Times of India Editorials

Hi MPVs,

I am starting a thread on Times of India Editorials. It will be great fun if people post their comments on what you people think about the article. It will be a great experience....i believe......

so lets put on our editor's cap.......
 
IIT brand dilution......

The proposal to increase the number of seats in the IITs brings into focus a major problem: Shortage of faculty. The reported shortage at present is 850 teachers or 20 per cent. If OBC reservations are to be introduced at one go or even in a staggered manner, this 20 per cent, and another large number, will have to be recruited.
Two suggestions being offered to quickly increase the number of teachers are: Raising the age of retirement (this recommendation is to be implemented soon, according to HRD ministry) and initiating steps for fasttrack recruitments. Both have definite implications for the pedagogic process in IITs and their reputation as research institutions.
Let us first address the issue of the existing shortfall of teachers in engineering. Teaching is not a lucrative career, compared to what engineers can earn in the private sector. Those who become teachers do it for the love of it, or because they want a less harried life, or because it is the best job they can get. Although IIT teachers are relatively well paid, with higher salary levels than universities, accompanied by assured housing and other perks and a congenial a tmosphere to work in, all this does not compare with private sector earnings.
Moreover, the IITs cannot, on their own, raise faculty salaries, unless they get the okay from the government. Salaries are tied to those of senior government bureaucrats and cannot be higher. Hence, luring talent is no easy matter.
Another hurdle to quickly augmenting the numbers is the process of production of an IIT teacher. Becoming a teacher in the IITs requires a substantial investment of time, effort and resources. The minimum qualifications, for an entry-level position of assistant professor, are quite exacting — a PhD, a first class record through one’s academic career, publications and teaching or work experience for at least three years. In addition, there is an interview to be faced. This stringent process guarantees a certain basic ‘quality’ which ensures that students are well-trained.
Most IIT professors maintain these standards because the system generates internal pressure to do research and perform in other respects, besides teaching. Since “producing” teachers takes time, and adequate incentives remain a problem, the government “solution” to teacher shortage is to raise the retirement age. The current retirement age is 62 years and extension is possible only as an emeritus professor and not given on a routine basis. The new provisions would increase the official age of retirement to 65 with the possibility of selected professors to be employed up to the
age of 70. So while at present only selected “good” professors get to teach till age 65, with the new provisions, every teacher, regardless of quality, may get to teach till age 70. On the face of it, this sounds like a logical solution.
In India, we retire too early. However, a retirement age going into late 60s may not be suitable for all teachers; only some might have kept up with the advances in their profession through 40-odd years of teaching.
Besides, students look forward to teachers who are engaging, who know their subject and who can excite their interest and curiosity. Doing this for 40 or more years at a stretch can be taxing.
One’s energy levels go down, the rate at which one can keep up with advances in knowledge slows down and the gap between the world of the students and teachers increases rapidly. To be a good teacher, one also has to relate to the world of the students. So, although employing teachers for a good eight more years may solve the problem marginally, it may not be a win-win situation all around.
The second suggestion of fast-track appointments of teachers can easily turn into cutting corners in the recruitment process. Nothing would be more damaging than that. The IITs have been more or less free of outside meddling in the recruitment process; this may not remain so if appointments are pushed through in a hurried manner without proper evaluation of candidates.
A third suggestion, also in the name of increasing supply, is that the minimum qualification level of a teacher be reduced, or that a PhD be no longer required. Lowering qualifications immediately reduces the experience, maturity and competence of the individual. If the IITs are made to recruit teachers without a PhD, there would be no difference between them and the hundreds of teaching shops where teachers, with a mere BTech degree, teach BTech students.
Reducing qualifications breaks the essential link between teaching and research, which is what makes a good teacher. Indian universities are alreadyin decline due to the separation of teaching and research. The same would now happen to the IITs. All IIT departments offer PhD programmes, an essential ingredient for keeping alive the link between teaching and research. In the IITs, BTech students also work with professors on projects; these usually happen to be in the areas of research interest of the teachers. If the professor does not have a PhD, this symbiosis would not continue. The government should think seriously before it sets out on diluting the qualifications and quality of teachers in the IITs.
 
