China rising, India falling: IITs are an illustrative example of the dumbing down of Indian universities

Last September, Indian Institute of Technology, Bhubaneswar, gave me an honorary Doctor of Science degree. When the honour was conferred President Pranab Mukherjee, in his capacity as visitor to the institute, lamented that no Indian university is now ranked among the top 200 in the world even though historically the country had excellent educational universities like Takshashila and Nalanda.

President Mukherjee’s contention raises two serious issues. First, how relevant are university ranking processes and do these give a fair indication of the quality and appropriateness of education in a rapidly changing world? Second, should Indian universities be concerned that not even one is in the top 200?

There are now three ranking systems. The oldest one is Academic Ranking of World Universities, popularly known as Shanghai rankings because it was started by Shanghai Jiao Tong University in 2003. It is updated biannually.

The Times Higher Education (THE) World Education Ranking started in 2004 in collaboration with Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). In 2010 QS went its own way with its own ranking methodology whose citation data base is provided by Thomson Reuters. The three ranking systems provide different results because criteria used as well as their relative weights differ. Many of the criteria are subjective and dependent on views of stakeholders sampled. With different stakeholders, the results could be very different.

To be ranked, universities have to continually fill up numerous surveys from the three ranking organisations. How reliable is self-reporting when results have high stakes as there are considerable economic and reputational consequences?

University rankings have become an important tool to attract high-quality staff, good students and serious funding. For administrators, politicians, government officials, funding agencies and media, rankings are important. Thus, temptation to manipulate data is quite significant. Providing regular global rankings data have become a fiercely competitive, lucrative and booming market. The way rankings are done at present, the roles of poachers and gamekeepers have become blurred.

No matter how the three ranking systems are assessed, they do not consider how good or relevant teaching quality is. Sadly, there is no indication that the system is likely to change in the near future because universities that rank within the first 200 simply refuse to provide such information. Not surprisingly, they would like to maintain the status quo since it serves their agenda well.

From my perspective, even though not a single Indian university is within the Global 200, i am not overtly worried about this fact so long as they can provide quality education to prepare the students for a rapidly changing world. Sadly, this is not happening.

The country made a good beginning as early as September 1944 when it was announced that an ‘Indian MIT’ would be set up. Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, was conceived in the image of MIT and started functioning in 1951. When i joined this institution as a student, in 1954, it truly had an all-India character, with the best faculty and students available. When the second IIT was established in Kanpur a large number of faculty left Kharagpur, including M S Muthana who became director of IIT Kanpur. Over the years, as the number of IITs proliferated, these have become provincial institutions.

Until recently, admissions to IITs were strictly on the basis of quality. IITs became a respected global brand because they selected students who were the best in India. With the proliferation of IITs and quota system for admission, the overall quality of future IIT graduates is bound to decline.

Sadly, for political expediency, India does not have a single MIT as in the United States, but at least 21 IITs in the foreseeable future. Not surprisingly, in 2014, early results showed that during the first phase only 9,061 of 9,711 seats were filled. There is still high demand for the first five IITs (Kharagpur, Kanpur, Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai) but not for the newer ones.

This is also reflected in quality and retention of staff. Overall, in IITs nearly 30% of faculty positions cannot be filled because of lack of quality staff. Indian politicians, for the sake of short-term gains, have killed the goose that laid golden eggs!

Compare this with Chinese policy. In 1998, the Chinese government decided to support only nine of their 2,000 universities to become world class. The results have been truly spectacular. China is now supporting a few universities at a much higher level so that these become globally some of the best. This does not mean research and teaching facilities are not supported at other universities but only that the elite universities are supported at a much higher level. Other countries like Germany have followed similarly successful policies. Current Indian policies are unlikely to produce world-class universities.

Irrespective of whether any Indian university is ranked within the first 200 of the world, the quality of education has to be improved significantly so that graduates receive the skills they need for employment. If India wants to have elite global universities it has to select a few that have the necessary potential and comparative advantage, then support them consistently over the long term with higher funding and less bureaucratic intervention.

Sony CEO Kazuo Hirai open to selling mobile, TV businesses: Sources

LAS VEGAS: Sony Corp CEO Kazuo Hirai has weathered a crisis over a cyberattack on its Hollywood studio and its controversial comedy "The Interview", but his toughest moment may be just arriving as he prepares a new business revival plan.

After failing to turn around the storied creator of the Walkman since taking the helm in April 2012, Hirai and his deputies are now open to options including sales and joint ventures for its money-losing TV and mobile phone operations, company officials familiar with the leadership's thinking say.

