CS & IT Academia: Profs. May Not Like Idea of Software Contribution Record

This post captures a slightly edited email exchange with a friend on the "CS & IT Academia: Inform Students About Software Contribution Record of Faculty" post.


Friend wrote: Its a clever idea and tries to work around the problem but it seems like a somewhat superficial solution to a deeply ingrained problem.

Eklavya Sai responded: I entirely agree that it is not a proper/complete solution to a deeply ingrained problem.

Friend wrote: I don't think profs will go with the suggestion since they think programming expertise isn't important in the first place and therefore don't want to be judged by this irrelevant (to them) criterion.

Eklavya Sai responded: Vital point. I read somewhere, in a recent newspaper issue I think, about HRD Minister Shri Kapil Sibal talking about independence of academia from government (interference) during some IIMs related discussions.

So profs will reject it as it does not suit them. Some may realize the importance of programming/software development but will not say so in public when such a measure is suggested.

But I am given to understand that students & parents at counseling (engg. college admission) time do question college/university representatives about the placement record. If placement record is poor then they tend to shy away from that college/university. So college/university managements give value to placement and as they pay the salaries of the academics, the academics have no choice but to listen to them.

If AICTE/UGC feel that this "software contribution record" is worth trying out and agree (perhaps under people pressure), then profs. may have no choice but to go with it.

Friend wrote: Students and parents have no idea what makes an engineer or a prof a good one any more than they know what makes a painter good.

Eklavya Sai responded: I am given to understand that many students & parents do put a lot of questions at counseling time. I think the high college education costs makes it somewhat like an investment and so I think they do try, with their limited knowledge, to assess where best to invest their time & money. If "software contribution record" is available then they may use that like they use placement record, as a parameter to decide their choice.

Friend wrote: Besides ideas that require the network effect to be useful are hard to get off the ground, unlike ideas that are useful to their practitioners even if others don't go with them.

So, sorry, but I'm not bullish on this one.

Eklavya Sai responded: I can understand. To be honest, I know that we are up against a solid wall.

Friend wrote: We can still give it a shot, though.

Eklavya Sai responded: That's exactly what I feel. I mean, it is like negotiating a tough deal. If MHRD and NASSCOM agree that something needs to be done, then AICTE/UGC admin. profs. may have to accept something. This may be the easiest thing to push through.

Even if it does get pushed through, whether it will really be adopted in the proper spirit ... and so succeed is another thing altogether. For that we have to experiment and wait & see.

I guess all we can do is raise the problem, suggest some easily implementable solutions and use 'amicable & peaceful' means to make them (MHRD/AICTE/UGC) at least acknowledge these issues & suggested solutions. After that it is completely out of our hands.