Is FYUP the first step to rejuvenate higher ed in India?

Before getting into what I want to say, links to a few interesting articles about higher education in India and the FYUP mess created by UGC. (For those who do not know, FYUP stands for Four Year Undergraduate Program and UGC is the University Grants Commission, the primary regulator of university education in India)

1. Columbia University professor Arvind Panagaria has some advice for the new Indian government on higher ed reforms.
2. Pratap Bhanu Mehta cautions the government/UGC. 
3. Vikram Kapur of Shiv Nadar University at Firstpost.
4. Vishwesha Guttal from IISc, Bangalore has this to say about the mess that UGC is hell-bent on creating there. 
5. A write up in the journal Nature on the same topic.
6. An anonymous doctoral student has this to say.
7. A position paper from October 2008 brought out by the Indian Academy of Sciences, Indian National Science Academy and National Academy of Sciences, India on "Restructuring post-school science teaching programs" 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the last couple of months, folks at UGC seem to have suddenly woken up to their duty as the watchdogs of university education in India. They first forced the Delhi University to close down its much controversial FYUP leaving thousands of students' future uncertain. Our Parliament was then informed that notices had been sent to Symbiosis University, Shiv Nadar University and Indian Institute of Science to shutdown their respective FYUP. I do not know what happened to the first two institutions. But, since IISc is a major player among the Indian science's elites, there was lots of grief and wailing that the government had dared question the high priests of Indian science. The result is a face saving compromise where the IISc  gets to keep its program with a modified name and an option for the students to exit after 3 years, if they wish to. Now this leaves one wondering if the UGC couldn't have been similarly considerate towards Delhi University since their FYUP already had exit options at different stages. My point, of course, is larger than the DU or IISc. I think UGC was right in blocking FYUP in a affiliating university like DU and wrong in doing so with stand alone institutions like the other three. Hopefully what I am posting below will convince you about my stand.

It is well accepted by now, and you will see this point made many times in the links above, that the higher education system in India as it exists today is a relic of our colonial past. The system was designed to produce clerks and bureaucrats to serve the British administration. It probably served its purpose well at that time and possibly even during the early days after the independence, but is terribly lacking in being able to serve the needs of a developing country in an ever changing, competitive world. There is no doubt that the system needs to be reformed to meet the challenges of the day. But what is the right system to adopt? Should we look at the various models around the world and borrow one of them? This approach is a definite case for failure since the university systems in the different countries,especially in the western developed ones, have evolved through many years to suit their particular local needs. We need to develop one most suited to us. To get to the best possible solution, we need to experiment with the various models before finding out what works best for us. And these experiments need to be done under settings which would allow the best chance to succeed and provide us with the best possible data. And that is why such experiments are best done is stand alone universities (such as IISc) which have the maximum resources and the least number of possible variables. This is also the reason why a large university such as DU with its hundreds of affiliated colleges which fall in a wide range in terms of quality of resources (both physical and intellectual) is a bad setting to initiate such experiments. These affiliating universities serve thousands of students in any academic year and in most cases happen to be the only degree awarding institution in an entire district leaving the students without any other choice. As often happens with anything new and drastically different from the existing, the general public's first reaction tends to be to resist the change, especially so if the said change requires the investment of an entire year of your life's prime. But the same set of people will be more than eager to accept the change if there is enough evidence that an extra year's investment is going to exponentially increase their employability. After all for most people, the only purpose of a college degree is to help them make a decent living. So, as I see it, the FYUP controversy is at the core a result of communication problem between the academics and the taxpayers who support their academic adventures.

Since there is a wide consensus in the academic community that the Indian university education needs to be reformed to suit the present times, the only question is about how it should be done. Is FYUP the ideal remedy? At this point it would be useful that you have had a look at the position paper prepared by the 3 Indian science academies (link #7 above) to be able to appreciate what I am trying to say below. There are many write ups in the intertubes highlighting the inconsistencies in the stated objectives and proposed curriculum of the DU's FYUP. So, I won't dwell into that here. What I am writing here is mostly considering the position paper linked above (and hoping that the design of FYUP at institutes such as IISc is based on this paper). I do not wish to argue about the stated objectives and outcomes of the proposed changes to the collegiate education. I am in complete agreement that the system needs to be revamped and that the said changes are ultimately going to benefit the students, and the country in general. What I want to do is to look at whether the same objectives and benefits cannot be achieved by slightly tinkering with the existing system, rather than wholesale changes.

Two objectives that the proponents of FYUP argue will be achieved by the reform are inculcation of a scientific temper and interdisciplinary training. The first of these is aimed at invigorating and replenishing the extremely poor human resource currently available for academic research in the country. And since research output of a country is directly related to its economic progress, this is indeed  a very valid objective for the higher ed system to aim for. But then the question is, will that be sufficient to attract, and more importantly retain, research talent? Is this even the first necessary step in that direction? For example, will a talented student who is capable of earning a well paying job in a non-research setting (because of the interdisciplinary training of FYUP) continue to pursue academic research if s/he is subjected to mental (and sometimes physical and sexual) harassment by his/her supervisor? Will such a person even join for a PhD after knowing that their stipend will just about suffice for their survival, has very little chance of being increased and will regularly be paid after a 6 month delay? I think there are more fundamental structural and attitudinal changes that are required to boost the country's research output. In my opinion, the reason there is an overall poor scientific temper in the country and the reason very few take to research as a career is not because of how science is taught in undergraduate courses. It is because of the way science is taught in the schools, boring and without any hands on experimental work. And by the time kids are through highschool, their minds are mostly made up on what career to choose. If a person is not inclined to take up a research career at the end of highschool, that is not very likely to happen after getting a bachelor's degree. So the science in schools needs to be fixed first before getting on to meddling with universities. 

An important proposal in the FYUP position paper is the introduction of a research component in the UG courses by dedicating 1-2 semesters to project work resulting in a dissertation. This is indeed a very good suggestion provided there is a provision for students to directly pursue PhD without having to have a Master's degree as a qualification. A suggestion to this effect is also made in the position paper. One of the advantages of having such a system, the position paper goes on to say, is that it will make taking up a research career more attractive by reducing the time period leading up to a faculty position by one year. Anyone who has any interest in taking up a faculty position in India would know that the recruitment advertisement of every university/institute includes a requirement for the candidate to have at least a few years of postdoctoral experience; greater the competition, longer is the experience required for a candidate to qualify. And so, I don't think this one year's concession is going to help anyone decide in favour of a research career. 

