Previously:
Education is Business - I
Back to the topic after the commercial break of the IITB interview.
So how would commercialization actually help education? I think it would be great help because it will start concentrating on the customers (students) and the market. At the outset, it will be about catering to market demands, adding most value. This will be done when options are available and competition is encouraged but more on that later. For now, lets concentrate on the primary transformations that we can expect from educational reforms:
1) Course Content
One of the remarkable changes would be in the course content. As it stands now, we have a summary revision of the course content every 5-6 years which involves just juggling around with the available courses irrespective of available resources or industry preferences. Mumbai University as it stands (with close to 50,000 engineers getting in every year) is not exactly 'lean' for changes that are responsive and quick. Elective courses are available only in the final semesters, that too, often limited by the college (or due to 'technical reasons', which people from my class will understand). As autonomous universities charging 'capitation fees' come up, one of the prime ways they would want to attract incoming students is using placement statistics and/or the number of their students getting into an IIM or pursuing MS. So, the end result that we can have is a curriculum that's changing fast according to 'placement' requirements. Also, an independent autonomous university would be better able to identify the resources at hand and offer relevant elective courses for diverse student profiles which can attract more industries.
2) Product Differentiation
Yes, I have revised my Economics and I refuse to call it brand building. (Though it may well be part of a brand-building exercise.) I think we will have universities that will concentrate on different courses as their USP’s. So while one would be known for electronics, another would do the same for civil or mechanical or nanotechnology for that matter.
I see some of this happening already in the B-schools. The top ones (IIMs A,B,C,L) are considered good for everything. Then you have a XLRI which everyone says is good for HR, an IITB which is selling its emphasis on ‘technology management’, a SP JAIN which highlights the ‘Indianness’ of its curriculum, then again is ISB which is attracting a completely different crowd. So can be the case with our graduate (equivalent to the American undergraduate) degrees. Instead of the whole and sole BCom degrees that are on offer now, perhaps we will have degrees concentrating on banking, accounting, finance and host of other sectors that a booming economy is throwing open.
3) Faculty Compensation
Let me define the problem here first. It’s inherent in our mentality that teachers should not earn. Remember all the old Hindi movies with the village Masterji. The guy who has lots of knowledge but only has a jhola on his shoulders, horn-rimmed spectacles and lots of poverty to show for it. I don’t know what it did to you but for me, it convinced me at a very young age that teachers are great losers and I don’t want to be one. Fifty years ago when there was hardly any industry in India, teaching was one of the options that an academically inclined class topper would consider. But all this has changed with liberalization. The class topper now has lots more (better) options than being a poor jholawala teacher. So, who opts for teaching? Either the guy who is so deeply, madly, passionately in love with teaching (and India) that he doesn’t mind living in rags or the guy who knows nothing and has no other jobs. It’s mostly the latter. It’s an often heard complaint from most students, “The older teachers know something. The new ones coming in are b******t.” (even my friend in an NIT has the same complaints) You expect the new teachers coming in to be more ‘in sync’ with the crowd. Why is it not so? Because the students who come in are usually the cream of India and the faculty that comes in is the discarded slag. And if you don’t trust me then trust the Economic Times (although I believe I am a more reliable source :-p ), faculty crunch is troubling even the IIMs.
( Another example to prove that teachers like any other human being like earning good money and aren’t here to just get kicks from their charitable instincts: The Maharashtra government in 1999-2000 came up with a law that prevented teachers from working in both classes and schools/colleges at the same time. What happened in reality was that most schools/colleges being faced with the problem of a faculty crunch if they followed the order, allowed teachers to continue with the coaching classes. )
So what’s the solution? Give a higher end salary for high quality work. Once you get the best people and pay them well, you can demand good work. You can take a feedback from students and evaluate faculty on that basis. In fact, there can be added incentive for research. If a faculty is able to deliver with good projects (with/without students) that are saleable, s/he can create funds in partnership with the university. Professors could even be given autonomy to design and start their own courses if enough students are interested. Competition could be encouraged within the faculty itself to attract students to their own courses which would keep them on their toes. So, if one member wants to focus on attendance, another on class participation, a third on project work let them have their way with the course.
This is one area which I believe is in need of the most desperate change and sooner the better.
