities was not something most people could understand. Instead, it was decided to insist on a first class. So only 60% and above were able to write the test. Prof. Idichandy was still not convinced.


We weren’t very happy about that, because the purpose wasn’t served.We had also decided to curtail the number of JEE attempts to two. There were people who stayed in coaching institutes for years together, till they succeeded; at that time there were people who were admitted to an undergraduate programme here even at the age of 28. Such was the attraction towards getting into IITs!

Views on Branches being allotted based on AIR JEE Rank

Another proposal was that branches should not be allocated on the basis of JEE rank. As he put it in his own words:
I’ve been fighting for this for a long time, I have not succeeded so far.

His explanation for the same was such: once you get into IIT after several years of rigorous exercise, you’d most likely be spent and exhausted; you’d want to relax and enjoy your first year. As a result, 30% of students fail in Physics, Chemistry and Math – these are all students who have cleared JEE.  So the idea was to not allot a branch on entry, but to give them time to prove themselves or earn a branch.
Admission into a particular branch need not only depend on an All India Rank.

Instead, he suggests, one could study basic engineering, understand what each branch has to offer, and then make a well thought out decision – maybe at the end of second or third semester; until then, they would all have common courses. This way they are also away from the pressures of parents as well as those of society, a society that believes only people in Computer Science and Engineering would survive. Aptitude for a branch is never taken into account at all.
The senates of every IIT had deliberated on this before, and it was almost decided upon a few years back, but then two IITs objected, and there was no consensus. This year, once again, it has come up as an agenda item, and will be discussed again.


He backed up the idea of a branch of study called General Engineering, which wouldn’t specialise in a particular discipline.


Why should every student who get into IIT go through the rigours of high funda mathematics which are required for design and analysis? Many students would be happy to choose such a stream – why should you do a specialised degree in Aeronautical Engineering if you’re intending to do an MBA afterwards?
A student undergoing this degree could choose to specialise in a suitable branch at masters level.

Unified entrance examination:

The pool of students writing AIEEE and JEE are almost the same; at least for the first five lakhs. He further questions the need for two separate entrance exams. A more important change that has come about is the adequate weightage given to 12th standard performance. The fact that a 90% in different boards may mean different things is being compensated for by calculating percentile instead of using the absolute marking – a lot of analysis is being done in this regard.
2013 students have been given sufficient notice regarding 12th standard marks weightage”, he concludes.


Regarding congestion and overcrowding
Prof.Idichandy was quite concerned about the facilities in the institute. He feels that  campus is being overtaxed by a sudden influx of people while it is designed to accommodate only 2500. Also in the Himalayas, there are cycles everywhere.
Single rooms have two people, double rooms have three people, bathrooms are an issue. This is my fundamental worry regarding this institute – the increasing population in campus.

In a few years, IIT Madras will house around 8000 students, of which around half will meet every day three times at Himalaya mess. With such a transition he feels that even a small spark can signal unpleasant reactions and it will not take much time for a mob psychology to build up.
I have no suggestion at all regarding problems like these; I’m at a loss. All of it was imposed without anybody being consulted in the IIT system about the increase in strength.


Prof. Idichandy also advocated the need for a satellite campus for IIT Madras. The problem here is that though we have enough land, we can’t use it.The crux lies in the fact that there is an existing rule regarding minimum forest cover that limits construction.


Regarding Eating Facilities in Campus:

I’m happy that nothing had blown out of proportion earlier because of the change in mess contractor.


He feels that was a very big mistake they had done. The idea behind having three independent contractors was that there should be competition; that there should be a choice of caterers and that they should work to provide better food.


He further delved into the attempts made to improve the situation like the introduction of swipe cards and hence to introduce a differential menu. The idea was that You can eat what you want, and pay then and there. There has been recent complaints about the deterioration of quality in food, services and common hygiene within campus restaurants, leading to many students going outside daily for food, he feels.


Caught In The Act

When Inquired whether 24 hour LAN cut really made a difference, he directed the question back :
I really don’t know, perhaps well meaning students such as yourselves should tell me whether you need 24 hours of LAN.

