This refers to the article “The 100% guarantee for 9%” (TNIE, 31 August 2007). The authors have rightly pointed out the lacuna in our educational system. Adopting a one-size-fits-all approach through state controlled regulatory bodies does not bode well for an economy preparing to face growth-related challenges. We do need to encourage drastic educational reforms for supporting creativity in professional education. Adopting concurrency to reduce the lead time in developing industry-ready professionals is indeed a very good suggestion. One can also uphold their suggestions for developing creative learner-centric programs through a more inclusive capacity building exercise involving participation of small towns. These suggestions can be taken forward through a more progressive educational policy that promotes free thinking beyond limiting geographical boundaries.
However, we have to be cautious with the idea of faculty exchange between top-rung institutions such as IIMs and IITs with other institutions of the country. Faculty members in these elite institutions have seldom experienced the harsh conditions under which most institutes in India have to grow. Nor has their involvement as nominees and experts to the various boards and committees given any relief to the faculty wanting to promote creativity in a less-privileged school of India . Even if some of them are prepared to face the harsh conditions, their ability gets stifled by the statutes currently governing most “non-elite” educational Institutions/Universities of the country.
Faculty members in elite institutions enjoy much greater autonomy than their less privileged counterpart in other colleges. Moreover, unlike US faculty, they don’t have to compete for funds as these are planned in the form of grants (read taxpayers’ money) by the MHRD. Naturally, therefore, they don’t have to spend much energy worrying about support to bring quality into the classroom meant for the elites. Further, their proximity to MHRD made it easier for them to be in most policy making bodies. However, did they ever use this opportunity to create more IIT/IIM like Institutions in the country? Did they create conditions to encourage pluralism in the faculty community? IIT Kharagpur has more than 40% of faculty who are the products of their own system. In some departments it is as high as 90%. Will it be healthy to make them the role models for the less privileged Institutions?
Finally, the authors have given some promising facts about the huge manpower potential that is locked in students below 14 years of age. Are the elite Institutions doing enough in helping them realizing their dreams for a future? The most important area where they can create a difference is by promoting greater freedom to the individual entity through formulation of progressive policies. I strongly support their bottom-line – “we need to think of new solutions to face the approaching challenges”. If I may add, we need radical reforms to promote academic adventurism.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Radical reforms
This refers to the express headline “BSE rot stinks, top to bottom” (TNIE, 23 Aug 2007). It has nicely exposed the rot in the examination system leading to “mark-fixing scams”. With the Chief Minister appointing a committee for suggesting reforms, we should take advantage of the situation in creating better systems for the future. It is time we suggested some radical reforms in our boards and councils.
The current examination system, controlled by BSE, is a result of our distrust for many. Perhaps the single most objective of the existing system is to negate the “internal biases” in our various schools. A closer examination of the existing evaluation process, as highlighted in the express report, shows that it cannot even fulfill this objective properly. Rather it adds a lot of non-value adding activities that distances the teacher/evaluator from the students. Moreover, several individuals fall victim to this system unknowingly. The end-result: BSE’s credibility has been severely undermined.
Further, the existing system of student evaluation is detrimental to the growth of young minds. It stifles their creative ability and does not provide enough motivation to the schoolteachers to create interesting learner-centric modules.
The most radical step forward would be to empower the schools to evaluate their own students. Models could be adopted whereby the teacher is encouraged to bring various creative methods of delivery and evaluation into the classroom. Teachers belonging to the region need to be supported to take the responsibility of evaluating the students in a transparent manner. The ultimate level in transparency is when students are allowed to compare their answers and the teacher/evaluator is allowed to respond to the student seeking re-evaluation. The board can only play the role of a mentor in developing the capabilities of these distributed centers. With the education sector poised for rapid expansion and competition, it is going to be extremely difficult to have the boards/councils undertaking the task of examining students without revamping their existing processes.
I urge the educators and legislators to shed their conservative outlook and make a bold step forward in devolving greater power to the schools.
The current examination system, controlled by BSE, is a result of our distrust for many. Perhaps the single most objective of the existing system is to negate the “internal biases” in our various schools. A closer examination of the existing evaluation process, as highlighted in the express report, shows that it cannot even fulfill this objective properly. Rather it adds a lot of non-value adding activities that distances the teacher/evaluator from the students. Moreover, several individuals fall victim to this system unknowingly. The end-result: BSE’s credibility has been severely undermined.
Further, the existing system of student evaluation is detrimental to the growth of young minds. It stifles their creative ability and does not provide enough motivation to the schoolteachers to create interesting learner-centric modules.
