Swing_n_Speed Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 What makes you feel so? There is no cult. It is pure meritocracy (besides some reservation rules enforced by Govt.o.India). [Would you dare use similar word ('cult') for MIT/HVD/Stan, who have relatively less transparent selection criteria than IITs] Have you ever heard of Govt/Society.of.USA telling MIT/HVD/Stanford/Princeton/Yale.../.../..../.., how to select their incoming students? Sure they do. Codeword- Affrimative Action. http://web.mit.edu/policies/7/7.1.html http://web.mit.edu/policies/7/7.1.html Many say even Barrack Obama was an affirmative action student and neither was George Bush qualified to go to an Ivy league school. American Universities have all sorts of preferences for admissions. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2006/6/5/law-review-debates-affirmative-action-policy/
Crookbond Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 What makes you feel so? There is no cult. It is pure meritocracy (besides some reservation rules enforced by Govt.o.India). [Would you dare use similar word ('cult') for MIT/HVD/Stan, who have relatively less transparent selection criteria than IITs] Have you ever heard of Govt/Society.of.USA telling MIT/HVD/Stanford/Princeton/Yale.../.../..../.., how to select their incoming students? Harvard definitely has some 'cult' too, to be fair. The more pertinent question is - Do these universities (MIT et al) involve in unfair practices to preserve their status OR Do they cry wolf every time?
akshayxyz Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 Harvard definitely has some 'cult' too' date=' to be fair. The more pertinent question is - Do these universities (MIT et al) involve in [b']unfair practices to preserve their status OR Do they cry wolf every time? Elaborate, cite examples.
Crookbond Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 Elaborate' date=' cite examples.[/quote'] The Dean/HOD of every department in an IIT is a rotating position every 3 years. Explain. (5 Marks) Disclaimer - I am just too closely involved with the higher education sector in India.
akshayxyz Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 Sure they do. Codeword- Affrimative Action. http://web.mit.edu/policies/7/7.1.html http://web.mit.edu/policies/7/7.1.html Many say even Barrack Obama was an affirmative action student and neither was George Bush qualified to go to an Ivy league school. American Universities have all sorts of preferences for admissions. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2006/6/5/law-review-debates-affirmative-action-policy/ And how much of that is 'dictated' by their govt? In Indian context - in what ways IITs have been discriminatory?, or in what ways they are not following Affirmative action policies? How do you evaluate - whether govt's 'affirmative action policy' (in matters of selection criteria) is not biased (not-at-all influenced by their vote-bank agenda)...in other words, is as objective possible........i.e. more objective than the proposal put forward by the IITs senate for JEE ? Btw, how many MITs/HVDs are there in US of A? To what extent their selection criteria is dictated by govt.of.USA?
akshayxyz Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 The Dean/HOD of every department in an IIT is a rotating position every 3 years. Explain. (5 Marks) Irrelevant. We are talking about UG/PG selection criteria and process.
Crookbond Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 ^ Your assumption that JEE is the best way to judge a candidate's meritocracy is contentious. Now, here's a way to look at it - Even if I accept your (for argument's sake) that IITs are more transparent than the MITs, Harvards etc. IIT's should have produced students more than the MITs and be a better "university" than the MIT. The fact is - It's hardly true.
Crookbond Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 Irrelevant. We are talking about UG/PG selection criteria and process. You sure you want to include PG in this? Another assumption you make - Transparency equates to a better selection process.
Swing_n_Speed Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 ^ Your assumption that JEE is the best way to judge a candidate's meritocracy is contentious. Now' date=' here's a way to look at it - Even if I accept your (for argument's sake) that IITs are more transparent than the MITs, Harvards etc. IIT's should have produced students more than the MITs and be a better "university" than the MIT. The fact is - It's hardly true.[/quote'] Just curious, how do you define 'better'?
