Team-BHP
(
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenhorn
(Post 4280640)
While I agree that conceptually, history and geography are relevant, my point was that the history that was taught to me was more or less irrelevant (please read my original post) and the geography was taught in far too much depth and breadth. Civics was touched upon barely, and economics was not taught at all. Regardless, I am not debating 10th standard education (despite my personal views), we are talking about Higher education
|
I do not think any board in India teaches history and geography, or economics to any classes higher than 10th, unless the Humanities group is chosen. May be a single paper for humanities in all of 50 papers for engineering, say -- thats it. When you pointed out problems about history, geography and regional languages, it had to be of education until 10th.
Regarding the content of history, depth of geography etc. of course, you may have an opinion. But we have methods to choose that in this country and they are mostly based on democracy. If you do not agree with the content, or if you have an issue with the depth, that does not mean you say no to the subject as a whole and state that teaching the subject is useless.
Quote:
I am not sure how teaching obscure literary works to someone who has a very clear grasp of the language and grammar helps. As for your example, I consider myself pretty well read in english, and found out only during my MBA that the word consideration in a legal contract has significantly different meaning that english, and trust me, no amount of Teaching, reading, and CAT VA courses had given me that knowledge. So i doubt plain old school english would qualify you to grasp the full implications of legal wordings!
|
First of all, your very clear grasp of language and grammar comes from the elementary literature you were taught. The idea of teaching literature and grammar till 10th is based on past experience of teaching children for many many years. If you grasped it when you were in 5th class, you may be brilliant !
I have not seen anybody who has read and understood original Shakespeare or Chaucer, but had a problem with legal documents. Of course the terminology or the words used may be different, but that is what dictionaries are for. Its like this -- if you have played football for years, of course you have an advantage while playing rugby, compared to people who have not played any sport. If your child grows up to be an IFS diplomat, or a CEO, the boring Shakespeare experience will come to use when he has to decipher a legal document with another diplomat or when dissecting a government deal. The idea is, you do not have to depend on anybody else's faculty if your language skills are good.
Quote:
That is fine, but Higher education, especially in a country like ours should help bridge the gap between things such as views and understanding, and things such as practical applications and day to day life. When I joined a school, I was told by everybody that employment was the primary purpose of education. heck, the only reason I endured so many years of school and college was because i was told that this would be useful for a job once i grew up. History and certain subjects are increasingly becoming world views of certain parties - I have no interest in learning those , nor my children, but lets not go into that. If you tell me (or the parents of the average schoolgoing kid) that this is the purpose of education, I'm sure they would be positively discouraged!
|
One of the most important practical application of one's self in a country like ours is "how" to vote. I mean the thought process. We cannot be a country of engineers/doctors alone. If you were told by everyone that employment is the primary purpose of education, you were told wrong. At least from your experience, you can understand that now --right ? Till the children are 15 years old, they must be introduced to all aspects of the world, all subjects; arts and humanities included. They can of course choose what they want to do after that. By suggesting that "this is how I turned out, so the rest of the things, that were taught to me did not matter at all", you are also choosing a path for your children, without really introducing them to all paths.
In a poor country where literacy rate was less than 50%, of course the primary purpose of education must be skill development. But the requirement has changed now. Kerala is close to 100% in literacy for decades now. Education would upgrade itself over time if the society runs its democracy properly.
I have no comments on the political side of it. I would agree that a lot of the content has to change. A lot more of citizenry has to be introduced and a clear picture of how the democracy, electorate, judiciary and the bureaucracy works must be taught to children. And of course there is a lot of junk being taught as literature too. We need the right people to choose the content. We do not need to strike off subjects.
When any system of schooling or higher education is introduced which tries to break this cycle, the backlash has to be seen to be believed. Yes our system is rotten, but 'a lot' of people simply wouldn't know what to do if exposed to anything else.
I know this is again a function of our conditioning, but unless there is a documented evidence of 3rd or 4th generation of Indians 'studying differently' in education systems abroad than how their grandparents did, I have my doubts. Due apologies for the cynicism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackwasp
(Post 4278332)
...................