The most radical step forward would be to empower the schools to evaluate their own students. Models could be adopted whereby the teacher is encouraged to bring various creative methods of delivery and evaluation into the classroom. Teachers belonging to the region need to be supported to take the responsibility of evaluating the students in a transparent manner. The ultimate level in transparency is when students are allowed to compare their answers and the teacher/evaluator is allowed to respond to the student seeking re-evaluation. The board can only play the role of a mentor in developing the capabilities of these distributed centers. With the education sector poised for rapid expansion and competition, it is going to be extremely difficult to have the boards/councils undertaking the task of examining students without revamping their existing processes.
I urge the educators and legislators to shed their conservative outlook and make a bold step forward in devolving greater power to the schools.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Collective responsibility
This has reference to the article titled “Health, education scams in Orissa” (TNIE, 17 Aug 07). The author rightly suggests overhauling of the entire system through sweeping changes in policy and implementation.
Unfortunately we find key members in both the sectors over-emphasizing the role of the “controller” – be it drugs or examinations. Controllers are human-beings and are themselves quite susceptible to the various corruptive influences. Even if they are not, ensuring quality through “control” (i.e., inspecting somebody else’s work) is an archaic form of quality assurance model as compared to the one that enforces a discipline of self-control (quality at source). This requires collective ownership of processes designed to provide individual autonomy as-well-as accountability with the sole aim of ensuring high process capability. Capable processes ensure quality output. This also makes the system less-amenable to malpractices.
Apparently, the role of the controller is defined by the existing statutes. However, instead of emphasizing the need for statutory compliance, it would be heartening to see the legislators being supported to make important legislations to foster collective responsibility. We need a paradigm shift.
Unfortunately we find key members in both the sectors over-emphasizing the role of the “controller” – be it drugs or examinations. Controllers are human-beings and are themselves quite susceptible to the various corruptive influences. Even if they are not, ensuring quality through “control” (i.e., inspecting somebody else’s work) is an archaic form of quality assurance model as compared to the one that enforces a discipline of self-control (quality at source). This requires collective ownership of processes designed to provide individual autonomy as-well-as accountability with the sole aim of ensuring high process capability. Capable processes ensure quality output. This also makes the system less-amenable to malpractices.
Apparently, the role of the controller is defined by the existing statutes. However, instead of emphasizing the need for statutory compliance, it would be heartening to see the legislators being supported to make important legislations to foster collective responsibility. We need a paradigm shift.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Holistic solution
This has reference to the editorial “Toys R’nt Us” (TNIE; 6 Aug 2007). Not wanting to lose the trust and confidence of its customers, American toy-producer Mattel went for worldwide product recalls. Toxic substances found in their Chinese-made toys prompted this action. Further, the falling share price will force Mattel to go for immediate supply chain corrections.
As rightly mentioned, India must learn a lesson from this episode and support its own manufacturing hubs with proper safety protocols. However, even though our system may be attuned to the concept of the consumer, there is a lot left to be desired. Case in point is the health sector of the state of Orissa, which has witnessed some horrific tales in recent times. We have seen gross negligence by some health-service providers and drug manufacturers that severely undermine the confidence of the consumers. Unfortunately we don’t see much urgency in seeking holistic corrections.
The pharmaceutical industry seems to be supported by an out-dated supply chain whose focus seems to be merely on warehousing, inspection and distribution. While these are important activities needed from a logistics perspective, there is a lot left to be achieved in terms of a robust supply chain. We need world-class domestic supply chains that would give “cradle-to-grave” support to the medicine manufacturing hubs of the country. That would mean greater involvement of our manufacturers from product development to delivery and beyond.
The Pharmaceutical associations have to take aggressive proactive steps in regaining the trust of consumers. To begin with, they have to share their expertise in identifying fake drugs and other supply chain delinquencies. I urge the Government and the medical fraternity to find a holistic solution rather than getting into a witch-hunt of nabbing the “culprits”.
As rightly mentioned, India must learn a lesson from this episode and support its own manufacturing hubs with proper safety protocols. However, even though our system may be attuned to the concept of the consumer, there is a lot left to be desired. Case in point is the health sector of the state of Orissa, which has witnessed some horrific tales in recent times. We have seen gross negligence by some health-service providers and drug manufacturers that severely undermine the confidence of the consumers. Unfortunately we don’t see much urgency in seeking holistic corrections.
The pharmaceutical industry seems to be supported by an out-dated supply chain whose focus seems to be merely on warehousing, inspection and distribution. While these are important activities needed from a logistics perspective, there is a lot left to be achieved in terms of a robust supply chain. We need world-class domestic supply chains that would give “cradle-to-grave” support to the medicine manufacturing hubs of the country. That would mean greater involvement of our manufacturers from product development to delivery and beyond.