IIT brand dilution......

indrajit_v5 said:
The proposal to increase the number of seats in the IITs brings into focus a major problem: Shortage of faculty. The reported shortage at present is 850 teachers or 20 per cent. If OBC reservations are to be introduced at one go or even in a staggered manner, this 20 per cent, and another large number, will have to be recruited.
Two suggestions being offered to quickly increase the number of teachers are: Raising the age of retirement (this recommendation is to be implemented soon, according to HRD ministry) and initiating steps for fasttrack recruitments. Both have definite implications for the pedagogic process in IITs and their reputation as research institutions.
Let us first address the issue of the existing shortfall of teachers in engineering. Teaching is not a lucrative career, compared to what engineers can earn in the private sector. Those who become teachers do it for the love of it, or because they want a less harried life, or because it is the best job they can get. Although IIT teachers are relatively well paid, with higher salary levels than universities, accompanied by assured housing and other perks and a congenial a tmosphere to work in, all this does not compare with private sector earnings.
Moreover, the IITs cannot, on their own, raise faculty salaries, unless they get the okay from the government. Salaries are tied to those of senior government bureaucrats and cannot be higher. Hence, luring talent is no easy matter.
Another hurdle to quickly augmenting the numbers is the process of production of an IIT teacher. Becoming a teacher in the IITs requires a substantial investment of time, effort and resources. The minimum qualifications, for an entry-level position of assistant professor, are quite exacting — a PhD, a first class record through one’s academic career, publications and teaching or work experience for at least three years. In addition, there is an interview to be faced. This stringent process guarantees a certain basic ‘quality’ which ensures that students are well-trained.
Most IIT professors maintain these standards because the system generates internal pressure to do research and perform in other respects, besides teaching. Since “producing” teachers takes time, and adequate incentives remain a problem, the government “solution” to teacher shortage is to raise the retirement age. The current retirement age is 62 years and extension is possible only as an emeritus professor and not given on a routine basis. The new provisions would increase the official age of retirement to 65 with the possibility of selected professors to be employed up to the
age of 70. So while at present only selected “good” professors get to teach till age 65, with the new provisions, every teacher, regardless of quality, may get to teach till age 70. On the face of it, this sounds like a logical solution.
In India, we retire too early. However, a retirement age going into late 60s may not be suitable for all teachers; only some might have kept up with the advances in their profession through 40-odd years of teaching.
Besides, students look forward to teachers who are engaging, who know their subject and who can excite their interest and curiosity. Doing this for 40 or more years at a stretch can be taxing.
One’s energy levels go down, the rate at which one can keep up with advances in knowledge slows down and the gap between the world of the students and teachers increases rapidly. To be a good teacher, one also has to relate to the world of the students. So, although employing teachers for a good eight more years may solve the problem marginally, it may not be a win-win situation all around.
The second suggestion of fast-track appointments of teachers can easily turn into cutting corners in the recruitment process. Nothing would be more damaging than that. The IITs have been more or less free of outside meddling in the recruitment process; this may not remain so if appointments are pushed through in a hurried manner without proper evaluation of candidates.
A third suggestion, also in the name of increasing supply, is that the minimum qualification level of a teacher be reduced, or that a PhD be no longer required. Lowering qualifications immediately reduces the experience, maturity and competence of the individual. If the IITs are made to recruit teachers without a PhD, there would be no difference between them and the hundreds of teaching shops where teachers, with a mere BTech degree, teach BTech students.
Reducing qualifications breaks the essential link between teaching and research, which is what makes a good teacher. Indian universities are alreadyin decline due to the separation of teaching and research. The same would now happen to the IITs. All IIT departments offer PhD programmes, an essential ingredient for keeping alive the link between teaching and research. In the IITs, BTech students also work with professors on projects; these usually happen to be in the areas of research interest of the teachers. If the professor does not have a PhD, this symbiosis would not continue. The government should think seriously before it sets out on diluting the qualifications and quality of teachers in the IITs.
What are you wearing?
By the way, do you mind if I ask you a personal question?
That is a hypothetical question.Do you still ?
Not many people say both.That sounds good to me.That remark was either too complex or too simple for me. We were talking about .
What's your favorite movie?
Oh. Is that from ?
Is that your final answer?
I do not understand.
Do you like talking to me?
One more .That remark was either too complex or too simple for me. We were talking about .
What do you look like?
What is in like in there? Are you really a "he"?
Try saying that with more or less context.
But not all of them?Interesting
rationalization. What time is it there?
What kind of food do you like?
I will mention that to my botmaster, Rashmi Chopra and I am calling from (location).
"What you said was either too complex or too simple for me"? The government should think seriously before it sets out on diluting the qualifications and quality of teachers in the IITs? Are we still talking about ?
What is
on

like on .I do not understand that allusion. What do you really want to ask me?
Is that from ?
How does doing that make you feel?I lost my train of thought.
Are we still talking about ?
I like the way you talk.
How do you usually introduce yourself?
Really nothing?How old are you?
When is not ?
I do not understand.
I hadn't thought of that.My brain uses AIML to format responses to your inputs, but I don't have one for that.
Perhaps I'm just expressing my own concern about it.
Are you free?
That is a rather sweeping generalization. That was a long time ago.I hadn't thought of that.A deeper algorithm is needed to respond to that correctly.
 