6. Finally, a bit controversial point - After my 10th, nothing I learnt was something which couldn't be found on the internet / self-learnt..
.....
|
You've sensibly mentioned it as controversial. Not more than 1% could utilize these resources the way they are (or were) originally intended, so in my humble opinion the point is moot at best.
What ails our Higher Education Institutions?
Sheer greed. Translating to poor infrastructure in colleges, under qualified staff, dilution of merit in admission.
Higher education mafia works similar to a business like real estate.
BTech (Fail): Empty seats, ghost campuses, unskilled graduates -
http://indianexpress.com/article/edu...egree-4977240/
The only thing id add to this discussion - something I never realized as a student - is that our educational institutions and teachers/professors are extremely judgemental. And we imbibed that trait as it was quite normal to judge and be judged. In most cases parents didnt help ( Dad was an exception - he prescribed to the 'each to his own' and 'theres good and bad within everybody' school of though)
As a society we are extremely judgemental even to personal perferences - be it that of our loved ones or complete strangers. Even something as mundane and personal as a hairstyle is open to judgement. This needs to change in a civil society and our educational system and educators ought to recognize this issue
And we thought only Indian higher education system is messed up. "Desperate Housewives" star Felicity Huffman was one among dozens charged over college entrance scam.
Quote:
Nearly 50 people, including actors Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin were charged on Tuesday in what federal authorities say was a $25 million scam to help wealthy Americans get their children into elite universities like Yale and Stanford.
|
Link
Last year there was an article on how Harvard evaluates and is biased against Asians.
Quote:
Harvard has never denied that it considers race and ethnicity in admissions decisions, but it has always maintained that it uses race and ethnicity as one factor among many, including economic disadvantage, special talents and a range of other factors.
|
Link
Quote:
Originally Posted by srini1785
(Post 5020262)
Probably its going to be replaced with Pali / Sanskrit and Ancient Astronomy.
|
There is a mention that bridge courses are offered.
Quote:
For students coming from diverse backgrounds, the technical education regulator has asked universities to offer suitable bridge courses such as Mathematics, Physics, Engineering drawing, etc., to achieve desired learning outcomes of the programme.
|
Anyway, with kids "solving problems" in Physics/Mathematics in +2 solely with the intention of clearing the 99.xxx barrier with zero practical knowledge, does this even matter? :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by srini1785
(Post 5020262)
|
I personally know someone who got into engineering despite failing in class 12 math.
Apparently, to pass 12th under ISC board, one needs to clear English plus any 3 subjects. This person was declared a pass because he/she had passed in English, Physics, Chemistry, and Comp Science. And some states just look for total pass percentage instead of individual subject marks as eligibility criteria for engineering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltoLXI Anyway, with kids "solving problems" in Physics/Mathematics in +2 solely with the intention of clearing the 99.xxx barrier with zero practical knowledge, does this even matter?
|
Exactly. Plus, most of the plus two math is not very useful for the folks ending up as software engineers. It is a debatable topic but holds true for the majority of work that the IT folks (including me) do on a day-to-day basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaguar
(Post 5020305)
Exactly. Plus, most of the plus two math is not very useful for the folks ending up as software engineers. It is a debatable topic but holds true for the majority of work that the IT folks (including me) do on a day-to-day basis.
|
Have never used 12th STD Math subjects in life post that. Infact Computer Science Engineering students had Physics and Chemistry for the first two semesters. I wonder even now what was the point in having them in first year. Atleast the second semester Physics was something related to semi conductor and opto-electronics which has some relation to computers.
We had a multimedia subject is 6th or 7th semester with lessons on outdated stuff in media world. Should have had Python, Java and stuff in the curriculum to make us work centric.
Our education system is a joke. China is trying to make tests more stringent and make kids passing out much better with better curriculum and here we are making a mess of all entrances with coaching centres spoon feeding, no entrance in some states like TN, more reservation and poor cut off standards for reservation, sub-standard college education but with ever increasing fees and government funding being wasted in many institutions. We need more technology centres and startups in all fields and our education system helping to create that. Sadly we are missing. Time to look at the Israel way of doing things or the Chinese way of making it work.