The Pharmaceutical associations have to take aggressive proactive steps in regaining the trust of consumers. To begin with, they have to share their expertise in identifying fake drugs and other supply chain delinquencies. I urge the Government and the medical fraternity to find a holistic solution rather than getting into a witch-hunt of nabbing the “culprits”.
Friday, August 3, 2007
Throw more light
This has reference to the letter titled “Rupee appreciation” (TNIE, 3 August 2007). The letter is justified in demanding an explanation from the policy makers. Given the UPA’s current disposition, I doubt there is anyone in the Government who will be brave enough to recognize the intrinsic worth of the rupee (read “Indian/local entity”) vis-à-vis the dollar (read “US/global entity”).
Also, historically speaking, the “swadeshi model” of self-reliance was rarely considered as the “in-thing”. Our post-Independent leaders in their eagerness to appear “socialistic” brought in regulations that stifled healthy and competitive enterprise. It was in the interest of these “socialite-elites” to then promote slogans such as “brain drain rather than brain in the drain”. Controls were exercised in a manner that finally resulted in the rupee depreciating drastically against the dollar. Along with it declined our standards of living.
According to management guru, Michael Porter, “devaluation causes a nation to take a collective pay cut by discounting its products and services in world markets while paying more for the goods and services it purchases abroad. Exports based on low wages or cheap currencies then do not support an attractive standard of living.”
Yet, our country has some fairly articulate economists who would like to see the rupee depreciate. No wonder you see some of them in the boards of IT companies that are heavily dependent on export earnings. The 21st century BPO industry, as some say, is akin to the 19th century Bombay Mills that exploited cheap labor to boost exports. [See Business World 21 July 2003 Book Review section: "The Global Competitiveness Report 2002-2003: Peter Cornelius, Michael Porter and Klaus Schwab as reviewed by Ajit Balakrishnan]
A firm having good corporate governance standards, however, should never aim for competitive gains at the expense of others. Is this happening? I doubt. These very economists would be respected more if they helped their firms find better methods of enhancing competitiveness. They ought to be riding the global “business process outsourcing” wave to create better “business process opportunities” for the local markets. That would then mean diverting greater attention to the domestic markets and enhancing domestic productivity in a manner that would make both our buyers and sellers more sophisticated.
If this had happened earlier, we would not have seen the horrific tales that we are currently witnessing in the health sector of our state. I urge the Government of Orissa to promote policies that would recognize the intrinsic worth of its “domestic entities” and enable them to face “healthy” global competition.
{This post appeared in the "letter to the editor" section of The New Indian Express}
Also, historically speaking, the “swadeshi model” of self-reliance was rarely considered as the “in-thing”. Our post-Independent leaders in their eagerness to appear “socialistic” brought in regulations that stifled healthy and competitive enterprise. It was in the interest of these “socialite-elites” to then promote slogans such as “brain drain rather than brain in the drain”. Controls were exercised in a manner that finally resulted in the rupee depreciating drastically against the dollar. Along with it declined our standards of living.
According to management guru, Michael Porter, “devaluation causes a nation to take a collective pay cut by discounting its products and services in world markets while paying more for the goods and services it purchases abroad. Exports based on low wages or cheap currencies then do not support an attractive standard of living.”
Yet, our country has some fairly articulate economists who would like to see the rupee depreciate. No wonder you see some of them in the boards of IT companies that are heavily dependent on export earnings. The 21st century BPO industry, as some say, is akin to the 19th century Bombay Mills that exploited cheap labor to boost exports. [See Business World 21 July 2003 Book Review section: "The Global Competitiveness Report 2002-2003: Peter Cornelius, Michael Porter and Klaus Schwab as reviewed by Ajit Balakrishnan]
A firm having good corporate governance standards, however, should never aim for competitive gains at the expense of others. Is this happening? I doubt. These very economists would be respected more if they helped their firms find better methods of enhancing competitiveness. They ought to be riding the global “business process outsourcing” wave to create better “business process opportunities” for the local markets. That would then mean diverting greater attention to the domestic markets and enhancing domestic productivity in a manner that would make both our buyers and sellers more sophisticated.
If this had happened earlier, we would not have seen the horrific tales that we are currently witnessing in the health sector of our state. I urge the Government of Orissa to promote policies that would recognize the intrinsic worth of its “domestic entities” and enable them to face “healthy” global competition.
{This post appeared in the "letter to the editor" section of The New Indian Express}
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