4) Incubate Research
Research is prominent in India only by its absence (That’s true even for the IITs and IIMs. The only places where a modicum of research takes place are TIFR and IISc). However, serious research requires a lot of investment and can earn big bucks. Entrepreneurs or even established business houses on the lookout for ‘capitation fees’ can invest in this research. And if we have good faculty and good students with good resources, it would not be long before industry sponsored projects find their way into our educational institutions.
There are a lot of other things that can and will change. I have lots more ideas on what can change like resources (which includes a LOT of things), efficiency, transparency, institutional autonomy (which is almost non-existent as of today), summer training etc. but there is a human limit to what I can write about. So I have outlined the basic changes that I hope to see with educational reforms coming in. It would be naïve to expect all these changes overnight. 5-10 years is also a conservative estimate. But by that time, things will start moving, and we will see the effects. Yes, fly-by-night teaching shops will operate and students will be made a dupe of. But then, they are by no stretch of imagination, getting a good deal now. Plus, that’s what the government and judiciary are there for. They can assume the role of a facilitator rather than act as controllers.
In case you have any reservations/oppositions/doubts/suggestions regarding this issue, please post a comment. This is an issue I feel strongly about and would welcome any ideas.
Tomorrow’s agenda: Questions that I have faced from friends (some are the typical socialist questions) and why I think these should not come in the way of educational reforms.
Next:
Education is Business - III
Education is Business - III contd..
Education is Business - I
Back to the topic after the commercial break of the IITB interview.
So how would commercialization actually help education? I think it would be great help because it will start concentrating on the customers (students) and the market. At the outset, it will be about catering to market demands, adding most value. This will be done when options are available and competition is encouraged but more on that later. For now, lets concentrate on the primary transformations that we can expect from educational reforms:
1) Course Content
One of the remarkable changes would be in the course content. As it stands now, we have a summary revision of the course content every 5-6 years which involves just juggling around with the available courses irrespective of available resources or industry preferences. Mumbai University as it stands (with close to 50,000 engineers getting in every year) is not exactly 'lean' for changes that are responsive and quick. Elective courses are available only in the final semesters, that too, often limited by the college (or due to 'technical reasons', which people from my class will understand). As autonomous universities charging 'capitation fees' come up, one of the prime ways they would want to attract incoming students is using placement statistics and/or the number of their students getting into an IIM or pursuing MS. So, the end result that we can have is a curriculum that's changing fast according to 'placement' requirements. Also, an independent autonomous university would be better able to identify the resources at hand and offer relevant elective courses for diverse student profiles which can attract more industries.
2) Product Differentiation
Yes, I have revised my Economics and I refuse to call it brand building. (Though it may well be part of a brand-building exercise.) I think we will have universities that will concentrate on different courses as their USP’s. So while one would be known for electronics, another would do the same for civil or mechanical or nanotechnology for that matter.
I see some of this happening already in the B-schools. The top ones (IIMs A,B,C,L) are considered good for everything. Then you have a XLRI which everyone says is good for HR, an IITB which is selling its emphasis on ‘technology management’, a SP JAIN which highlights the ‘Indianness’ of its curriculum, then again is ISB which is attracting a completely different crowd. So can be the case with our graduate (equivalent to the American undergraduate) degrees. Instead of the whole and sole BCom degrees that are on offer now, perhaps we will have degrees concentrating on banking, accounting, finance and host of other sectors that a booming economy is throwing open.
3) Faculty Compensation
Let me define the problem here first. It’s inherent in our mentality that teachers should not earn. Remember all the old Hindi movies with the village Masterji. The guy who has lots of knowledge but only has a jhola on his shoulders, horn-rimmed spectacles and lots of poverty to show for it. I don’t know what it did to you but for me, it convinced me at a very young age that teachers are great losers and I don’t want to be one. Fifty years ago when there was hardly any industry in India, teaching was one of the options that an academically inclined class topper would consider. But all this has changed with liberalization. The class topper now has lots more (better) options than being a poor jholawala teacher. So, who opts for teaching? Either the guy who is so deeply, madly, passionately in love with teaching (and India) that he doesn’t mind living in rags or the guy who knows nothing and has no other jobs. It’s mostly the latter. It’s an often heard complaint from most students, “The older teachers know something. The new ones coming in are b******t.” (even my friend in an NIT has the same complaints) You expect the new teachers coming in to be more ‘in sync’ with the crowd. Why is it not so? Because the students who come in are usually the cream of India and the faculty that comes in is the discarded slag. And if you don’t trust me then trust the Economic Times (although I believe I am a more reliable source :-p ), faculty crunch is troubling even the IIMs.