Friday, March 30, 2012

73 - Giving weightage to standard 12 marks is the step in the right direction says Professor IdiChandy



Professor Idichandy is the former dean of IIT Madras and convener of the Chandy committee report for suggesting reforms in Joint entrance exams for IIT's which led to changes in the admission criteria for IIT's in 2006. Professor Idichandy supports the greater emphasis to standard 12th marks which gives greater emphasis to the students academic performance in school. GyanCentral spoke to professor Idichandy to get more insights about the recent changes in IIT admission process and improvements in engineering education in India.

Do you think the move to give 40% weightage to standard 12th marks for admission in IIT is a step in the right direction?

Yes. Since 2004, we were advocating this step to give importance to school education. Over the years all stake holders in school education came to the conclusion that what they need is a pass in the higher secondary and what matters is a rank in the entrance examinations of various institutions and states. None can blame the students or parents for this lopsided priority, as 12 years of schooling had no relevance in their admission to higher studies except perhaps in Arts and Science Colleges. We have witnessed principals and teachers lamenting that all their good students are in the coaching institutions and not in schools.

How will the IIT's normalize scores across boards (different boards have varied difficulty level)?

While a single board examination with a common core syllabus shall go a long way in removing this apprehension, it may be a very long term dream but achievable. The school boards are now realizing that a common syllabus is an important step in the interest of everyone and what is required is political will for its implementation across the country. As far as the normalization of marks in different school boards is concerned, the Indian Statistical Institute, based on the analysis of the data of number of years of board examination suggested a scheme of normalization which I am told is a foolproof. I am sure the method suggested by ISI will find acceptance with all.

In any case, normalization of ranks across school boards is nothing new in India as there were Institutes following this practice for admission yesteryear's. States which have done away with Entrance Examination are also practicing normalization of marks/ranks.

What are the changes you would like to see in the IIT admission process?

Basically three major changes:
  1. A single national exam/test for admission to all professional colleges including IITs
  2. Giving adequate weightage for the overall performance in the school and not in just Sciences and Mathematics
  3. Allotment of branch/discipline based on the performance in the first three semesters in the respective institutions. The ranking based on the weighted score of the test and the school performance may be used for selecting Institutes and not branches of study.

Do you agree with Mr Narayana Murthy's statement that the standard of IIT students has lowered due to training institutes? If yes, How do you recommend improving the same?

I would tend to agree with Mr Narayana Murthy because the whole exercise of revamping the admission procedure to premier institutions is an acceptance of the fact that something is wrong.
The changes that MHRD is trying to implement in the admission procedure certainly will have effect on the quality of inputs but one should watch and monitor the processes in the next few years. My suggestion for branch allotment needs to be debated and implemented as at the end of three semesters of study, the students will be adequately informed to make the choice judiciously and based on aptitude. While these reforms are in progress, our school education and our attitude to teaching and evaluation should go in for major changes shifting the emphasis from rote learning to more of analytical and problem solving skills. Best communication practices and development of soft skills also should form part of school education. Unless these are done, the quality of inputs to Institutions of higher learning will not improve.

Are you satisfied with the research being conducted presently in IIT's? How can the research facilities be improved?

What is the yardstick for evaluating the research output of our Institutions? Are we providing our Scientists and Researchers with a level playing field? We have done very well in all fields where the goals were defined, like in ISRO, DRDO, Atomic Energy. Team work and well defined goals made all the differences in these institutions. Researches were for accomplishing targets and goals. This model cannot be compared with the research at a more fundamental levels happening in some of our research institutions. Good team work, critical mass of Scientists and Researchers in thrust and emerging areas shall go a long way in accomplishing our targets. We are in the right track and for a young democratic country like ours goal-oriented research may be one of the ways to achieve national goals.

Recently the IIM's have focused on greater diversity in a batch. Do you think the IIT's should also follow a similar path?

Diversity is already there in IITs and it evolved with time. Nevertheless, IITs can be better off, if they can improve the gender ratio amongst students and faculty in favour of women. It is easy said than done. One of the expected outcomes of taking the school performance into reckoning for admissions in premier institutions is an improvement in the number of girl students.