Also, this suggestion to have a research component in UG courses will work out only in non-affiliating institutions such as IISc which have a well established research infrastructure. Among the affiliating universities, in most cases, the UG courses are conducted by the affiliated colleges and only postgraduate courses are conducted in the university campus. Except for a handful of quality colleges affiliated to each university, most others tend to be substandard, conducting their affairs with inadequate staff and facilities. Such places hardly tend to conduct even basic practical classes with standard experiments properly. I can cite my own example in this regard. I did my UG degree at the only government degree college in our city. Since it was the only government college in our city for boys (there was a separate college exclusively for girls and ours was a co-ed), it had the best possible UG faculty and gave admission to the top students who wanted to pursue a non-professional degree. All through my 3 years in the college, there was not a single restroom for the male students and there was only one such facility for all the girl students of the entire college. Since the college did not have funds to even construct toilets for the students, its understandable that there was not enough money to pay for the lecturers. To deal with this, teaching staff in most departments was contract faculty and there were very few permanent staff. (Some information to appreciate how indifferently paid these contract faculty were. After MSc, I went back to work in my UG college as a contract lecturer for an year. My salary was Rs.7000 a month and was only paid to me as a lump sum at the end of my appointment. Subsequently, when I joined for PhD my stipend was some Rs. 8000 odd + HRA).  This was the scenario at a public college and you can imagine what the situation might be in private affiliated colleges. Now imagine mandating such colleges to organise original research projects for their students for an entire semester; how practical do you think that is going to be. If they can't build toilets for students, will they be able to purchase the instruments, chemicals and other facilities that such a project will require? Do temporary lecturers, who are paid pittance have any motivation to develop research programs in these colleges? 

One solution to this could be to ask the students to carry out their project work in established labs outside their colleges, in universities and research institutes. I can relate another experience from my life in response to such a suggestion. I did my MSc at a private engineering college. As it usually happens at such places, we barely had the facilities to complete our prescribed lab courses and there was no research program of any kind in the college. So doing the project, mandated in the MSc course, on campus was out of question. So most of us had to look elsewhere. Those who had a relative who knew someone who mattered, got to do projects in a university or a private company for free. And those who did not have any connections, had to pay a university lab or a private company for the chemicals or more to let them do their projects (of course, not surprisingly no one reimbursed this expense, not to mention the lodging and eating expenses incurred during the project period). I can foresee something similar happening to students of most affiliated colleges if a project is mandated in their course, adding greater financial burden on to an already high education bill. Moreover, I don't even think this approach is actually required to inculcate a scientific aptitude among UG students. Why not, instead, make the basic lab course and practical examinations more creative.  

Another interesting proposal of the FYUP is the interdisciplinary nature of the course. There is no arguing with the claim that interdisciplinary training is going to make students more employable. But the question is, does it need to be over a four year period or can the same objective be achieved by restructuring the present three year course. To start with, I do not think science students should be forced to take courses in history or some other humanities nonsense. Most of what's important for them to know as Indian citizens is covered as part of the social studies courses taught in the schools. No new purpose is served by repeating those lessons, unless of course the idea is to leave the door ajar to facilitate political propaganda. Also the foundation/interdisciplinary courses could be limited to the first two semesters and planned in such a way as to facilitate incremental addition to the knowledge of a particular subject that students had acquired in high school. At the end of first year, students should be allowed complete freedom to choose any combination of major and minor subjects that they wish to study for the last two years without limiting the options to pre-determined combinations as is the practise at present. These measures along with not enforcing a compulsory project work would facilitate achieving all the proposed objectives of the FYUP in 3 years. Project work could be mandated as part of the PG courses which will be pursued by a far fewer students. Curriculum of the PG courses should be synchronized with the UG course so as to prevent overlaps and be designed to cover advanced aspects of the major subject that were left out of the UG curriculum.    

What we need in India is to find solutions that not only address the deficiencies in our university system but are also implementable. Many times experts in our country end up adopting what has worked elsewhere and often come up with solutions that are appealing on paper but seldom succeed in solving our problems. Just having the heart in the right place is not enough. There must be an ear to the ground too.     

Global University Rankings and India

Note:

The inspiration for this post is this op-ed by Prof. Bhaskar Ramamurthy, the Director of IIT-Madras. A big thank you to the folks at Nanopolitan from where I learnt of this op-ed. 

If you have been following this blog, you would know that I have often written about the environment and the state of Indian universities, especially the State Universities. This post is in the later category. To say that the standard of higher education in India is abysmal and it is a direct reflection of the quality of our universities. And this fact is highlighted every year in the global university rankings published by such agencies as Times Higher Education. None of our universities figure in the top 200 or so rankings. Those that usually make it to high-200 ranks or later are institutes like the IISc and IITs, which are specialised institutions for research and training in Science and Technology. They do not really qualify as universities in the traditional sense. One response of those that are responsible for administering the higher education in India has generally been to rubbish these rankings, like Prof. Ramamurthy has done in the above op-ed. I am among those who take these rankings seriously. Admittedly, these ranking systems are not perfect, use metrics that are geared towards Western universities and don't take the specific social and economic settings in which our universities have to operate. Nonetheless, no one can have a doubt the universities that are ranked in the top 10 in any year are indeed top of the heap. Despite our peculiar social and economic conditions, it is indeed possible for Indian institutions to achieve internationally competitive quality standards. Success of our atomic and space programs and international standing of institutions like ISRO is a testament to this. Even some of our educational institutions like the IISc, IIM and IIT systems are well regarded in the world in their specialized domains. But these institutions are too few and very specialized to be able to lift the overall quality of our higher education system. And it would be unfair to compare them to centuries old, extremely well endowed, completely autonomous institutions like the Harvard or the Stanford that have well established research and teaching programs in diverse areas of science, technology and humanities. Nevertheless, those standards are not impossible to achieve provided we have the vision and the determination to remain dedicated to that dream. Our present Prime Minister's ascent to the highest administrative position in the country when every card in the deck was stacked against him is a testament to this. Hope his HRD minister has the same commitment to lift the Indian higher education to standards that rest of the world would hope to emulate. To get there we could probably start by reforming our universities and inject some professionalism into their functioning, starting with the appointment of Vice-Chancellors. As the news items in the following links will show, a lot of our university vice-chancellors are a disgrace to that office. 

