A few days ago, a colleague C invited a senior collaborator to visit N1 for a few days to discuss their research project. C had hoped that since the collaborator is a well known and senior researcher in their field, his presence would have a positive effect on their department and that the senior visitor would give them some input about department activities like their graduate program, which is being built from scratch.
The senior researcher, let's call him SR, agreed to visit N1 for two days. However, his visit totally belied C's expectations. All that SR had to offer was criticism and disdain. Some of his comments, at their best, could be interpreted as impatience with the newness of N1 and at their worst, as showing no faith in the future of N1.
After SR left, C was depressed for some time and doubted his decision to join N1.
But, he got over it soon and decided not to take SR's comments too seriously.
Perhaps, SR meant to offer constructive criticism, but it just came out the wrong way. Perhaps, this was SR's way of showing concern for C, for whom he wanted the very best. Or perhaps, SR is a jerk with an inflated opinion of himself, who could not appreciate the hospitality of a department which had invited him with a lot of goodwill. I do not know him well enough to decide.
SR is not unique in writing off N1 and I have met others with similar views about N1-type institutes. If I am in a good mood, I think, "Oh well. These people have got used to working in a certain environment and cannot imagine that people can adjust to and stay happy in environments different from theirs." If I am in a bad mood, I deplore their prejudice and lack of vision.[1]
Nonetheless, what concerns me is that by making disparaging comments, scientists like SR are possibly discouraging their PhD students and postdocs from applying to new institutes. This is not good for my department (and similar departments in other new institutes), who are trying very hard to hire and retain good people. This is also not good for those students and postdocs, who might only apply to limited institutes and restrict their options.
Perhaps, this is not as serious as I have made it out to be. I welcome feedback from readers.
For those of you who are planning to enter the job market or who already have a job(anywhere in the world), how important is/has been your supervisor/mentor's opinion about your potential employer to you?[2]
For my senior readers, did you or would you discourage your PhD student or postdoc from applying to a new institute?
If my PhD student ever approaches me for advice about choosing a job, I would say something along the lines of a comment made by Vijay, while answering a question raised in a previous post:
"Today, I would focus on joining a research institution or university, young or old, that is fun to be in and wants me. The two criteria, fun to be and one which wants you, appear simple but are not. If you manage such a place, you have it made and the equipment will take care of itself."
[1] I do so mentally, of course - I cannot imagine the consequences if I were to say that aloud.
[2] I consulted my PhD advisor before taking my final decision. I think I would have made this choice even if he did not have a great opinion of N1. However, his positive views were certainly very encouraging and meant a lot to me.
The senior researcher, let's call him SR, agreed to visit N1 for two days. However, his visit totally belied C's expectations. All that SR had to offer was criticism and disdain. Some of his comments, at their best, could be interpreted as impatience with the newness of N1 and at their worst, as showing no faith in the future of N1.
After SR left, C was depressed for some time and doubted his decision to join N1.
But, he got over it soon and decided not to take SR's comments too seriously.
Perhaps, SR meant to offer constructive criticism, but it just came out the wrong way. Perhaps, this was SR's way of showing concern for C, for whom he wanted the very best. Or perhaps, SR is a jerk with an inflated opinion of himself, who could not appreciate the hospitality of a department which had invited him with a lot of goodwill. I do not know him well enough to decide.
SR is not unique in writing off N1 and I have met others with similar views about N1-type institutes. If I am in a good mood, I think, "Oh well. These people have got used to working in a certain environment and cannot imagine that people can adjust to and stay happy in environments different from theirs." If I am in a bad mood, I deplore their prejudice and lack of vision.[1]
Nonetheless, what concerns me is that by making disparaging comments, scientists like SR are possibly discouraging their PhD students and postdocs from applying to new institutes. This is not good for my department (and similar departments in other new institutes), who are trying very hard to hire and retain good people. This is also not good for those students and postdocs, who might only apply to limited institutes and restrict their options.
Perhaps, this is not as serious as I have made it out to be. I welcome feedback from readers.
For those of you who are planning to enter the job market or who already have a job(anywhere in the world), how important is/has been your supervisor/mentor's opinion about your potential employer to you?[2]
For my senior readers, did you or would you discourage your PhD student or postdoc from applying to a new institute?