Having stated so, I am not very sure whether steps to artificially introduce diversity will produce the desired results.

You had strongly advocated not assigning branches on the basis of AIR. How can the system change? Do you think majority of the students will be inclined towards the most lucrative branch if he/she is given 3 semesters to decide the same?

Many of us strongly feel the same way. In fact I am told that five IITs agreed in principle to adopt the change though a consensus still eludes. At present the Institutes and branches are allotted based on the rank in JEE which in itself is an aberration in the student's overall scholastic performance. As of now the aptitude is not the deciding factor in the selection of branch but societal pressure, herd mentality and of course perceived lucrative placement. Three semesters of exposure to courses, we feel, will prepare the students to take a well informed decision about their career.

Your thoughts on the general engineering branch and its advantages?

I think the IIT system has matured enough to introduce paradigm shifts in branches of study depending on the demands of the time and the aptitude of the students. Such bold experiments need encouragement.

The AIEEE has a computer based version. Do you think the combined test will also have a computer based test version?

The number of students taking the proposed combined examination may not be significantly different from the number appearing for AIEEE today. Therefore a partial computer based test version practiced now can continue and may eventually give way to an online examination provided we create sufficient infrastructure and implement novel testing methods. After all, the exam is a test for admission to begin a professional career and not an end in itself.

What are the issues facing Indian engineering education today. What steps would you like to see to resolve them?

Today more than a million students enrol for higher technical education. There are Institutes like IITs at one end of the spectrum and Institutions without adequate infrastructure and faculty at the other end. The quality of engineers coming out from such a wide spectrum of Institutions can be best left to the imagination of the readers. If there is a widespread belief that only 10 percent of them are employable, it cannot be found fault with. The major challenge therefore is to train the available faculty and find ways and means of attracting more faculty for all Institutions. NPTEL can be a solution if adequate workshops are arranged for teachers to teach how to use the NPTEL material for the benefit of the students.

Teaching and research as a preferred career option must be "sold" to our students by encouraging the bright students to take up higher studies and later teaching and research. Rather than leaving everything to IITs and IISC and a few good institutions around the country to find solutions for all the ills facing technical education, there must be separate institutions to train a community of teachers at all levels. While there is a talk of skill development being a part of school education, why not teaching as a skill being imparted to students at an early stage at different levels? It is not a very easy task but should be a National Mission.
________________________________


IIT panels lie dormant to overhauling

New Delhi: Kapil Sibal, the Human Resource Development (HRD) minister had in October 2009, formed a series of committees during a meeting of the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Council - the highest decision making body, to look into the functioning of various IITs which now lies dormant.

It has been reported that various reforms, which were to be inculcated by these committees at the IITs, are on a standstill since its formation.

A committee, on which it was entrusted to recommend the new cut-off for the IIT's Joint Entrance Exam (IIT-JEE) and new curricula, is yet to meet.

The panel, which was assigned the reformations, comprises of secretary of science and technology, secretary of biotechnology and director general of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR).

It was expected that this panel would submit its report within three months while suggesting reforms in the IIT-JEE but it was not.

Most of the reforms, assigned to two other exam panels still lie unimplemented.

A panel, for example, set up under IIT-Madras deputy director, V.G. Idichandy in 2008 suggested scrapping JEE and considering school marks. The council, under former atomic energy chief Anil Kakodar, formed a second, five-member panel outlining a vision for the future of IITs.

The panel is expected to submit its report within six months. It has been four months now, the scenario is clear with the panel not having even met since then.

Following a Right To Information (RTI) exposure of the faculty selection in the previous JEEs, the reform process at the IITs, both for JEE and selection procedure, needs an urgent change.

The RTI exposure, which was filed by an IIT-Kharagpur professor Rajeev Kumar revealed that 994 candidates who were denied admissions in the year 2006 might have made it to the premier institutes had the IITs followed their stated method of determining subject cut-offs.

Although the IITs have revised their cut-off formula thrice but the need of a more transparency persists.