Sony, which has cut its earnings forecasts six times on Hirai's watch, forecasts a 230 billion yen ($1.9 billion) net loss for the business year to March, and will suspend dividend payments for the first time, after deep smartphone losses.

Sony management recognises that "no business is forever", one source told Reuters. Although no deals are on the table, "every segment now needs to understand that Sony can exit businesses", he added.

Last year Sony sold its Vaio personal computer business and spun off its TV operations, cutting 5,000 jobs in addition to the 10,000 slashed earlier after Hirai took over.

But even as many analysts say further drastic action is needed, such as a full-fledged exit from TVs, Hirai used last week's high-profile Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas to push an array of new gadgets, including a super-slim TVs and a $1,100 Walkman digital-music player.

He stressed the success of Sony's imaging sensors for cameras and its PlayStation 4, saying the company has sold 18.5 million of the game consoles, putting it ahead of Microsoft Corp's Xbox One and Nintendo Co's WiiU.

Sony has refused proposals for aggressive action before, such as a 2013 demand from influential hedge fund manager Daniel Loeb to spin off part of its profitable entertainment business to fund an overhaul of the struggling electronics operations.

'Drastic reforms'
As he prepares the latest revival plan ahead of the new business year, Hirai, 54, must decide what to do with the financially weak operations that have already been subject to heavy cost cuts.

He told a small group of reporters at the Las Vegas show that his reforms have succeeded "in some parts but not in others".

"Electronics in general, along with entertainment and finance, will continue to be an important business," he said. "But within that there are some operations that will need to be run with caution - and that might be TV or mobile, for example."

Yet cost cuts and a focus on high-end phones, a strategy led by Hiroki Totoki, the new chief of Sony's mobile division, aren't enough, said Citigroup analyst Kota Ezawa.

"The mobile and TV businesses both require a drastic overhaul," he said. "Without drastic reforms such as joint ventures or alliances, they will both be in the red three years from now."

Exiting the TV business would mean heavy restructuring costs and lost sales. Potential buyers might not want all the division's assets, let alone at a high premium.

But Japanese rival Panasonic Corp has succeeding in shifting focus from TVs and DVD players to growth areas such as advanced driver-assistance systems and high-margin home appliances under CEO Kazuhiro Tsuga, who took office around the same time as Hirai.

"Anyone can make TVs these days," Tsuga said after browsing rival booths at CES. "But you see this in smartphones too, not just TV."

Indeed, Sony expects a 180 billion yen impairment charge for its mobile phone business after struggling to compete with cut-price Asian rivals and failing to close the gap with Apple Inc and Samsung Electronics Co in high-end smartphones.

The same predicament forced Nokia to sell its mobile phone business to Microsoft and Sony's former JV partner Ericsson to sell its stake in 2012.

India will catch up with China's growth rate in 2016-17: World Bank

WASHINGTON: Buoyed by the economic reform measures taken by the Indian government after coming to power in May last year, the World Bank has said that India would catch up with China's growth in the year 2016-17. 

"According to our analysis, India will catch up with China's growth in the year 2016 and 2017," World Bank chief economist and Senior vice-president Kaushik Basu told reporters. 

He was speaking yesterday at a conference call as the bank released the latest issue 'Global Outlook: Disappointments, Divergences, and Expectations Global Economic Prospects,' report. 

"China's growth will remain high, but will begin to taper very gently, reaching 6.9 per cent in 2017," Basu said. 

The World Bank in its report also forecast a growth rate of seven per cent each in the fiscal year 2016 and 2017 as against China's 7 per cent and 6. 9 per cent respectively. 

This would be for the first time in recent past that India's growth rate would catch up with that of the Asian giant China. 

The World Bank estimated a growth rate of 5.6 per cent in 2014 and has forecast a growth rate of 6.4 percent in 2015, while that of China as 7.4 (estimated) in 2014 and 7.1 per cent (forecast) in 2015. 

In its report the Bank said growth in South Asia rose to an estimated 5.5 per cent in 2014 from a 10-year low of 4.9 percent in 2013. 

"The upturn was driven by India, the region's largest economy, which emerged from two years of modest growth," it said. 

Regional growth is projected to rise to 6.8 per cent by 2017, as reforms ease supply constraints in India, political tensions subside in Pakistan, remittances remain robust in Bangladesh and Nepal, and demand for the region's exports firms, it said. 

"Past adjustments have reduced vulnerability to financial market volatility. Risks are mainly domestic and of a political nature. Sustaining the pace of reform and maintaining political stability are key to maintaining the recent growth momentum," the report said.