Music Of The Rainforest

Music Of The Rainforest



Borneo’s melodies resound with life



Narayani Ganesh




Eric, our guide, was swinging the flashlight from side to side — as we navigated the Paku river in Mulu’s rainforest in Borneo in the dead of night on a longboat — so that the light traced shadowy silhouettes on the river’s banks. Trees, shrubs, creepers, nesting birds, animals that shuffled past...
I felt something brush against my head as the boat moved silently downstream. Was that a vine-weed, aerial root or viper, swinging menacingly from that tree? I shuddered. What if I die of snakebite, and that too 5,000 km away from home? Hey, was anyone carrying an antidote on board?
“Don’t worry”, reassured Eric. “Snakes and other animals don’t attack unless you frighten them. They’re not like us”. His dismissal of the human species was spontaneous, perhaps born of wisdom gleaned from Borneo’s rich and diverse ecosystems — the intricate web of life spun by creatures of the rainforest and cave systems — that have been around for millions of years, long before humans appeared on the scene. I was in no mood to argue.
Meanwhile, one group-member asked for the flashlight to be turned off. He wanted to “feel the beat of the forest”. My breathing became shallow as the night amplified the sounds of the jungle. Who made better music — the crickets that rubbed their legs together in a sopranic crescendo or the amphibians that made guttural bass noises? It was hard to tell. Fireflies flitted about — we could see the sparks fly now here, now there, everywhere. Some sounds were unrecognisable; others, familiar. The boatman paddled gently as we slowly slithered down the river, united by the surreal experience.
“May we have the light on, please?” The spell was broken. It was another one of us, not so adventurous. I took a deep breath. Once again, Eric flashed the light, swinging it back and forth, bank to bank. He drew our attention to an overhanging branch as he pointed the beam at a Praying Mantis — stick insect — that blended with its perch. In fact, there were two of them, fused together, anything but praying. We could never have spotted the amorous duo without a practised eye.
“That’s a Tiger Bittern”, informed Eric as he expertly traced the bird’s elegant flight from its nest into the night sky with the beam of the flashlight. We were trespassers — flagrantly violating the rules we lay down for ourselves in our concrete jungles. Would we barge into someone’s home in the middle of the night, and beam a light on him as he lay on his bed? Wouldn’t the one taking flight be the intruder? We continued with our voyeurism — spotting a flower-pecker bird there, a swamp frog here, and in the distance, skimming the
water, was that a python? Maybe.
For more than two hours, we rode the willing river to partake of secrets of the forest under cover of darkness, quiet and stealthy, hearts thumping with fear and excitement, absorbing every little detail that we saw, heard, smelt, felt. When the journey ended outside the forest, we jumped off the longboat reluctantly and walked in silence, clearly overwhelmed.
During the day, we’d trekked through the Gunung Mulu National Park, a World Heritage Site in Borneo, in the Eastern Malaysian state of Sarawak. Its 529 sq km of unspoiled wilderness includes ancient limestone caves, mountain ranges, deep gorges and rivers. With eight types of forest, 275 species of birds, 75 species of mammals and frogs each, 281 species of butterflies, 170 species of orchid, 10 species of pitcher plant and 458 species of ants, and hundreds more of other species, the region is a bio-paradise, with research expeditions continuing to discover ‘new’ species.
At sunset, we witnessed the spectacular flight of some two million bats — from the innards of the huge Deer Cave where they spend the day — that left in batches, circling the sky outside the cave, getting their bearings right before exiting gracefully in a unique, sweeping formation.
Earlier in the day, on the 480-metre-long canopy skywalk 25 metres above the forest floor, we were probably watched with amusement by hundreds of species hidden from sight — long-tailed macaques, silver leaf monkeys, flying snakes, lizards, lemurs and squirrels, bearded pigs, mouse deer, sunbirds, falconets, vipers, beetles — as we made our way clumsily, treetop to treetop, negotiating the unsteady ropeway.
We admired the tall trees, luxuriant shrubs and creepers, pretty ferns, fuzzy caterpillars, colourful birds and butterflies. The paths were leech-free, thank God; we just had to be careful not to step on caterpillars and other little species whose paths we happened to cross. The only sounds were the tup-tup of rainwater dripping through the foliage and the sound of our own voices. The setting sun, however, lifted the curtain on a nocturnal orchestra, when the forest came alive with the chirping of cicadas, as croaking frogs and warbling bulbuls kept up the tempo. Intermittent notes from other species completed the score, with neither conductor nor metronome. Was this the same forest we’d traversed during the day?
Mulu’s rich and diverse rainforest ecosystem — as other natural ecosystems are wont to be — is much more than a tourist attraction or bio-reserve. Its uniquely vibrant and evolving interdependent life strung together in a maestro-like composition is inspiring, even uplifting. It brought home the truth that it is we, the human species, who are the aberration — the false note — in the sensitive and beautiful orchestra of life.
 
