[sgiitk]

This is common practice at manned crossings. The cops directs you to do so.

[rohanjf]

I did my BE from MIT Manipal from 1999 to 2003. Vishweshwaraiah Technological University was formed in 1998 and MIT was a part of it. But in 99, we got deemed university status and our syllabi was revamped. For practical exams, any questions could be asked and not some predetermined 12-15 that we practiced through the semesters during lab hours (unlike VTU). Also, we had full 8 subjects each in 7th and 8th semester (again, unlike VTU) along with a major project.

I got a job through campus placement, but was greedy to work in a big brand company. So I went for a walk-in at Philips, after I joined my first company. Philips had a cut-off of 75%. Most companies kept high cut-off, because it was easier to score marks in VTU.

I was in the screening queue and the Philips guy asked my marks. I said, 74.8%. He said he cannot allow me. I got so angry and because I had nothing to lose, I told him, "I lose nothing. Philips is losing me" and walked away.

Unlike bollywood films, he did not call me back :-D

But my thoughts were right. During initial training at my first job, we were 32 people. 4 of us from MIT scored better marks than others in most tests. Something I am still proud of.

I am not complaining about VTU graduates. My complaint is about VTU itself. Its methods and syllabi severely hamper growth of mind. I feel it gives plenty opportunities to find shortcuts.

[blue_pulsar]

Originally Posted by rohanjf

I did my BE from MIT Manipal from 1999 to 2003. Vishweshwaraiah Technological University was formed in 1998 and MIT was a part of it. But in 99, we got deemed university status and our syllabi was revamped. For practical exams, any questions could be asked and not some predetermined 12-15 that we practiced through the semesters during lab hours (unlike VTU). Also, we had full 8 subjects each in 7th and 8th semester (again, unlike VTU) along with a major project.

I got a job through campus placement, but was greedy to work in a big brand company. So I went for a walk-in at Philips, after I joined my first company. Philips had a cut-off of 75%. Most companies kept high cut-off, because it was easier to score marks in VTU.

I was in the screening queue and the Philips guy asked my marks. I said, 74.8%. He said he cannot allow me. I got so angry and because I had nothing to lose, I told him, "I lose nothing. Philips is losing me" and walked away.

Unlike bollywood films, he did not call me back :-D

But my thoughts were right. During initial training at my first job, we were 32 people. 4 of us from MIT scored better marks than others in most tests. Something I am still proud of.

I am not complaining about VTU graduates. My complaint is about VTU itself. Its methods and syllabi severely hamper growth of mind. I feel it gives plenty opportunities to find shortcuts.

Rohan, I have been in this software industry for almost as long as you. I have seen good candidates scoring less marks as well as coming from not-so-good colleges. The ones from not-so-good as not as 'polished'. But you train them a little and they work as good as the ones from the good colleges like yours (probably barring communication skills). Btw, I'm from a college which is pretty similar to yours.

But I agree with you. Almost anyone can score 70pc in VTU. To add to that, the lesser reputed colleges give almost-full marks to their students in labs and internals. Which boosts up their percentage. But believe me, the scene is pretty much same across. I have been out of Karnataka for campus interviews and I get to hear answers like "Sir, I forgot that program.." from a 6/7th semester Computer Science student who had an aggregate of >85%. I gave them the logic but still, not even one line of code was written.

[sagarpadaki]

VTU is not so easy anymore. Its difficult to score above 75 consistently in all 8 semester. And the syllabus has also been revamped. I passed out in 2011 and I know how difficult it was for me to score above 75 in all 8 semester. Papers are tough and there are lesser chances of shortcuts. Although I agree some colleges give high internal marks to push up the percentage.

Yes , there Will be students to just mug up everything! Heck ,couple of my friends used to mug up lab programs!!! I mean even those big big ones. Even the name of the variables would not change in their papers. And they got more than 75. But there are few who are indeed good and also get above 75.