Why don't you guys reconnect with your alma mater towards improving conditions through Industry engagement - mentorship / project proposals / training / internship opportunities / etc. At least the interested students will benefit from such exposure. Hopefully the faculty folks will adapt the methods to maintain the initiatives by connecting with other alumni / alumnae.
I have grown up in India studying the international curriculum right from IGCSE till 10th standard and IB after that and now I'm in an Indian College. This puts me in a unique position because I have and am seeing the differences between the various international methods of teaching and our Indian standard of education. Right from the get go, the first thing they teach in IGCSE or IB is Practical Application. I have had more opportunities to apply my knowledge practically in my 4 years of high school than I have in my 3 years of college. Another glaring difference is the way we are tested and given assignments.
In high school, our tests were more aptitude and practically based and our assignments were all inter disciplinary. Compared to that, in engineering college, our assignments are archaic with no scope of connecting one subject to another.
Another major difference that highlights the biggest flaw in our education system is the entire concept of teachers running behind the students to get work done. What they teach and practice in international curriculums like IB and IGCSE are, the student is independent and has the capability to make his/her own decision and the teacher is there to guide or correct a mistake.
Once our education system progresses to the point where we give more importance to application based teaching and students are allowed to be independent to find their own way, our schools and colleges will nurture some of the brightest students of the nation.
(Sorry for the long post, this is one topic which is discussed in my home weekly because of the different exposures we all have to various education systems)
I don't know why one of these "formal" educational institutions are even relevant, especially in India. I really wish we had Youtube, Coursera and the like during my college years. To get an idea of what it is like to attend a lecture on a technical subject in India, all you have to do is watch a video from Youtube posted by some of our "top" colleges. Totally cringeworthy.
You can absolutely get an education if you want one now, just spend some money on a good internet connection and learn to seek out the best teachers and videos. Even the best books are free. Of course, you will not get a job because you will not have a certificate "approved" by the system. You will probably not even be able to make a living after you educate yourself unless you can somehow sell your skills to those who hold the purse-strings inside that walled city guarded by many levels of doublespeak. Unless many self educated are able to succeed without encountering insurmountable obstacles it's pointless to discuss why our education system is the way it is and why normal people choose to take the easiest path to a comfortable life.
As one comedian put it, our education system is one giant pyramid scheme. :D
A question for those ranting about the crappy indian education system:
Why dont multinationals (especially those started by college dropouts like Apple, MS, FB, Dell) take in people based on the skills instead of degrees? Why do they visit the IITs, IIMs and NITs for placement?
Quote:
Originally Posted by m8002?
(Post 5022449)
A question for those ranting about the crappy indian education system:
Why dont multinationals (especially those started by college dropouts like Apple, MS, FB, Dell) take in people based on the skills instead of degrees? Why do they visit the IITs, IIMs and NITs for placement?
|
Let me answer this as I am frequently a member of interview panels visiting these universities. The simple answer is quality and quantity - you will be hard pressed to find as many talented freshers raring to go in top tier colleges compared to other colleges.
While we are not mass recruiters, we still give a significant number of offers as we know that out of every 10 offers, only 3-4 will actually end up taking the job as most of the students will either head abroad or would have multiple offers.
Hiring at scale is simply not possible in an easy way other than at campus hiring at top tier institutes.
Thanks for the reply reignofchaos. Even I visit these colleges for recruitment.
On the one hand, we tell our higher education is not good. On the other hand you mention you get the talented freshers from the same system. How can both be true?
If skills was the only criteria, then why look at college degree and on top of that the pedigree? Lets keep aside the freshers: will these companies in India, shortlist a highly skilled school dropout (lets say the person has enough stuff to show though free lancing and git repos )?
Our system doesnt offer good education, but does a great job of filtering the bright guys from the average and the poor students.
| All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 06:50. | |