1. Recently, Tamil Nadu high court cancelled the appointment of Madurai Kamaraj University Vice-Chancellor. 
2. The Vice-Chancellor of MG University in Kerala was sacked because he fudged his CV
3. Kerala Govt. recently admitted in the assembly that Vice-Chancellors of three other universities in the state did not have the requisite qualifications to hold that office. Note the brazen attitude of the state government in stating that the UGC prescribed qualifications are not mandatory.
4. Another news item on the same issue, this one with comments from some of the VCs.
5. This link highlights the non-serious attitude of the HRD ministry towards an important decision such as the appointment of VCs to Central Universities which were established the promise of raising Indian higher ed to international standards.  
6. Tavleen Singh has written an op-ed today urging the HRD minister to liberalize the higher ed sector and liberate it from the clutches of bureaucracy. 

Moral Dilemma

Let me start off with a story. I have totally made up this story but it is, as you will realize, inspired by some real life events. I wont be surprised if a lot of you can relate the story in part or full to some event you know of. May be at least some of you also share the same moral dilemma as me.  

"N" is the new guy at the local high school. He is a very smart young man who comes with excellent grades and recommendations from his old school. But for all the great academic record that he had, he was popular only with his teachers and never with the other kids. N is determined to change that at the new place. He will do whatever it takes to be popular with both the teachers and students. So he takes on "B", who is the local boxing champion and the reigning school popular guy. N starts to verbally bully B; taunts him about his average grades; makes snide remarks on how he looks older than other kids; calls him a "muscular sissy" when N warns about taking the matter to school Principal etc, etc, etc. Short of getting physical, N does everything possible to hurt B's ego. When things get so far that B can take it no more, he resorts to what he's good at and beats the hell out of N. Now that there is some blood on the floor, everyone around takes note. B is roundly criticised by everyone around for getting physical and using violence to settle a dispute. "Why can't you respond to verbal taunts in kind? Words should be countered with words, and not fists" is the most common counsel that B got. B is suspended from attending classes and representing the school at sporting events. And N gets everyone's sympathy for being the weakling who was beaten up by a physically stronger bully and becomes the new popular guy. 
My moral dilemma is not about what N or B did. N did whatever he thought was needed to achieve his objective. And B, being a person of limited smarts, resorted to the best possible method he knew to protect his fragile ego. But I am not so sure about the conduct of all the others. While B was criticised for losing his composure, N was not only let off despite his provocation of the violent act but he also got everyone's support. No one seems to have paid attention to the fact that N is as strong as B, if not more. Only that it was in a different faculty than B. Why is it that the society seems to think that physical power is somehow stronger than mental power? Why is physical violence more condemnable than mental violence? Isn't N as much responsible for the violent act as B? If so, shouldn't N too be condemned and punished? Or should N be let off because, after all he was only exercising his right to free speech when all that he did was to state facts about B, however offensive those might be? If freedom of expression includes a right to be offensive, why is intellectual offence any less worse than physical offence? 

Getting 'em and Keeping 'em

For all their scams and scandals, the "recently-voted-out" UPA government in India needs to be credited for getting a few things right. Increased investment into improving the standard of higher education and research is one of them. An important part of these efforts was a concerted campaign to woo scientific talent from abroad to man the newly established, as well as the well rooted, institutes and universities. As a life sciences researcher, I am acquainted more with the various initiatives to recruit quality faculty in Biomedical sciences, but I am sure there were similar efforts in all the other STEM disciplines as well. Unlike most other initiatives of that government, at least some of these efforts seem to have borne fruit. An increasing number of foreign-trained faculty have been joining the higher ed institutes over the last few years. Some of the factors that could have encouraged these scientists (some of them already holding faculty positions in foreign universities) to return to India are an increase in the number and amount of research funding; improved availability of quality chemicals, instruments and other infrastructure; a more liberal and collegial atmosphere in the new institutes and of course, a large pool of very smart students. Apart from all these, there is another important factor that might have clinched the deal for a lot of them. That is, an ever improving ecosystem of high quality researchers in the country. Research today, more than at any time earlier, is a highly collaborative effort. And having a decent pool of researchers working on similar problems in your close vicinity gives you a chance for better exchange of ideas and collaborations. More good researchers you have, the more will come. That's the reason why universities and institutes in countries like USA, Japan and Germany keep producing consistently  high quality research work.   
Despite all these efforts to recruit new talent into our universities and research labs, one area that, in my opinion, has not got much attention is on retaining the existing and incoming manpower (and womanpower, of course). Over the last few years, our elite, extremely well endowed institutions have seen some high profile departures. A couple of these that I know of have been from the National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS), probably the best biomedical research institute in India. G.V. Shivashankar, a well accomplished biophysical scientist, had moved away a couple or so years back to NUS, Singapore. When I first came to know of this, I was left asking myself, why? And now, the news is that another young researcher, Yamuna Krishnan, will be moving out of NCBS soon (She was recently included in a worldwide list of 40 under 40 by the journal Cell). Why would two very successful and brilliant scientists, working at an institute that probably has the best talent in the country and probably gets more funding than any other institute, decide to move out? May be because the new place offers even better funding, opportunities and ecosystem to support their work. Admittedly, there is very little that the government or administrators can do immediately to address the concerns about a limited ecosystem to support and nurture their research activities. It is a slow process that will take a long term effort to bear fruit. But there are some other issues, salary and benefits for example, that the government can help resolve. There might be other issues involved that I am neither aware of nor am capable of imagining. Whatever those might be, the concerned authorities should be empowered to do all that it takes to find solutions and retain the best scientific minds in the country. Otherwise, all the various efforts to recruit high quality talent into our research labs will be like trying to fill up a leaky bucket.   

PS:
I do not, in any way, wish to give an impression of criticising these two extremely good scientists. They have all the right to make the most of their talent and ability. And they are the best people to decide on which place and setting gives them that opportunity. This post is just intended to share my pain at seeing such high quality research talent leaving the country. And also, highlight what could be a blind spot in the way higher ed institutions are administered in our country.