( Another example to prove that teachers like any other human being like earning good money and aren’t here to just get kicks from their charitable instincts: The Maharashtra government in 1999-2000 came up with a law that prevented teachers from working in both classes and schools/colleges at the same time. What happened in reality was that most schools/colleges being faced with the problem of a faculty crunch if they followed the order, allowed teachers to continue with the coaching classes. )
So what’s the solution? Give a higher end salary for high quality work. Once you get the best people and pay them well, you can demand good work. You can take a feedback from students and evaluate faculty on that basis. In fact, there can be added incentive for research. If a faculty is able to deliver with good projects (with/without students) that are saleable, s/he can create funds in partnership with the university. Professors could even be given autonomy to design and start their own courses if enough students are interested. Competition could be encouraged within the faculty itself to attract students to their own courses which would keep them on their toes. So, if one member wants to focus on attendance, another on class participation, a third on project work let them have their way with the course.
This is one area which I believe is in need of the most desperate change and sooner the better.
4) Incubate Research
Research is prominent in India only by its absence (That’s true even for the IITs and IIMs. The only places where a modicum of research takes place are TIFR and IISc). However, serious research requires a lot of investment and can earn big bucks. Entrepreneurs or even established business houses on the lookout for ‘capitation fees’ can invest in this research. And if we have good faculty and good students with good resources, it would not be long before industry sponsored projects find their way into our educational institutions.
There are a lot of other things that can and will change. I have lots more ideas on what can change like resources (which includes a LOT of things), efficiency, transparency, institutional autonomy (which is almost non-existent as of today), summer training etc. but there is a human limit to what I can write about. So I have outlined the basic changes that I hope to see with educational reforms coming in. It would be naïve to expect all these changes overnight. 5-10 years is also a conservative estimate. But by that time, things will start moving, and we will see the effects. Yes, fly-by-night teaching shops will operate and students will be made a dupe of. But then, they are by no stretch of imagination, getting a good deal now. Plus, that’s what the government and judiciary are there for. They can assume the role of a facilitator rather than act as controllers.
In case you have any reservations/oppositions/doubts/suggestions regarding this issue, please post a comment. This is an issue I feel strongly about and would welcome any ideas.
Tomorrow’s agenda: Questions that I have faced from friends (some are the typical socialist questions) and why I think these should not come in the way of educational reforms.
Next:
Education is Business - III
Education is Business - III contd..
3 comments:
Good points.
Addenda:
1)Use open courseware like MITs and effectively get someone to grade the courseware.A rating from the technical personnel from the reputed industry will suffice.
This will also initiate innovative courses and new curriculum on part of the college faculty for advertising their strengths in terms of subjects (assuming autonomy of the colleges).
2)The entire official work,right from getting marksheet..the process of attestation of marksheet,filling forms,etc..to name a few to be computerized.
Sooner,the better.
Outsourcing the work at kalina to a professional third party and providing student support round the clock..just like how an organization handles their with their BPO.There should be counsellors informing you about what the course and what suits best for ur interest.It happens in USA.Besides at the high school level(12th),we need psychological and work related counsellors too(better word would be advisor).
Commercialisation comes with a price tag and that is professionalism at every level of education.Education has been made a mockery and disrespectful by the present process..leaving aside the IIMs and IITs.
I will come up with more points later...
An IIM professor in India earns 6 lakhsp.a while a harvard professor earns 80,000$.Factor of economy and currency is important too.The same goes for the software engineers..Mtech graduates will earn 5 to 6 l.p.a in India..in US on an average it is 55,000 to 65,000$ p.a(roughly Rs 30 Lakhs).This distinction is unfair and it creates class differences. It brings out another impt issue- NEED FOR GLOBAL CURRENCY.
IIM profs receive lesser pay. However, there is also the fact that everyone receives the same pay. Earnings are not linked to performance like in a Harvard. This too is part of the problem.
Post a Comment