If my PhD student ever approaches me for advice about choosing a job, I would say something along the lines of a comment made by Vijay, while answering a question raised in a previous post:
"Today, I would focus on joining a research institution or university, young or old, that is fun to be in and wants me. The two criteria, fun to be and one which wants you, appear simple but are not. If you manage such a place, you have it made and the equipment will take care of itself."
[1] I do so mentally, of course - I cannot imagine the consequences if I were to say that aloud.
[2] I consulted my PhD advisor before taking my final decision. I think I would have made this choice even if he did not have a great opinion of N1. However, his positive views were certainly very encouraging and meant a lot to me.
14 comments:
SR is a jerk, and he is a conservative jerk. There are many like him who cannot understand what change and growth is all about. I am speaking from experience: our institute was "new" not so long ago and we faced similar situations. No, the problem is not serious. N1 has to "produce" and once it does that, there is only one way, and that is up!
anong
Among the new institutions in India, the IISERs + NISER are a new breed and IMHO would have a huge impact on Indian Science in the future. I have talked to and communicated with some of the students and have noticed the excitement of being introduced to research right from the beginning of their program. One can read some students impressions at http://www.orissalinks.com/archives/285 .
SR seems to fall into the all too common rut of negativism about the future. Once a place succeeds,as Anon (Sept 4, 2011, 5:48 PM) says, things quieten down. All of us need to tattoo SR's responses on our arm and read it every day so that we do not become like him. It is so easy to put down talent and effort. Chitta is on the spot about the new institutions: The IISERS+NISER have some buzz. I was at IIT Kanpur and IIT Madras a few days ago, these oldies are revving up nicely because of the new and because of themselves too! How are the new IITs coming up wrt research? Any idea anyone? About where to join, here is a post your readers (particularly biologists) may want to read:
http://www.indiabioscience.org/node/162
In general, I would rather jump into the new and would urge my students and postdocs to do so too. Its so much fun steering in choppy seas than to loll around in harbour. For their part, the old need to work really hard to stay attractive in the context of the excellence that the new is developing. Part of SR's response could also be the insecurity of the old!
Cheers
Vijay
As a student, I think I would like to be a little more conservative than what Vijay makes it out to be. For a student wanting to work in orthodox fields, there are many reasons for a student to go to an established and big institution... big department, chance of backup options in case your first choice advisor is unavailable due to whatever reason. Exposure to broader areas of research and the brand name of the univ/dept (which all said and done, does seem to be important). If I was working in a new/cutting-edge field, I would prefer to go wherever I found interesting faculty, irrespective of whether the place was big or small (of course, given that it's not some totally unknown place). I would think that (in India) older institutes have a lot of human resources and wisdom which you can pick on (usually mixed with a liberal dose of maniacs like SR), whereas in many of the newer institutes, it's easier to find freedom and funding. Hence, I would think that for a student, and established university might have the edge, while for faculty, a new place might have an edge. This however will change within a few(~5?) years when the new inst is not an unknown quantity and a blossoming research scene there can be very attractive for students.
To answer the question posed in the post, my faculty's advice would be very important to me, since I trust them and their experience to judge the status of the field and to help me find a place where I will be a good fit. After all, for a student (applying for grad programs) who barely knows anything about research who else can s/he get advice from but their faculty? Having said that, I have noticed that my teachers have been wonderful in not pushing their viewpoint across on me. They've given me insightful comments and tips on what to lookout for and encouraged me to make my own decision.
@ Vijay: What you wrote makes sense - no doubt. But I would like to slightly disagree with your opinion of "steering in choppy seas" and "lolling in harbour".
Well, to me, it is simply not worth to spend many, many years, struggling to set up basic infrastructure and then to start doing research (experiments mostly). By the time all equipments are in place and working, I will forget how to actually run and operate them ! And the years lost !..So to me, I should have the basic infrastructure (labs) set-up so that I can put my time, talent and ideas to work as soon as possible.
As a simple example, I work in solid state electronic devices and I need a class 100 cleanroom for that. If an institute does not have a cleanroom, I simply can't do my research ! If I struggle on my own to get funding and start a cleanroom, it will take more than ten years ! ..