akshayxyz Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 ^ Your assumption that JEE is the best way to judge a candidate's meritocracy is contentious. You got it wrong. I am saying - the final word (selection model) should be left upto IITs, to define the criteria of admitting students to their institutes. Remember what you said - MITs (and alike) have succeeded because of their commitment towards 'certain' philosophy (which they have been 'allowed' to execute over almost a century) Here you are not even allowing 'someone' to execute a philosophy they believe in. If someone has better model, go ahead implement on their own.. and prove that theirs' work better....By interfering with their process, you are not giving them any chance to prove that their model works (or not). IF you have anything to say after watching Prof. Sanjeev Sanghi's talk.. then refer to specific points - before coming up with absurd allegations about unfairness in selection process or any 'cult' mentality.. Now, here's a way to look at it - Even if I accept your (for argument's sake) that IITs are more transparent than the MITs, Harvards etc. IIT's should have produced students more than the MITs and be a better "university" than the MIT. The fact is - It's hardly true. Transparency of selection process has (almost) nothing to do with - 'end of the day' 'success' of the students. Bold part - nonsense and apple vs oranges. You just do not understand why you can not compare IITs vs MITs....MITs should be compared with HVD/Stan.... and IITs with BITS/NITs etc. Besides, you should know that most of the IITians who go for PG in MIT/Stans... do pretty well in academics, despite coming with from relatively less reputed & privileged UG school (MIT-UG vs IIT-UG)..... Also, wait for couple of decades.. before you can have sizeable data of (comparable) IITians vs MIT/HVD/Stan-ians.. as there are even more factors involved in professional world.
akshayxyz Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 You sure you want to include PG in this? Do not know what you are implying. I just meant, can you cite any examples of unfairness/discrimination at any level - either UG or PG. If you can't then better stat away from alleging them of unfairness/discrimination/cult-mentality. Another assumption you make - Transparency equates to a better selection process. Transparency means - if you have doubts about existing process - you are most welcome to question and provide suggestions. So, if you do not have any objections, then you better submit to it - for the moment. And for nth time - it is not about 'better' or 'worse' selection process. It is about - any institute (or even department of institute) should have freedom to execute the set of ideals/principles they believe in - as long as it is not against fundamental rights and/or constitution. Similarly, if someone else can come up with better model - they should be allowed to execute it.
Swing_n_Speed Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 Technically since MIT is private we should not be comparing MIT with the IIT's. Instead IIT's ought to be compared with public universities like UC Berkley, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/06/best-public-colleges-opinions-colleges-09-top.html
The Outsider Posted June 6, 2012 Posted June 6, 2012 It's not just MIT, but there is an entire group of universities which are really good. If someone is trying to argue that MIT is decisively and overall better than a Harvard, Cambridge, or Princeton then he does not know life beyond Engineering. Even in Engineering, I can't see how you can distinguish MIT from Stanford and Caltech. Moreover, I can't even make out if the discussion is about undergraduate education, graduate education, or research. But to address the general point as to why these universities are so good, here are a few reasons which come to mind: 1. Intricate tie up between teaching and research. 2. Strong adherence to academic honesty. 3. Tie ups with leading companies. 4. Extremely strong alumni network and endowments. 5. A broad and subjective entrance criteria. 6. Ability for the faculty to make decent money through salary and make more through independent consulting projects in the industry. 7. An education system based on problem solving. 8. Vibrant student organizations both extra curricular and related to specific fields of interest. 9. A willingness or even a preference to hire faculty from other universities. 10. Strong emphasis on writing and presentation of any idea, however basic. It's a combination of these and a few other factors mentioned earlier in the thread.