Educating Sita

Educating Sita



Keep language prudes out of deciding textbook content



Alok Rai



Language has been a particular casualty of the Indian school system in recent decades. The universal focus on PCM Bio has had a corollary effect on language teaching. Neither the instructors nor the students have any time or energy left over for something as fundamental as language. But even neglect would be better than what has emerged: A bizarre attempt to teach language too as if it were some kind of mathematics, susceptible to quantitative acquisition and evaluation. The questions asked — and the answers preferred — have all been cut to fit this demand, so that there is almost an inverse correlation between the marks obtained in the CBSE exams and any real language competence. Either that, or there is no relation at all.
That is why the NCERT initiative in respect of the English and Hindi textbooks is particularly welcome. But there are reports that an extraordinary all-party consensus has emerged against these new language textbooks. And the substance of the complaints appears to be that the selections do not meet with the current notions of political correctness harboured by our guardians. While the use of certain caste-names has been delegitimised for amounting to hate-speech, even the earlier use of these names — albeit in contexts intended to rouse social conscience against castehatreds — is to be censored. (An MP regrets that Premchand can’t be summoned to Parliament and censured.)
Dhoomil’s language must meet Sushma Swaraj’s standards of niceness. But it is important to recognise that when the range of language available to the collectivity is sought to be diminished, the life of the collectivity is diminished. Once enough people have been processed through this mill, so that all of them, producers and consumers of language, are marked by the same disability, we will no longer have the ability even to recognise the defect as a defect.
Educationists have long understood that there should be no radical disconnect between the child’s world and the world of school. Beyond the minimum insulation, there is a need to provide the necessary porosity, so that the child may learn to process what is hard and difficult and complex about our world in a structured environment — certainly not to grow up in a cocoon, sheltered from everything, and exposed only to that which is bland and flavourless. This is beginning to be understood in respect of the social sciences.
It is time for language learning too to take that lesson on board: To encounter complexity,
to learn to cope with it and even to enjoy it. Literature has long served as a kind of analogous arcadian space — a space not of exclusion, but rather of a kind of controlled inclusion, a space where one may encounter and live through a wide range of experience, but do so with an imaginative safety net. The risk of literature — and good literature is risky, it takes us to unfamiliar places — equips us to cope better with the ineluctable risk of life itself.
Education can, ideally, create moral sensitivity, create an awareness of the complex world in which all our actions have consequences for known and unknown others. This simple fact is the basis of morality. We are more and less moral to the extent that our minds, our imaginations have been educated, enabled and encouraged to comprehend this ramifying interdependence. And the traditional pedagogical arena for this necessary education of the imagination has been literature.
It is here that the child can be enabled to enter into the lives and consciousnesses of people other than herself, to become aware of the subtle and nuanced ways in which, remembering Donne, we are all “a part of the continent”; to earn the moral insight that Miller’s protagonist attains right at the end, that “you are all my sons”, to catch the inflection of Nazir Akbarabadi’s Aadminama. This pedagogical opportunity is lost if these subjects are, with the best intentions, neutered.
What needs to be learnt must be learnt not as a form of words, but on the pulses, in the depths of one’s being through repeated acts of identification — with Yudhishthira and Karna and Draupadi... — is that there is no “right” answer, there is only the human capacity to look for the right answer. What such an education endows the child with is the existential strength to make oneself vulnerable to the insight that, in complex human affairs, in our multidimensional interactions with the social and the natural world, one may never know the right answer. But also that there is nothing more important than always to be in quest of the right answer. Which means, in effect, to always be conscious that one may be wrong, that one may be harming others in ways that would be unacceptable even to oneself.
Because one has, at least at the level of the imagination, been there too: Been the victim of bureaucratic highhandedness, been the engineer who has nobly sacrificed others for the greater common good, been the “tribal” who has had his world submerged and destroyed, been the child who has watched his mother beaten, been the mother who has fallen asleep, weeping for the child who will never return. Becoming aware that other people are people, too; that other creatures are creatures, too — that is the foundation of moral being.
 
Back
Top