Simply blaming the naysayers, won't do IISERs any good. If after 5 years of start of student intake, you still don't have the authority to grant degrees and are working out of transit campuses, then that is really a big problem. Also there seems to be no concrete plans with deadlines when the infrastructure is going to be at least at par with state universities. So there is no use for people to be in self-congratulatory mood.
Also one more important factor is the kid of directors these institute are able to attract. One bad director in the initial 15 years- institute is gone!
It is possible to attract decent PG students for institutes funded by MHRD since they have this "Indian Institute of...." label. But such student will not have even enough courses to take before starting the serious research. Most faculty will be busy in teaching UG courses! Not to talk about hostel facilities, poor sports facilities etc.
Someone who is planning for 10, 20 30 years at a new institute can opt to work but for a student, it is a bad choice and also for faculty who wants to join there and change later- bad!
I think it is just typical of a crusty old SR from IIX. The IIXs are full of crusty old SRs - after me, the deluge types. If you want serious constructive feedback, talk to some trusted people in the field and ask them to specifically recommend people who are likely to give constructive feedback - they may not be the well known senior researchers. Well known senior researchers are just that, bring them in for a day to get some positive PR and for the ooh - aah factor in your students. Occasionally you may luck out and find some WKSRs who also give constructive feedback. There is hope for the N1s. Some have started off very well and will get there quickly - IITH and IITGn, for example. Some don't have sufficient local support and will take longer to get there.
Thank you all for sharing your experiences. I would also go with the consensus that we need not pay much heed to SR and should focus our energies on building the new institutions as best as we can.
A big thank you to newprof for sharing her excitement and the challenges involved in working at N1. As I am joining a similar institution, this blog has helped a lot.
MF
Hi all,
Thank you very much for your thoughtful comments.
It was very helpful to hear the perspectives of faculty members both at older and newer institutes as well as students.
Like any new institute, N1 also has its own challenges, some of which are related to its geography. But, these initial obstacles cannot be the basis for writing off the entire future of an institute.
I agree with iitmsriram's suggestion that it is much more useful to invite scientists who can give us objective and constructive feedback. In fact, one of our visiting professors has played a big role in shaping up our undergraduate program.
MF, congratulations for your new position. I wish you all the best.
Anon @ 11.46 am, I believe the act that enables IISERs to grant its own degrees was passed by Lok Sabha last month. The delay in passing the act was hardly the fault of IISERs. In the last few months, as you know, the Lok Sabha has been busy with matters of far more importance to our leaders!
Hary, indeed, you have raised a very valid point, namely course work for beginning graduate students at new institutes. Your comment has suggested to me the next topic for this blog.
As a suggestion I thought N1 students can be allowed to take course work of a semester at O1 or any Ox. Some kind of exchange program!
@NPNI, Being cynical about the future is one kind of bias. There are several others. The one I faced every day when I was at LNMIIT Jaipur was "every private university is worse than every government university." This is the belief of a fairly large number of people in the country, which is understandable. But this is also the belief of a very large number of professors at IIXs, and they should know better. The discussion would invariably be comparing LNMIIT with some NIT. I would ask them if they have been to either institute. NO. Have you met any faculty from either place. NO. Have you been to their website. NO. Have you met any students from either places. NO. Then, how do you know. Oh! you are private. Then, I would tell them that it is under public-private partnership, and the number of government nominees on the board is actually more than the nominees of Mr. Mittal. And then magically, we will become better, since we are now a "government" place, in their mind.
Such biases are not just irritants, but they actually hurt a lot, since all government committees are full of IIX professors and directors, and their recommendations are usually anti-private sector because of such strong biases.
Dear NPNI, it is a delight to read your blog, especially as someone who hoes to contribute to Indian academia at some point in the near future. I also admire your enthusiasm, which is perhaps a rare quality in a country like India, which can make a cynic out of almost anyone.
I would like to know more about how (or whether) IISER faculty are proactive about their role in broader Indian academia, especially in relation to state universities. I would think that you are aware of the dire situation prevailing in most of our state universities, and since many of your graduate students and (hopefully) collaborators, their health should be of concern to you.
I am guessing you are in a city that also has one of India's better state universities. Have you seen any signs of revival there ? Professors at the same university had recently written a journal article on the state of India's state universities, which I covered in my blog here, http://vikramvgarg.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/the-inspiration-of-the-inquisitive-by-the-ingenious/
Post a Comment