IF ONE WERE ASKED TO DESCRIBE THE aura of the Indian Institutes of Technology in the 70s, the answer would have been: A hotbed of talent, energy and enthusiasm. When I went to the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, as a graduate student in 1967, the place had an overpowering enthusiasm and energy. However, I do not see this any longer, when I visit some of these institutions today. Over the years, a variety of factors have caused a gradual drying up of talent that goes for technical higher education. This has now become a genuine cause for concern.

This decline is not because of the fact that the profile of the faculty has changed. Nor is it because there is any change in their dedication towards equipping the bright minds that come to them for education. In fact, it is hard to pinpoint any one reason for this phenomenon. Nevertheless, the problem exists and it has to be rectified. This is important for India to retain her rightful place as one of the leaders in technical higher education.

Governmental interference has been touted as one of the many reasons for the decline in the IITs' ability to attract top talent. However, this might be an unreasonable accusation. Indeed, there is some degree of governmental control that may be unwarranted. However, this is certainly not the major reason. In fact, in the past year, the grants given by the central government to the IITs have increased. Further, most IITs say that they have enough money - at least in terms of proper infrastructure.

Nevertheless, from Mrs. Gandhi's time, there has been an increased tendency towards over-centralization of the educational policy in the country. This might be good in some ways. However, overall, over the years, it has become clear that this policy can be counterproductive. Traditionally, it has been the prerogative of the chairman and the board of IIM-A to select the director. However, the government felt that it could expedite the process of selection by making the appointment its brief. Thus, the government has started having a say in the intrinsic matters of an educational institution. This can be put into context with a simple example. My son is a student at Cornell University. He is now in his freshman year. The other day, we received a letter from the University asking us for suggestions as to who should be the next president at Cornell. This is because the incumbent President, Mr. H. Rawlings, was stepping down. While an institution in this country (USA) thinks it worthwhile to consult the parents of their students, we in India, seem to think that the directors, the chairman and members of the governing council, and the faculty are incapable of selecting the next director.

Another rule, which might be counterproductive, is that an educational institution has to get the government's permission to invite a foreign academic for a discussion. For instance, the director of one of the IIMs had invited the president of a reputed management school abroad, to India. However, the government of India refused permission. In this context, it is important to remember that higher education is all about interaction with other high quality people, researchers and professors from other countries. Further, it is about learning good things from them. By denying the director of an institute the power and authority to even invite a scholar from abroad, we are slowly creating a paradigm of atrophy.

Another issue is the low student-teacher ratio in the IITs. In other words, there are fewer students per faculty in the IITs than in American institutions, which have often performed much better than the IITs. Thus, there is considerable scope for increasing the intake of undergraduates. We are currently taking only 2,700-2,800 students out of a pool of about 40-50,000 students in a country of one billion people. Hence, we could raise this number to around 15, 000.

The same applies to the intake of graduate students as well. The tragedy is, the number of Ph.D. students in the engineering discipline is slowly drying up. If the IITs are not able to attract students for Ph.Ds, how are they going to provide good quality teachers for other engineering colleges? If this situation continues, perhaps, in about 5 years or 10 years, the IITs may have to close down.

Most importantly, we need to facilitate an exchange of ideas. However, to be realistic, it is not possible to get people from the U.S. to go to India on a long-term basis. Nevertheless, we can start a scheme where people can teach in India for a month or two and, thereby, interact with the students there. In fact, there is a scheme to have a fund set up from which we could pay a certain amount to a scholar for teaching in India. This amount could be, say, $ 5,000 plus airfare and other expenses for a period of two months. Similarly, around seven students, who are doing their Ph.Ds in India, could travel to the U.S. for a couple of months during the summer season. For this, they could be paid a stipend of $ 2,500 a month plus expenses.

Corporates should help the academia create a mechanism whereby there can be an exchange of ideas - both at the student level and the faculty level. This will help avoid the risk of the IITs being insulated from what is happening elsewhere, which can lead them to think that they are very good, without being able to benchmark with others. This will result in the standards moving down even further.

Another important development is that, over the years, there has been a decline in incentives to take up a life in academia. The cost of living and the salaries of non-academics in the corporate world have gone up considerably. However, the average person still cannot afford higher education. It might be helpful to put in place a system of awards for performance, such as for publishing the best paper or journal. The award money should be sufficient to ensure that the student can remain in academics, without financial worries.

Another good idea might be to introduce a six-year integrated B. Tech-Ph.D. program. This should be offered to the top hundred students in the Joint Entrance Examination. If they take it up, at the end of the 6th year they are awarded a Ph.D. These students can also be given scholarships of, say, 10,000 rupees per month. The advantage of this program is that faculty members get a chance to interact with extraordinarily bright young researchers. This way, the quality will go up and the environment will become much more competitive. Hopefully, this will result in an increase in the number of Ph.Ds. Some of these Ph.Ds may choose to stay back in India and this will add to the quality of faculty. Finally, it is encouraging that, today, there is an increased awareness of the ills plaguing our foremost technical education institutions. People seem to realize that if we do not do something quickly, we will not be able to harness and groom the talent of our good students, as we have been doing in the past. This will, hopefully, lead to positive change.