[srinih75]

Today most of the jobs even IT are commoditized. They do not want thinkers but more doers. Why is that? Because the bread and butter of most companies are from low skilled service oriented work - support, operations, admin tasks, etc. This is very true for IT, and with more and more "operationalized" form of work like flipping burgers in McD or being a cashier in Big Bazaar or the dude who comes home to fill our Credit Card or Loan Application, its now every where. The moment a work is split into tasks which can be "outsourced" you need not have skill/talent, just need labor force.

Only the top few % of people in an organization and let to think (whether they can or not, is a different question!).

Anyway, one more problem is (many may object this, but I have seen it happen in my own college!) those who do not find jobs in a company end up probably joining a college (may be the same one they graduated). They in turn try to "teach" the next batch. Again from that batch those who now already have degraded knowledge few many not get through. They join a college to again "teach". So I can see that the "inability" is getting more and more concentrated in each batch finally we are blaming an entire set??

With coaching classes, guides and cheat sheets there is no need of intelligence to pass our exams. Its how much of memory (is it RAM mostly yes because once exam is over power supply goes away and contents are wiped out!) each person has. People get more marks, so now the concept of higher marks better brains have lost its value. So who is the "brainy" guy? Can even one become like Funsuk Wangdo? I don't think so.

I guess one should look at things a different way from now on. If a person joining a company can complete the assigned tasks the way it should be done (usable to next assembly line) and without much assistance (pain for others if I can say in a different way) he is employable. If there is a lead/manager who can get work done by people (brainy or not) he is a good manager and so on.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by rohanjf

I am not complaining about VTU graduates. My complaint is about VTU itself. Its methods and syllabi severely hamper growth of mind. I feel it gives plenty opportunities to find shortcuts.

I am afraid tables have turned now. Now MIT doesn't give less than 70%, so I hear.

Originally Posted by srinih75

Today most of the jobs even IT are commoditized. They do not want thinkers but more doers. Why is that? Because the bread and butter of most companies are from low skilled service oriented work - support, operations, admin tasks, etc. This is very true for IT, and with more and more "operationalized" form of work like flipping burgers in McD or being a cashier in Big Bazaar or the dude who comes home to fill our Credit Card or Loan Application, its now every where.

You are right, that is the real tragedy that is taking place in large companies. And guess what it leads to?

This: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/t.../17250356.cms?

I especially want to draw your notice to this statement:

"The shelf life of a software engineer today is no more than that of a cricketer - about 15 years," says V R Ferose, MD of German software major SAP's India R&D Labs that has over 4,500 employees . "The 20-year-old guys provide me more value than the 35-year-olds do."

This is a self fulfilling prophecy. It is companies like these who have caused such a situation. If your company does the kind of work that can be done by a 20 year old, then you don't need a 35 year old.

Generally a fresh BE graduate is at least 21-22 years old. At that stage they almost know nothing, bar a few exceptions. If SAP India's R&D Lab finds 20 year olds more useful than 35 year olds, it means couple of things. One, the skill set they require is really low end, stuff that could be taught in few weeks. Second, they don't have proper career planning for their development staff. They must be treating them like code coolies, who keep hopping from one coding assignment to the next. A properly groomed 35 year old software professional (not manager) should be capable of architecting huge projects or products, foresee problems in advance and take remedial actions, deal with staffing needs and training needs for the team, groom juniors, understand the current and future technical challenges, understand industry trends... the list goes on. These are things a 20 year old, or even a 25 year old cannot handle. Such knowledge can be earned only over 10-15-20 years of experience.

I wonder what these people do when they needs a doctor. Will they pick a cheap 20 year old doctor, or prefer an expensive senior doctor of say 35+ age.

Here is another sound bite:

Shailesh Thakurdesai, business development manager at Texas Instruments India , says college hiring is a priority for the company because "freshers learn fast and do things differently, without the baggage of past experience" .

Notice how all these dumb statements come from people from non-technical background. Having an engineering degree doesn't make one technical, nowhere near enough. You have to work hands-on in the technology track at least 10 years before you earn the right to make expert comments. But all the industry majors force their employees off the technical track before they complete 5 years of experience. No wonder the shelf life of their employees is low.

