Last updated on 14th June 2016
A stark look at the problems faced by some Indians who are doing Ph.D. in USA, including the UCLA shooter-killer Mainak Sarkar. I think many Indians doing Ph.D. in India are also in not-so-great shape.
A premature, horrible death, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/sunday-times/Patently-headed-Downhill/articleshow/52593691.cms, dated June 5th 2016.
------------------------------------------------
Some additional thoughts of mine:
From a pure research point of view, I think it would be wonderful if non-elite Indian academia did proper research in its Ph.D. programs (as against development). That would require a filtering process whereby some candidates who opt for proper research realize/or are told that they are not suited for it, and drop out early, say within a year or so, from the Ph.D. program, and move into something else more suitable for them.
But the practical reality of UGC/AICTE governed Indian academia today, it seems to me, is that the Ph.D. has become a vital stepping stone in an academic career. Perhaps two or three decades ago it was OK to have only a Masters qualification to have some sort of academic career in India. But today only a Masters qualification (without a Ph.D.) will heavily stunt one's academic career.
So most Indian academics want to acquire a Ph.D. by hook or by crook. Some will do it the proper way. But for some others, even if the work they do is more of development type rather than research but which gives them a Ph.D. (a minimum of one/two national publications is the critical UGC/AICTE norm if I recall correctly), they will be more than happy. And, in turn, they will become Ph.D. guides for other Ph.D. candidates who they may guide to do similar work - a self-perpetuating kind-of thing.
But these things are very difficult to control in UGC/AICTE Indian academia. In some cases (hopefully only a few cases but I don't know for sure), there is even money corruption and other kinds of unethical practices involved in enrollment and granting of Ph.D., mainly because the Ph.D. opens up better academic career (and pay scale).
Within my limited scope as a blogger who has some exposure to Indian academia in Visiting Faculty type capacity but who is not an Indian academic, my concern is mainly about the human toll on Ph.D. students who do not really understand what the Ph.D. is all about when they enroll into it. I think in non-elite Indian academia, a lot depends on the supervisor that the student does his/her Ph.D. under. Some Ph.D. guide academics are very wise. They know the system well in terms of what is the minimum expected for a Ph.D. by UGC/AICTE norms as well as by important academic administrators. They can assess a candidate's ability and can advise a path suitable for the candidate given the circumstances. The students who come under such Ph.D. guides, in a sense, are the lucky guys, as they tend to get their Ph.D. in reasonable time (say, three to five years) without too much pressure and suffering.
On the other hand, there are some Ph.D. guides who are very ambitious and set far higher standards than what is required by UGC/AICTE, for all/most of their students. So, for example, they may want the publication of the student to be in an IEEE transaction publication (which would typically have a high impact factor). Now if the student is capable AND is provided enough time & resources, perhaps this could work out very well, earning laurels for the institution, the guide and the student, and giving a tremendous foundation for future research work of the student.
However, many times, it is too much for the student given the various factors involved (time & resources being an important factor; some, perhaps most, institutions burden Ph.D. scholars with other work, especially if they are paid some stipend). Usually, in such scenarios, the Ph.D. student is not experienced or wise enough to know what sort of trap he/she has fallen into. He/she may keep trying and trying and still not come up with something satisfactory enough for the supervisor. They dare not fight or argue openly with the supervisor as the supervisor has tremendous control over their life as a Ph.D. student, and can make life hell for the student.
This is where I think some Ph.D. students get into serious mental issues. Some time back I was told a former student of mine (I taught him programming courses for his Masters in Technology - Computer Science degree) who was doing a Ph.D. landed into some serious issues with his Ph.D. supervisor. Fortunately, given the system of obedience by juniors in the associated institution, the student did not go overboard, I guess. I believe he parted ways with the institution. I don't know whether he was granted the Ph.D. But what I had heard was that there a breakdown of relations between Ph.D. student and guide.
Ideally speaking Ph.D. candidates should be given a clear picture of the risks involved in Ph.D. and there should be some sort of a decent exit plan for them if the Ph.D. does not work out.
To make things even more difficult I think Indian academic system seems to be churning out many Ph.D.s leading to some finding it difficult to get suitable jobs in Indian industry or Indian academia after they finish their Ph.D.
No comments:
Post a Comment