Talking about Talks

In popular culture, the stereotype of a scientist is that of an introvert and a recluse. I do not know if this is based on the observation of real life lab-rats or its the product of a writer's imagination. Either way, it has come to be accepted by the larger populace outside the academic world. But, from looking at my own colleagues and the wider research fraternity, this stereotype is as bad as every New York cab driver being an Indian. The fact is that the reclusive, loner scientist is probably an endangered species being driven to the brink of extinction by a growing culture of academic cliques and the increasing prominence of collaborative research. It is now important that you network with the right people, employ the appropriate jargon and attend the popular conferences. The funding agencies and grants' review committees tend to be more sympathetic towards projects with an inter-disciplinary character which might require that you need to have at least a working relation with folks who have an entirely different way of looking at a problem. Then there are the hiring committees that ensure that you humour and stay in touch with every supervisor and every committee member that you had ever worked with, so that you can furnish some 10 or 15 reference letters with your application. So, in this new and improved (?) world of academic research, being good at communication is as important (if not more) as knowing science. And one of the most important means of scientific communication is to talk about your work. You give talks at lab meeting, at departmental seminars, at student/post-doc association meetings, at conferences, at job interviews, etc etc etc. Considering that giving talks is such an important, and frequent, part of an academic's life, its a real surprise that many researchers are not good at it. 
As a graduate student, I worked at an isolated, multi-disciplinary research centre and had very few opportunities to listen to talks from external researchers. But when I started my first postdoc position at a medical college in the Tri-Institution area of New York, it was like going from being starved to being obese; there was at least one (but usually more) talk every week. I have attended talks by some of the best researchers, working on almost every possible problem in life sciences, sitting in the same room with Nobel laureates, sometimes more than one (as a grad student, I remember going to a seminar by Sydney Brenner and being so overwhelmed at seeing a Nobel laureate that I didn't hear anything he spoke). Now, as a postdoc at a conventional university with all the different faculties ranging from humanities to engineering, I get to attend talks on such variety of topics from the effects of Indian residential schools to monitoring bike traffic to develop a better signalling system. Of the hundreds of  talks that I might have attended, there are only a handful that really had my attention throughout. But this is in no way a comment on the quality or novelty of the work discussed but on the style of presentation. Recently, there was a "job seminar" in the department (I really look forward to attending those as an opportunity to collect tips for my own performance when the time comes). I was a little extra interested since the candidate had an Indian name, was from Harvard and had done some excellent work. But during the seminar, she looked nervous and overwhelmed by the occasion and overall the performance was a let down. On another occasion, the candidate's talk was so monotonous and understated that it was really hard to feel the excitement of the work. Recently, there was another seminar by a very senior scientist. Again the work was excellent but for some reason, the presenter tried hard to avoid eye contact with the audience; most of the time he looked at some empty space towards the end of the seminar hall. Good writing or talking may not make up for bad work, but bad writing or talking can certainly let down some really good work. That was the lesson I learnt from that experience. Whenever I myself give a seminar on my work, I try to keep the presentation the way I like to hear; informal, without too much jargon, assuming no one knows anything about my work and overall having the feel of a conversation rather than a sermon. My first real research presentation was during the first meeting of my doctoral committee. I had made what I thought was a bunch of good powerpoint slides, reviewing a lot of literature on the Gap Junctions (a lot of which I only barely understood then) and describing the plans for my PhD project. In my mind, I had a clear picture of how I was going to talk and explain my project. But I was so nervous that as soon as I was asked to talk, I could not recognize anything from the presentation I myself had prepared.  At the end of that disastrous presentation, my supervisor gave me an advice that I still use while preparing for a seminar to this day. Preparing for a talk is not about making powerpoint slides. Its about planning what you are going to say about each figure on each slide. A good way to do that is to write down or type down exactly what you are going to speak about each slide. This helps to keep the talk compact by staying focussed and to stay away from rambling about aimlessly. The one mantra that has served me well through the many academic talks all these years is that "good talks are well practiced talks". 

Update (5:10PM 16 June 2014):

Wanted to add a quick note. Whether the science in your talk is good or not, whether your presentation is good or not, it is always important to watch your manners. I had once attended a workshop at IISc, Bangalore. Most of us  participating were grad students. One of the workshop speakers was a young professor from JNCASR, Bangalore. During the seminar, while he was still talking, raised his leg onto a desk, placed his foot facing the audience and started tying his shoe lace. I do not know if he was in some unbearable discomfort that he needed to retie his shoe laces then and there. But I thought that was improper and extremely arrogant behavior from someone who at least at that time was like a teacher for us. 

How to build world class universities in India

An interesting writeup in Economic Times looking at some of the attributes of top International universities and comparisons with the Indian situation. Here is the link.
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-03-13/news/48189407_1_universities-faculty-endowments

"THAT" moment

I have read this somewhere but don't really remember where. That the greatest motivation for a scientist and the reward they work for is the experience of that one night when he (or she) alone knows a particular secret hidden in the nature's treasure trove before they reveal it to the rest of the world next morning. It is to experience that feeling of discovery that we slog day and night. I have heard people talk of it in research pep talks. I've wanted to experience it and have been waiting for it ever since I started doing research. Through years of being a grad student and a postdoc; and I started my PhD in 2004. I call it the eureka moment. That moment when you see something in your experiments that you hadn't expected when you started. A pleasant surprise. I think that moment for me has come now. 

I am sure you've noticed that I said "think". You see, the way academic research works these days, you can't just jump out of your bathtub and start celebrating butt-naked. And it's never a moment. There is a long gestation period before you can be sure that you have got something good with you. A period when you have to repeat the experiment a number of times, so the observation is reproducible. You also have to think if you have got all the controls right and haven't missed anything. You have to do a number of supporting experiments that can explain the unexpected. Your work then has to be reviewed and approved by your "peers", who you hope don't have a conflict of interest in approving your observation. After all this, you have to be approved by a copy editor somewhere who wants to make sure that you have got your fonts right, the spacing right, the size of images right, their color right, the spellings and grammar right, etc., etc., etc. Only then will your work be published for consumption by the tax paying public that has funded the entire process. By then you would have lost all the enthusiasm to open the cork and it will be time to be back at the bench so you can continue with your efforts to save the humanity (from itself?). And wait for the next eureka moment. 

Novels and moving images.

Recently watched "Sherlock", BBC's modern reimagining of Arthur Conan Doyle's classic detective tale. My impression of the show, in one word, is disappointing. In the modern retelling, the famous resident of 221B Baker Street comes out as an arrogant, egocentric and pretentious. In the original stories Sherlock Holmes' attitude towards Watson is warm and friendly. But in the BBC series on several instances it comes across as downright condescending. Its the same with other characters too, like Lestrade. Also I think the new Mr. Holmes is too much into sentiment and melodrama; like the more-than-obvious hint at romance with Irene Adler character or the self-sacrificing leap to death at the end of second season. As a teenager I was a great admirer of Mr. Holmes and an avid reader of his adventures as documented by his friend and roommate, Dr.Watson. For me, he was the most detached observer and interpreter of facts. As such my judgement of Mr. Holmes' personality could have been clouded by idolatry. If the portrayal of the great detective comes across as being over-the-top and skewed to even a fan like me, then I would think the show needs to improve its character sketches. Of course, its quite possible that it could be just about me. I have also been a big fan of John Grisham's courtroom dramas. And I have not found a single movie based on his works to be as engaging as his novels. Infact, I can't think of a single movie that could be considered a worthy recreation on screen of a literary work. Guess its a matter of choice. Some just prefer their favourite characters as immobile images.   