vipin Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 I don't understand what all the fuss and fighting in here is about:- (1) Times Higher Education Ranking has often ranked IITs(all combined) at #3 in the world, just after MIT and UCB. That is inspite of MIT getting approx $1Bn (Rs. 5500 Crores) in funding annually as against all IITs together getting a sum total of less than Rs. 1000 Crores. Mind you, the PPP(Purchasing Power Parity) model does not apply here because there is hardly any difference in the prices of Laboratory Instruments across the world. (2) The IIT-JEE is very integral to the success of IITs. We cannot resort to using scores from the schooling system unlike in the US, because our schooling system in based upon rought learning, whereas the US system is based upon analytical thinking and practical learning. Infact these are the abilities that the IIT-JEE also tests in the students. If the Indian school (board) toppers are that good, they should be able to crack the IIT-JEE. Unfortunately, the correlation between scoring in boards and cracking the IIT-JEE is very slim. That is because it is not very difficult to mug up **** and unload it onto an answer sheet without even knowing what it is all about. (3) The competence of IIT undergraduate students in comparison to MIT's is nowhere doubtful. The proportion of IIT students that MIT itself accepts to its grad programs is almost as high as the proportion of its own students it allows into grad school. The same does not apply to Masters and Phd students as the top undergrads from India almost invariably go abroad for higher education. This is driven by the reason mentioned in #1.
Crookbond Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 You got it wrong. I am saying - the final word (selection model) should be left upto IITs, to define the criteria of admitting students to their institutes. Remember what you said - MITs (and alike) have succeeded because of their commitment towards 'certain' philosophy (which they have been 'allowed' to execute over almost a century) Here you are not even allowing 'someone' to execute a philosophy they believe in. If someone has better model, go ahead implement on their own.. and prove that theirs' work better....By interfering with their process, you are not giving them any chance to prove that their model works (or not). By all means I agree to this. IF you have anything to say after watching Prof. Sanjeev Sanghi's talk.. then refer to specific points - before coming up with absurd allegations about unfairness in selection process or any 'cult' mentality.. As I said earlier, you need to be involved in the selection process to understand why I made that comment. I can't refer to examples on a public forum but if we can have a private chat I can enumerate points. So, cut some slack & try to get the hints. I have been very closely involved with 2 IITs in different capacities and currently interface with them too.
Crookbond Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Just curious' date=' how do you define 'better'?[/quote'] MIT & IIT is a teaching plus research institute. MIT fares the best on both counts. IITs fare very well on teaching but not on research. It's in that respect I said MIT is better.
Crookbond Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Do not know what you are implying. I just meant, can you cite any examples of unfairness/discrimination at any level - either UG or PG. If you can't then better stat away from alleging them of unfairness/discrimination/cult-mentality. Talk to me in private to know more.
Swing_n_Speed Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 I don't understand what all the fuss and fighting in here is about:- (1) Times Higher Education Ranking has often ranked IITs(all combined) at #3 in the world, just after MIT and UCB. Sources please... I googled Time Higher Education Rankings, Even in the Asia rankings IIT's didn't figure in the top 10. http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/top-400.html http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/asia.html And as discussed in the Rajya Sabha according to the Quacquarelli Symonds global system the highest ranked Indian University at 218 is IIT- Delhi,As per the Times Higher Education World University Rankings for 2011, IIT-Bombay is the highest ranked institution at serial 317, while the Academic Ranking of World Universities has ranked Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore at serial 321 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-03-30/education/31260521_1_iit-bombay-iit-madras-ranking-system
vipin Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 Sources please... I googled Time Higher Education Rankings, Even in the Asia rankings IIT's didn't figure in the top 10. http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/top-400.html http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/asia.html And as discussed in the Rajya Sabha according to the Quacquarelli Symonds global system the highest ranked Indian University at 218 is IIT- Delhi,As per the Times Higher Education World University Rankings for 2011, IIT-Bombay is the highest ranked institution at serial 317, while the Academic Ranking of World Universities has ranked Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore at serial 321 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-03-30/education/31260521_1_iit-bombay-iit-madras-ranking-system This was when they had combined rankings for the IITs. Now, they have decoupled them. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2006-10-14/news/27430365_1_iits-science-technology-universities
The Outsider Posted June 7, 2012 Posted June 7, 2012 This was when they had combined rankings for the IITs. Now, they have decoupled them. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2006-10-14/news/27430365_1_iits-science-technology-universities I am sorry, but that article and ranking makes absolutely no sense. Combine IITs? What does that mean with respect to the rankings? Add up the individual points they gained?
Recommended Posts