The Indian Institute of Science (IISc) has announced that it shall start accepting undergraduates for admission to its four year Bachelor of Science program in 2011. The issue was under consideration for a couple of years until it was accepted by the committee responsible for it.
Tata Institute, as it is locally known, has always occupied a niche in higher learning in India. It caught the fancy of many European researchers when India was still a British colony and was spoken of in high regard in scientific circles. Morris Travers, the first director of the Institute, famously said," There is nothing like it in India, and nothing better in Great Britain". Over the years, the Institute has maintained its high standards of research and charted new research areas as well.
The question of introducing undergraduate learning was a quintessential one, given the possible advantages that could be enjoyed by the Institute and its students. The former would benefit from a continuous feed of science students for its Masters and Doctoral programs. The students, fortunate enough to study at IISc, would also enjoy a stimulating atmosphere surrounded by people breathing science.
Prof P Balaram, the current director of IISc, paid a visit to my Masters school - IIT Delhi, a few months ago. In his interview with CHEMCOS, the science magazine at IITD; he clearly mentions the conflicting opinions within the Institute about the idea of opening its gates for undergraduate classes.
It is interesting to hear this for a couple of reasons. One, IISc has always been a supporter of undergraduate learning in science. It offers scholarships like the Kishore Vaigyanik Protsahan Yojna (KVPY) and fellowships for summer research. Each year, hundreds of undergrads get a taste of research at the highest level and many go on to pursue careers in science. Therefore, the institute has been shaping young minds for decades. Secondly, any scientific endeavour requires a steady influx of young talent. The IISc is no exception. On many occasions, I have heard professors lamenting about the dampening of scientific enthusiasm among kinds across the planet. The best way to tackle this problem would be to start a serious undergrad program on its own campus.
One possible reason for the apprehension in IISc's approach could be the lack of qualified teachers and infrastructure. There is absolutely no doubt about the research capabilities of the Institute. However, undergraduate teaching is a completely different ball game. Most of the students have very little idea of what they have jumped into and they need proper guidance at this stage of their careers. A lot of adjustment is warranted on the part of researchers so as to address such issues. They are used to solving research problems and working with graduate stduents who are more serious about their work. Undergrads can be a differnet ball game altogether. Also, the existing infrastructure is only enough to keep the Institute up and running. An influx of undergrads would require huge investments.
The idea seems really lucrative and, on a personal note, I am eagerly looking forward to see how things shape up. I have always felt that a two year Masters program in chemistry and physics would have worked really well at IISc because the teaching and laboratory resources have for such courses are already present. If handled carefully, this program could work wonders for Indian science.
Tata Institute, as it is locally known, has always occupied a niche in higher learning in India. It caught the fancy of many European researchers when India was still a British colony and was spoken of in high regard in scientific circles. Morris Travers, the first director of the Institute, famously said," There is nothing like it in India, and nothing better in Great Britain". Over the years, the Institute has maintained its high standards of research and charted new research areas as well.
The question of introducing undergraduate learning was a quintessential one, given the possible advantages that could be enjoyed by the Institute and its students. The former would benefit from a continuous feed of science students for its Masters and Doctoral programs. The students, fortunate enough to study at IISc, would also enjoy a stimulating atmosphere surrounded by people breathing science.
Prof P Balaram, the current director of IISc, paid a visit to my Masters school - IIT Delhi, a few months ago. In his interview with CHEMCOS, the science magazine at IITD; he clearly mentions the conflicting opinions within the Institute about the idea of opening its gates for undergraduate classes.
It is interesting to hear this for a couple of reasons. One, IISc has always been a supporter of undergraduate learning in science. It offers scholarships like the Kishore Vaigyanik Protsahan Yojna (KVPY) and fellowships for summer research. Each year, hundreds of undergrads get a taste of research at the highest level and many go on to pursue careers in science. Therefore, the institute has been shaping young minds for decades. Secondly, any scientific endeavour requires a steady influx of young talent. The IISc is no exception. On many occasions, I have heard professors lamenting about the dampening of scientific enthusiasm among kinds across the planet. The best way to tackle this problem would be to start a serious undergrad program on its own campus.
One possible reason for the apprehension in IISc's approach could be the lack of qualified teachers and infrastructure. There is absolutely no doubt about the research capabilities of the Institute. However, undergraduate teaching is a completely different ball game. Most of the students have very little idea of what they have jumped into and they need proper guidance at this stage of their careers. A lot of adjustment is warranted on the part of researchers so as to address such issues. They are used to solving research problems and working with graduate stduents who are more serious about their work. Undergrads can be a differnet ball game altogether. Also, the existing infrastructure is only enough to keep the Institute up and running. An influx of undergrads would require huge investments.
The idea seems really lucrative and, on a personal note, I am eagerly looking forward to see how things shape up. I have always felt that a two year Masters program in chemistry and physics would have worked really well at IISc because the teaching and laboratory resources have for such courses are already present. If handled carefully, this program could work wonders for Indian science.