[blue_pulsar]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Here is another sound bite:
Notice how all these dumb statements come from people from non-technical background. Having an engineering degree doesn't make one technical, nowhere near enough. You have to work hands-on in the technology track at least 10 years before you earn the right to make expert comments. But all the industry majors force their employees off the technical track before they complete 5 years of experience. No wonder the shelf life of their employees is low.

I guess TOI/ET always publish such stuff. They always try to publish stuff against IT industry. You know, such content gets more attention. I'm sure, all Indian middle class has at least one software engineer in their family or extended family. I'm even including the families from rural areas.

You should see the code written by these freshers. They are least bothered about performance and memory. Even when I try to point it out, I get to hear from my superiors that hardware has become cheap nowadays. So they keep pushing in crappy code which just appears to work. It is only after few iterations that people begin to realize that the code is totally messed up and is not maintainable and scalable anymore. This is a situation which can be easily avoided when you have people with experience doing architecture, design and then coding.

Imagine, I have seen architects having 5 years of experience. No offense to anybody here but according to me an architect needs way more experience and forethought before he builds an application. If you ask me, 5 year guy should be a programmer and a part-time/junior designer at most.

I don't feel like an engineer anymore.

[rohanjf]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Generally a fresh BE graduate is at least 21-22 years old. At that stage they almost know nothing, bar a few exceptions. If SAP India's R&D Lab finds 20 year olds more useful than 35 year olds, it means couple of things. One, the skill set they require is really low end, stuff that could be taught in few weeks. Second, they don't have proper career planning for their development staff. They must be treating them like code coolies, who keep hopping from one coding assignment to the next. A properly groomed 35 year old software professional (not manager) should be capable of architecting huge projects or products, foresee problems in advance and take remedial actions, deal with staffing needs and training needs for the team, groom juniors, understand the current and future technical challenges, understand industry trends... the list goes on. These are things a 20 year old, or even a 25 year old cannot handle. Such knowledge can be earned only over 10-15-20 years of experience.

I couldn't agree with you more, haveing worked for SAP, both in development and consulting, for close to 7 years. I have seen the quality getting worse year by year. In SAP Labs, the R part of R&D has pretty much disappeared. I don't see any innovation happening now. The objective is to get the designs implemented. Design is done elsewhere. (Note- this is a general statement, and there always are exceptions).

Let me boast my own trumpet - I filed a patent in 2006 when I was employed there. Now it is approved I think, because a plaque with my name is installed in SAP Labs office.

Edit- my invention would not have been possible without the help of 2 Germans, both PhD holders. Sadly, in the name of cost saving, the interaction between teams in different countries has reduced a lot. Many developers in Germany are highly qualified (not necessarily in IT related fields). I believe their educational system ensures that they understand and learn what they do.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by Samurai

... Will they pick a cheap 20 year old doctor, or prefer an expensive senior doctor of say 35+ age. ...

Someone (who was rather frustrated with lack of competence / skills in fresh engineering graduates) had once said "A fresh medical graduate, whatever his competence/skill be, is at least trained not to kill a patient. Such reliability, OTOH, cannot be expected of anyone who has taken education in an engineering college in India"!

You are absolutely right about non-technical people having queered he pitch in the industry. If that gentleman from SAP expects more innovation from a 20 year-old, one should perhaps remove all the 25+ year olds from his organisation - let him try and retain customers. Such short-sighted, narrow-minded generalities kill organisations. In almost all cases that I have come across, such non-technical people have a tremendous inferiority complex but possess very good articulation abilities. Their only focus in life is to cement their position and ensure their survival / growth by such horrific inferences drawn from data pertaining to their own incompetence.

The TI person was correct in a very narrow context. It is more difficult to nurture a person who comes in with prejudices that a fresh graduate doesn't have.

[AlphaKilo]

On contrary, having watched the Skyfall yesterday, I would like to quote conversation between the new "Q" and 007.

