Someone who read my recent posts comparing US and Indian academia and universities asked me the following question:
How do PhD graduates from Indian universities compare with those from US universities?
Here's what I feel based on my observations over the last 16 years:
--> About 15% of our PhD graduates are world class. They are comparable with high quality PhDs anywhere in the world and their training as well as thesis quality would be appreciated at any good university in the US. This also reflects in their teaching and research. They are excellent and comparable to anyone else.
--> Another 15% are also very good. They may not be shining completely at the end of their PhD program, but the potential is there and if they keep working hard, they will shine in their careers.
--> But the remaining are not up to the mark. They may be talented people - I'm not denying that possibility - but their training is weak and thesis quality is below par. And this starts showing fairly early in their academic career: many find it difficult to answer questions in class, many can't do research independently or guide students, many start publishing in journals emanating from smaller foreign countries to "pump up their international publication numbers", many even start publishing in "paid journals".
If you ask: But then why did these people get a PhD? My answer is: Because the "number of PhD students graduated" is a criteria today in ranking parameters. Its that simple. Its intellectually dishonest and will hurt our academia and universities in the long run (its already doing so) - but to stop it, our universities will have to make a firm decision that they will not compromise on quality. That would be the right thing to do. We'll climb ranking charts slower, but we need to be ok with that. A slower but a more honest and clear climb will take us further than quick tricks.
No comments:
Post a Comment