  

The right turn

Few days ago, Uday Kiran, a young actor in the Telugu movies killed himself by hanging. He tasted fame and success when he was 20 with the success of his very first movie and ended it all at 33. His initial success was followed by a long list of box office failures and he was almost forgotten by an industry where a person is only as good as his ability to excite the cash registers. He was reportedly depressed for sometime about the way his career was shaping.

Jiah Khan entered the Hindi films as a teenager. In her first movie, she was the female protagonist to Indian cinema's biggest superstar Amitabh Bachchan. Unlike Uday Kiran, her debut movie did not do well with the audience and rest of her career panned out like his; almost forgotten. She committed suicide sometime last year. And she too reportedly suffered from depression.
These are but two celebrity examples of a problem that is very prevalent in my country; there are many stories that remain unheard and untold. While the peculiar socio-religious setting of India makes it a fertile breeding ground for mental health related problems such as depression, most people, even those from the educated class, refrain from seeking professional care either because of poor awareness or out of fear for social stigma. At the end of the examination cycle each year, the newspapers are scattered with reports of young boys and girls giving up on their lives  and dreams because of pre- or post-exam anxiety. Some of the brightest kids that enter our elite engineering, medical or management colleges do not graduate from there alive. A lot of these lives could have been saved if only they knew what the problem was and that there are easier ways to solve their problems than death. Any information that can instill hope in them will contribute in some way to avert the ultimate tragedy. I know this, because I have been there. I am still there; but trying to break free. In the hope that it might be of help, to me primarily and to someone else as a consequence, i have decided to chronicle my journey to overcome this psychological shackle in this blog. I will try to post as frequently as my work permits. Hope you will join me in this exciting ride. 
  

Goodbye Sachin………

Adding my 2 cents’ worth to an already over-exposed and over-discussed topic. Sachin Tendulkar in all likelihood has played is last innings in Cricket today. And have to admit whenever the Indian Cricket team takes the field next time, it will certainly feel a little different. I hate to admit it but for a very long time he was a part of my life since cricket was the only sport that I followed with any interest and Sachin was an inseparable part of the only team I supported, the national team of India. Mind you those were the days before Ganguly and Dravid and Sehwag. And much much before the IPL. He started playing for India in 1989 and it was also the year that I joined a boarding school where the first seeds of my cricket obsession were sown. To this day, the best and most memorable years of my life were those spent in that school. So my memories of Sachin are also the memories of my growing up years. I am sure this is true with most Indians of my generation. We grew up watching Sachin, adoring him for taking our favorite team to victory, singlehandedly conquering the mighty Aussies and instilling a confidence that our team too could win against any opponent. As his long and very successful career draws to a close, I feel a tinge of emotion. A string in the cord that connects to my childhood will now be broken. So thank you Sachin for being that string for this long, and goodbye. This is the last time I will curse you for getting out without scoring a century.

Minor efforts, Major effects

Towards the end of this blog post, the blogger describes how her employer, IISER-Pune, has taken steps to address a few minor, but non-trivial, issues that could worry a prospective employee, especially the ones that are not natives of the town/state. This is a particularly important, and probably a peculiar, issue relevant to India considering the multitude of languages and cultures in our country that change dramatically from state to state and sometimes even within a state. An outsider might have to deal with not only a bit of a culture shock but also subtle discrimination. This reminds me of my own experience as a PhD student that was diametrically opposite of what folks at IISER-Pune experienced. And the issues at hand were pretty much the same. 

I grew up in Visakhapatnam, a coastal town in Andhra Pradesh. When I got a PhD position in Chennai, it was my first big move away from my native town. Also included in the "move to a new place" package were the issues pertaining to a new culture, language and life in a metro. The institute where I did my PhD was a center affiliated to Anna University and established on a Public-Private-Partnership (PPP) model with pretty ambitious goals for research excellence. In tune with its stated objectives, the center has a very cosmopolitan composition, both in personnel and the research pursued. People of non-Chennai and/or non-Tamil background composed a good chunk of the staff and student population. One of the unintended (and certainly unwanted for someone in my situation) side story of this PPP experiment was that the PhD students did not have access to the University's hostel facilities.  And unlike the Pune folks, people entrusted with the job of running our center did not deem it an important enough issue to pay attention to. Consequently, the students were left to fend for themselves with their broken Tamil and shallow pockets. The challenge was not finding a decent place that was close enough to the campus. There were plenty of such places. The problem though was with the people who owned these places and insisted on renting them out only to "vegetarians" and "families". Luckily for me, both my roommates belonged to this "vegetarian" category. So, we were only half disqualified to be tenants on account of our failure to get married. In the almost 5 years that I spent there, we rented 4 different places. Each time we had to spend considerable time and energy in the process of finding each one of those and in trying to convince the landlords that we did not intend to burn the place down. It is important for me to clarify that I do not blame the landlords of that locality for thinking the way they do. I am sure they have valid reasons derived from their past experiences for imposing those conditions on their future tenants and every property owner has a right to decide who to rent their place out to or not to. But the point I am trying to make is that knowing how things were in the community, the administrators could have done things differently to ease the life a little for the students rather than leave them to their fate. It could have earned them a life time's goodwill for sure.

Another such example of administrative apathy was with regard to our stipends. Some of us had fellowships directly from CSIR. The way these fellowships were administered was something like this. At the beginning of the fellowship year (sometime around June, I think) we had to submit a claim form telling them how much to pay us (as if they didn't know that already) along with a progress report and a certificate from the supervisor confirming our continuation in the program and recommending the release of stipend. These forms are submitted to a particular office in the university. Once this office receives the forms from all the fellows in the university, they forward them to the CSIR in New Delhi who process them and release the funds to the university which then pays us every month. It usually took about 6 months before this entire process was completed and some money showed up in our bank accounts during which time we were without a pay. This could have been fine for someone living in university accommodation and eating in university mess. As mentioned above, we did not have half of this luxury. So, the system forced us to develop a grasshopper like personality to escape an ant like fate during the dry months. Again, things could have been done differently. Since, the CSIR was going to transfer funds to the university, our stipend could have been payed by the university in the interim. As it turns out this mile was too long for them to walk. 

