Engineering Teaching and Research in Iits
COMMENTARY
Engineering teaching and research in IITs and its impact on India*
Milind Sohoni This note analyses the nature of research and development (R&D) as it is practised in our premier engineering institutes and its effect on India’s development. I argue that the dominant paradigm of R&D is too abstract for it to be accessible to a wider set of students and teachers, and for it to yield developmental dividends. Furthermore, our metrics for R&D are too ‘international’ to incentivize work on our own development problems. I contend that good engineering must train students to model societal problems and solve them, and that problems coming from our development needs are good vehicles to promote it. Finally, I make some recommendations to make engineering more inclusive and outline the role of the engineering college as a regional solution provider.
This note is an analysis of the structure and nature of research and development (R&D) in engineering, as I see it. Much of my professional life has been at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay and that will serve as a running example for this analysis. I must add that in the case of IIT Bombay, its best years are still to come. I report here about R&D in engineering, as opposed to ‘pure’ or ‘blue-sky’ research. In what follows, I argue for four basic contentions: (i) there is a lack of diversity in the prevalent engineering education paradigms in the country; (ii) the dominant paradigm is too abstract to inculcate a suitable and broad-based R&D ethos; (iii) this paradigm is perpetuated by the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) and Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE), and these adversely impact our R&D efforts and finally (iv) our pursuit of international research is misplaced. At the end, I suggest a possible change of course, based on notions of engagement, delivery and accountability in engineering. for a good education/research institute, one cannot really separate R&D and its practice from
Engineering teaching and research in IITs and its impact on India*
Milind Sohoni This note analyses the nature of research and development (R&D) as it is practised in our premier engineering institutes and its effect on India’s development. I argue that the dominant paradigm of R&D is too abstract for it to be accessible to a wider set of students and teachers, and for it to yield developmental dividends. Furthermore, our metrics for R&D are too ‘international’ to incentivize work on our own development problems. I contend that good engineering must train students to model societal problems and solve them, and that problems coming from our development needs are good vehicles to promote it. Finally, I make some recommendations to make engineering more inclusive and outline the role of the engineering college as a regional solution provider.
This note is an analysis of the structure and nature of research and development (R&D) in engineering, as I see it. Much of my professional life has been at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay and that will serve as a running example for this analysis. I must add that in the case of IIT Bombay, its best years are still to come. I report here about R&D in engineering, as opposed to ‘pure’ or ‘blue-sky’ research. In what follows, I argue for four basic contentions: (i) there is a lack of diversity in the prevalent engineering education paradigms in the country; (ii) the dominant paradigm is too abstract to inculcate a suitable and broad-based R&D ethos; (iii) this paradigm is perpetuated by the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) and Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE), and these adversely impact our R&D efforts and finally (iv) our pursuit of international research is misplaced. At the end, I suggest a possible change of course, based on notions of engagement, delivery and accountability in engineering. for a good education/research institute, one cannot really separate R&D and its practice from