Q: 007. I'm your new Quartermaster.
James Bond: You must be joking.
Q: Why, because I'm not wearing a lab coat?
James Bond: Because you still have spots.
Q: My complexion is hardly relevant.
James Bond: Your competence is.
Q: Age is no guarantee of efficiency.
James Bond: And youth is no guarantee of innovation.
Q: Well, I'll hazard I can do more damage on my laptop sitting in my pajamas before my first cup of Earl Grey than you can do in a year in the field.

This indeed is applicable to Indian students too!But unfortunately a combination of system and the need of hour (making quick) money forces them to adapt the herd mentality.

Well, I read in more or less all news papers that the current batch of engineering graduates have lost the quality and less than 10% are fit for recruitment. So, my question to recruiters and managers here,

Who are you recruiting? Engineers or clerks with engineering knowledge?

I am not blaming the managers but as many have been pointing out, isn't even our work culture also a part of the game in diluting the quality of education? Isn't it all a chain reaction triggered by what the industry needs?

[Harshal.Bhosale]

Originally Posted by AlphaKilo

On contrary, having watched the Skyfall yesterday, I would like to quote conversation between the new "Q" and 007.

This indeed is applicable to Indian students too!

Agree. And also the latter part of the conversation - where Bond mentions about experience whether to pull or not pull the trigger iirc - that part is relevant too. Freshers can't have the ability to weigh in so many factors while making decisions that an experienced hand can.

[sam_boy]

I have been using the SAP's latest offering for which they are going ga ga all over the world. Now after using it for almost 8 months, I can confidently say that there are certain features which were developed by 20 year old guys

It is very evident SAP as a company has never valued "end user experience" which only an experienced person can design. If you employ 20 year old college grads everywhere then you will have a position like "Abhimanyu" in Mahabharat where he knew how to get into a chkravyuh but did not know how to get out. If SAP CEO can stand by his word why does not he replace all 35 year old guys in his company !!!

PS: My age is 31

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Here is another sound bite:
Notice how all these dumb statements come from people from non-technical background. Having an engineering degree doesn't make one technical, nowhere near enough. You have to work hands-on in the technology track at least 10 years before you earn the right to make expert comments. But all the industry majors force their employees off the technical track before they complete 5 years of experience. No wonder the shelf life of their employees is low.

Actually the TI guy is quite right. If you hire a "experienced code" from the big companies, you will find you will get a guy who cannot even learn. Atleast you can teach something to a fresher.
R&D companies (who actually do R&D) have a tough time getting experienced coders, as people who "assemble code" using android etc,. APIs cannot write beyond hello world in C++.
Coders do not even know when can they do threading, and when they cannot.
A 2-5 year experience guy can still be taught, but with a 10+ years experienced guy dumbed down by 10 years in a big company, its like playing Zubin Mehta to a herd of buffalos. He will still give milk, when you want iced cappuchino

[huntrz]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Actually the TI guy is quite right. If you hire a "experienced code" from the big companies, you will find you will get a guy who cannot even learn.
A 2-5 year experience guy can still be taught, but with a 10+ years experienced guy dumbed down by 10 years in a big company.

This is an absolutely distorted perception of an IT work. More over I don't understand this "Big Company" tag with every statement.
One rises the ladder on his ability to learn and master technologies and functionalities and it is not the other way round. This is true for ANY successful product development company big or small. People management is not a core skill in product development organization.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by huntrz

This is an absolutely distorted perception of an IT work. More over I don't understand this "Big Company" tag with every statement.
One rises the ladder on his ability to learn and master technologies and functionalities and it is not the other way round. This is true for ANY successful product development company big or small. People management is not a core skill in product development organization.

When we say big companies, we usually mean companies not really doing R&D, but mostly "services" and code maintenance.
Cutting edge R&D (eg developing a software model of a reed solomon decoder from scratch, with pipelined multipliers, or cycle accurate processor ISA model) is very rare in the large setups in India. Its a sad fact.
Most people you find in the eco system are "consultants" and have not done core level programming.