In none of the above instances, were the authorities concerned breaking any rules. They can't even be accused of dereliction of duty. They were just not prepared to walk the extra few centimeters to make our lives a little bit easier. And this is not something limited only to our university. From what I know, this is what happens in most universities in India. In some places, things are even worse. I have heard from people who had to spend money from their pockets to buy chemicals and plastics or to get their samples analysed on specialized instruments. I probably had a relatively better Indian PhD experience. Mostly because I was part of the above mentioned PPP experiment. Though I was part of the university system, I was also detached from it. I was also fortunate to have done my PhD with supervisors who, above everything else, were great human beings. Working from within the system they did their best to protect me and tried to minimize the influence of  the negative experiences. Most importantly, they did not let any of this compromise the quality of my research. Not every researcher in Indian university system is that fortunate. Often one hears the leaders of Indian science lament the decline of research in Indian universities. For all their eminence and experience, one doesn't get a feeling that  they are looking at the right problems and suggesting the right solutions.  Maybe because, like most of our politicians, they too haven't gone through the systems and hence haven't experienced the problems first hand. Hopefully India will soon have leaders, both in politics and in science, who have grown through the system and have experienced the problems to provide real solutions. 
Were you a researcher associated  with a state university in India? Do you have similar experiences to share? 

Communicating research

The big cola companies Pepsi and Coca-Cola are constantly at war with each other for dominance of the un-healthy foods market. And the weapons of choice employed in this battle to capture the public mindscape are the TV and print commercials. Sometimes these ads are witty and interesting to watch, but most times they down right nasty where one company takes potshots at the other’s products (here’s an example). This was what I was reminded of while reading a recent report in Science which the journal claimed were the results of an year-long “sting” operation carried out to expose the ugly underbelly of Open Access research publishing (here is the link; but I am not sure if the full text can be accessed without a subscription to Science). In my opinion, this was not an honest “sting” Operation and Science was taking a cheap-shot at the Open Access movement that is starting to threaten the subscription access model that journals like Science have been employing to exploit (I’m tempted to say extort) the research community. If the study was objective, the fake paper should have also been submitted to the traditional subscription-access journals from the stables of Nature, Springer, Wiley and Science itself. The sample selection for the study is clearly biased and was done to fit into a pre-determined outcome. In fact, it could be a textbook case of how not to design a research study. Anyway, the point of this post is not to criticize the Science report (there is plenty of that already in the blogosphere, like this for example), but to present my views on communicating research findings.

Just like religious books had once served a  useful purpose in setting order in society before the advent of Democratic governments and constitutions, the subscription-driven, peer review backed research journals too had played a very important role in furthering the cause of research communities in a pre-internet world. The basic idea behind the origin of journals was the need to communicate latest research findings to the widest possible academic audience. So, a system developed where by the research from all over the world will be collected, published in the form of a book and distributed to everyone that wanted to read. Since printing and distributing these research records involved considerable expense, a fee was collected from those who wanted to read them. But evolution of the world wide web has made the hard copy journals irrelevant. Now almost everyone discovers and keeps to date with the latest developments in the research world on the internet. The open access journals that publish online and provide access to their content to everyone free of charge are fast overtaking the traditional publications. But even the open access journals, though an improvement, have not been able to shake off all the deficiencies. Specifically, the reliance on the age old practice of peer-review to judge the quality of research to be published still continues. My biggest problem with the anonymous peer-review practice is the conflict of interest that arises due to the fact that these reviewers are by rule competitors. The entire process is built on the foundation of abstract ideas like honesty and trust.

Also, though there is no charge to read the articles published in open access journals, they do charge the authors to publish their findings. I basically think even this is unnecessary expense of scarce research funds that could be expended on doing the research. Since the very idea of research publications is to communicate one’s work to the wider community, there are many alternate ways available today to accomplish that. And most of them come at almost no expense to either the author or the reader. For example, I plan on using this blog space to regularly publish my research findings and then publicize/communicate them to my peers using social media avenues like Twitter, ResearchGate, Mendeley etc. Since the content on blogs and other social media sites are indexed by search engines such as Google, it won't be difficult for those interested to find and access the information on the internet, just the way they do now. Of course, I will have to wait to establish myself as a principal investigator before implementing this plan and taking the liberty to challenge the established tradition of research communication. But I have a very strong feeling that something similar or a variation of this approach will be embraced by the wider research community in the very near future. And we can all spend more energy on doing, rather than writing and presenting, novel science. 

Questions Galore

Last week, a couple of my friends on Facebook shared this first hand report about an American woman’s traumatic experiences with sexual assaults during her visit to India. Anyone who reads the report cannot but sympathise with the trauma that the woman experienced, so much so that she had to be treated for PTSD. I wanted to say something about the facebook posts but all that I came up was confusion. I knew and wanted to say this is not the culture of my country. This is not an apt description of men who share my heritage. We are a country that preaches "Athidi devo bhava" (may the guest be treated as equal to god). This is probably a one off experience of a foreigner who, by her own confession, had come with a preset mind. May be she was overreacting to a curiosity of  people on seeing a white woman participate in traditional festivities assuming them to be stares filled with sexual perversion. But I also knew that was my emotional side reacting. I knew the experience and horror that the woman described was real. I knew she must have faced sexual harassment, molestation and even rape. I knew in my heart of hearts that this cannot be brushed aside as a one off. This is now a trend, one that is very widely prevalent. Fortunately, there was another report on CNN iReports that gave an alternate perspective from a woman who too was part of the same group that spent time in India.

Of course, this is not the first time that we Indians have experienced emotions such as shame and disgust at how some men amongst us treat women. In fact news such as this and worse than this have become a little too common recently and we might be approaching a stage where we might react to news of sexual assaults just the way we react to corruption in government, with apathy. Just this week there was yet another incident of gangrape on a female journalist in Mumbai. This was followed by the now too familiar  outrage, candle light marches, TV studio discussion, raucous in Parliament and self-righteous speeches by celebrities. But in my opinion, none of this is going to help with the problem that is getting to endemic proportions now. It will probably only assure us that we have not yet become an emotionless populace, despite the television and cinema. I think the problem is deep seated and well entrenched in our cultural psyche, the role and position of woman that was traditionally emphasised in our culture and how these are being re-defined in a constantly evolving society. There are probably some elements of this society that are not acclimatizing easily to this rapid rate of evolution. This is probably a phase in the evolution of our society and things will settle down in the course of time. In the short term though, there is no doubt that steps need to be taken to make India a safe place for women to not just survive, but also to live. This is a necessity for our country to progress and prosper. But what are these steps that would make our women feel safe once again? What can we do to tackle the ugliness that has presently engulfed our psyche? Honestly, I have no answers to these questions. I have neither the expertise nor the experience to come up with solutions this vexing problem. What I do have is the ability to observe the going on around me. My intention in this post is to share some of these observations. 

Many people have pointed to the inefficient and insufficient policing of our streets. There have also been suggestions to enact laws such as to make rape an offence that can be punished with death. No one can disagree with the first of these suggestions. There is no doubt that our police is severely understaffed and not very well trained, especially when it comes to matters related to women and children. Also, better enforcement of the existing laws would also help. Its been my long held belief that if there is any institution that has let India and her people down the most in these 67 years of independence, it is the police and the judiciary. Most problems Indians face today wouldn't be there if the judiciary and the police fulfill their constitutionally entrusted duties efficiently. 

Another aspect (probably a more important one) that needs to be studied is the role that our society (that is, all of us) plays in these crimes. How much does our hypocrisy have to do with this? What role does the moral policing, at the family and societal levels, play? What role do immature measures such as outlawing mannequins advertising lingerie play? What role does the treatment of women in the families of those committing these crimes play in shaping their mentality?  We are a society that cannot tolerate an unmarried man and woman living together. We shut our eyes to natural hormonal changes taking place in teenagers and young adults. In the name of morality, most men and women stay away from a serious physical relationship late into their 20s and 30s unless they are given a stamp of approval by the society in the name of marriage. How much do these attitudes contribute to the present perverse behavior of some? How much does the cultural shock of moving from a traditional/rural setting  to a more liberal/urban setting contribute? How much have our movies contributed, especially with their culture of "item songs" (such as this and this) whose main objective is to titillate men?  Will not treating sex as a sin help? Will it help to have a 911-like emergency response system? Will it help to not criminalize production and exhibition of pornography to grown ups? Will it help to legalize prostitution? Will it help if we do not objectify feelings such as love and beauty? Overall, will loosening the society's grip on individual's life help improve the present situation? 

These are just some questions bugging me and most certainly, I am not the first one to think about them. I am sure there are people that are a lot smarter, and occupy positions that matter, who can, or have to, find answers. Otherwise, our future generations may look back at this part of their history with nothing but repugnance.

Burden of knowledge

While returning from lab yesterday night, I was accosted by a Firefly. The first thought that occured to me on seeing the firefly was my son. What would he think when he sees a firefly for the first time? Would he be curious why its back is on fire? Would he want to know where and how that beautiful glow came from? I could then tell him how wonderful evolution is. I could tell him how nature has devised these wonderful factories in the fly's body that makes the light so that the fly could make little babies. I could probably also tell him about other such wonders like the petals of flowers or the plumage of a Peacock. Or I could just tell him how beautiful nature is. I could tell him to enjoy the beauty that surrounds him. I could tell him that it may not last for a very long time. That his father's and grandfather's generations have not been smart enough to preserve it in all its glory so it could be passed on to him. I would infact just teach him to worship and thank Mother Nature for making this planet our home. 

The price of pursuit.

At many points in my life, I have wondered if what I someday hope to achieve is really worth all that I am giving up in this pursuit of the elusive. I am at that point once again. Recently a lab colleague received the news that her mother was in an accident and had to rush back to her native country. I don’t know if she made it in time. That was the trigger for my latest bout of contemplation. In the past, on occasions like this, I would deliberate and argue with self, resulting in some really bad effects on my psyche. So this time around, I have decided to let it out. As a graduate student in India, I was pretty clear about what my goal was. There was probably a kind of arrogance that I knew what my priorities at that point ought to be. Work hard, be as much published as possible, keep my supervisor happy, get a PhD. So I skipped over many many important events. I would visit my parents at the most once a year though it would have taken only an overnight trains to reach their place. I did not take a day off to meet friends who were visiting from abroad after a while. It was really hard to take some time off to attend friends’ wedding or school reunions. I did not even remember to take my mind off the depressing spectra so I could call and say good-bye to a dear friend who was setting off to distant lands in pursuit of scientific truths. In the end, I managed to work hard and was even given a piece of paper in recognition of that work which proclaimed that I am a doctor (“who cannot cure people”). But I couldn’t accomplish my other two goals of graduate school. At the end of it, I asked myself, was it worth? As a post-doc, living thousands of miles farther away from my family, I have published more work and have earned the respect of supervisors. I have still not got my life’s priorities straight, though. The greatest regret of my life yet is that I was not there to welcome my son into this world. Now, as I watch him grow up over Skype, I find myself asking yet again, is it worth? 

O' My God..............

There is a prayer that Hindus are supposed to say immediately after they wake up and set foot on ground for the first time on a day. It roughly translates to: "O' mother Earth, the wife of Lord Vishnu, please excuse me for I have to touch you with my foot while carrying out my life's duties". We have long forgotten that prayer. Not only do we not ask for Mother Earth's forgiveness anymore, but also actively participate in her mutilation.

I always thought God was invented as a means to explain things that we couldn't completely comprehend. What are those shiny things in the sky? Why do we have day and night? Why do we have seasons? Where does rain come from? How are we born? Why do we die and what happens after that? How did this wondrous planet of ours come about? We were always an inquisitive and curious lot. And at a time when we did not have the tools and means to answer our curiosity, community's self-appointed wise-men and -women told us this was all the magic of a mysterious, all-powerful being, "The God".

But I am clearly wrong. God was invented as a tool to justify escapism; run away from taking responsibility for your own actions. Don't study and fail in exams; gods are angry. Invest without using your brain and lose all your money; gods are not kind. Be unproductive and lose your job, gods must be upset. Destroy the forests, dig out the mountains, build dams to imprison the rivers and when you are faced with drought, floods and calamity blame it on the merciless gods. 

I am in complete agreement with people who think the present calamity happened because the God is pissed off. Of course he would be. Wouldn't you, if you worked hard for many days to create something wonderful only for it to be tastelessly tampered with by a fool? The gods are really angry and if we do not acquire a taste to appreciate their creations, it might not be long before we are kicked out of this art exhibition. 

Worshipping wrong Gods

There was a time not long ago when Malayalam films used to narrate stories where someone or the other would be lured with the promise of a ‘Gulf visa’, taken to Madras or Bombay, robbed of their possessions and dumped. Looks like the Malayali entertainment industry has kept pace with the changing times in Kerala. These days Malayalees get duped for water. This skit is probably an over exaggeration and the situation is probably not as grave in reality. But the it is (though tacky and not very funny) a good reminder of where things are moving in the state. Mind you, we are talking of a state that is famously canvassed, and for a good reason, as ‘Gods own country’. This is the state where Monsoons enter the Indian mainland and probably receives the longest spell of rains than any other state. This is the state where people agitated to protect the Silent Valley and shut down Coca Cola. But today, in a mad rush towards urbanization and ill-planned development, we are destroying the precious gifts of nature that we were endowed with and in the process endangering the quality of our lives.
This water story is probably true of most states in India, not just Kerala. That things have come to such a pass in a place like India reveals a lot about how we have changed as people because we were a culture of nature worshippers. We have gods for every element in nature; for Sun and Moon, for rivers and oceans, for air and rain. Every animal that we can find in the wild is an object of our devotion on account of being the favoured vehicle of one or the other of our gods. Not only tigers and lions, we revere even snakes and chicken. For such a culture to not just neglect conserving what was given to us by nature but to abuse it, in my opinion reflects how misplaced our ideals and ideologies have become. We have forgotten the original ideals that our ancestors so zealously pursued that they placed these animals and elements of nature on a divine pedestal as god and goddesses. We practise the religion but have forgotten its sacred tenets. We worship the gods but have forgotten why they were considered divine in the first place. We worship the wrong gods and neglect the most important one that sustains our existence on this planet. 

ISI vs ISI

Courtesy this blog, came to know about this news article published in Deccan Herald. While the article is about the founding member of ISI, Mr. Khan Bahadur Qurban Ali Khan, the photo published along with the article is that of the founder of ISI, Prasanta Chandra Mahalanobis. The only problem here is that P.C.Mahalanobis had no association with Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence. He was the founder of Indian Statistical Institute. Says a lot about the journalism standards of that publication.

Doordarshan............Nostalgia

I recently happened to watch an episode of Dekh Bhai Dekh on youtube. And was flooded with memories of all those shows I watched on Doordarshan (DD) as a child. But as I suggest in the title of this post, good shows on DD are now confined to memories. On second thoughts, that's probably not a fair judgement. I haven't watched anything on DD (not even news) for a very long time. So, I don't really know if there are any good shows. But my guess is that most people in India don't either. (My statistics here are limited to my friends and relatives, close and distant. Since they are spread far and wide in the country and abroad, there is enough variety in there for the data to be representative.) Back then (that is before the advent of Zee TV) though, things were different. DD was the only television station in most of India and there were a few really good shows. So much so that I still remember dialogues in some of them. This post is about a few of those shows I remember from the 'DD days'.
There were the two very famous shows based on Indian epics, Ramanand Sagar's Ramayan and B.R. Chopra's Mahabharat (see I remember the maker's names). As I am typing this out, the title song of Mahabharat is on in my mind. (unrelated to the subject of this post, I wonder if DD would venture to telecast shows such as these now a days based on 'Hindu' epics in the present 'secular' environment in India). The subject of these two shows was not new to me (and probably to most Indians), having already heard most of it from my grandparents. But the exciting part of watching them was to put faces to the characters and visualize the incidents from bed-time stories. 
After the tenth board exams, I got a silver medal from my school for having stood first in History in those exams (class first of course!!!!!). But I enjoyed learning about Indian history the most while watching Bharat Ek Khoj based on Jawaharlal Nehru's Discovery of India. For a very long time I believed the narrator of the show was actually our first Prime Minister. Roshan Seth as the narrator was that great. Then there was Chanakya narrating the story of the famous Indian economist, thinker, administrator.
I (and most of the world) saw the future Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan for the first time in the serial Fauji based on the lives of a few army cadets. I used to love the show so much that even today I remember a dialogue that one of the characters utters repeatedly ("I say chaps"). We again watched SRK's subdued acting in Circus before he was afflicted with stammering and super-stardom happened. 
Another show I remember very fondly was Param Vir Chakra which used to depict the lives of those brave soldiers who sacrificed their lives to protect the country and later were awarded the nation's highest gallantry award. What I remember the most about this show was not so much the stories themselves. I and my friends used to play role-playing games after watching the show (talking of role-playing games, during the 1992 cricket world cup, we organized a mini-world cup of our own where we were members of different teams. I was captain of South Africa Kepler Wessels!!!!!).
There were other shows like Surabhi which was probably India's first talk-show, Japal Bhatti's Flop-Show and a science-based show (whose name I can't remember, any help?) hosted by Prof. Yashpal (what's the second name?). About those and others in some other post (maybe when I am in a nostalgic mood again).  
Do you have a fond DD memory? What was your favorite TV show growing up? 

Well begun isn't always well-done

I recently came across an article in the careers section of the journal Science recently. Here is the link. This is one of those feel-good news write-ups. Especially so if you are interested in Indian science scenario, both as a member of the research community and as someone who takes pride in anything good happening in his country, even if those are few and far between. A point that is repeatedly made out by the author in the article is the need for labor law reforms to enable the research and higher education institutions to hire foreign researchers. An underlying, unstated assumption of such a line of thinking is that the homegrown talent in India is probably not good enough. Not surprising considering the fetish we Indians have for anything and everything that is imported. 
Over the past few years, there have been many schemes launched by the government in New Delhi to invigorate the research eco-system in the country. New institutes and central universities have been established, money has been showered on the  already established premier research institutes and the moon has been promised. There is no doubt that the country needs to reinvest in research to give a fresh impetus to economic growth and stay globally competitive. If anything, this reinvestment has been much delayed. It is alright to spend money but that should not be done without application of thought (as in this example). More importantly, it needs to be followed up by steps that bring about a change in the existing culture and attitude of our research community. Otherwise, the enthusiasm generated by the present investment, like with most schemes launched by our governments, will be short-lived and will not result in long-lasting gains for the country. In my opinion, the most important of these steps should be to restructure and reboot our state universities which is where most of the graduates in our country are trained. Establishing specialized research institutes is fine, but the number of Indian citizens who are directly influenced by these places is minuscule. Most people probably wouldn't even know of their existence. Money needs to be spent in such a way that it benefits the most people. After all, there is a strength in numbers!!! Another important step would be to popularize research as a main-stream career option. Make it less intimidating and more cool to be a researcher in popular imagination. It's probably time someone made an Indian version of Big Bang Theory. Does anyone know how to get in touch with Ekta Kapoor?