Showing posts with label ugc. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ugc. Show all posts

Friday, August 28, 2015

TRAINING and EDUCATION

TRAINING and EDUCATION
Musings
By
VIKRAM KARVE

Training Strategy is the sine qua non for the efficacy of a Training Programme.

In fact 
 Training Strategy is the basis for Training Design and Implementation. 


That is why  the first thing I used to do before designing a training programme – was to reflect, explore, consider, analyse and decide as to which Training Philosophy is relevant to the context in the particular Training Need and Environment.


There are 3 basic Training Philosophies:

1.Confucian Training Philosophy

2. Zen Training Philosophy

3. On-the-job Training Philosophy

You must formulate your Training Strategy as per your Training Philosophy. 


Thus  Training Philosophy is the foundation  the core  of the Art of Training.



CONFUCIAN TRAINING PHILOSOPHY
Objective of Confucian Training Philosophy:

The aim of training is to qualify the trainee for a more important job.

In other words 
 Training is inextricably linked with Career Advancement.


Most Military Training Courses are based on the Confucian Training Philosophy.

Since Confucian Type Training is primarily for promotion  if the training is not followed by promotion or career advancement quickly enough  non-realization of expectations may create frustration and resentment in the trainee.




ZEN TRAINING PHILOSOPHY
Objective of Zen Training Philosophy:

The purpose of training is continuous improvement in performance.

The emphasis here is on “continuous improvement”.
The aim of training is to improve the present performance of the trainee 
– by focusing on excellence in work and self-development. 


Zen Type training aims at strengthening the inner urge and enhancing requisite skills for work-excellence and job-satisfaction  without the trainee expecting any tangible material reward or career advancement due to the training.




ON THE JOB TRAINING

And  of course  if you want to avoid a formal training programme altogether  there is always my favourite good old time-tested On-The-Job Training philosophy which is breathtaking in its simplicity:


“Entrust a man with responsibility  and then tell him to get on with the job!”


It is called “On the Job Training” and it always works – you can take my word for it!

In my next blog post – I will tell you a story on On-The-Job Training.



TRAINING versus EDUCATION

Hey 
 Dear Reader – can you this please tell us the difference between Training and Education.


Is there a difference? 


Difference between Training and Education:
In my opinion  the difference between Training and Education is as follows:


1. The Aim of Training is to develop the required Skills in the Trainee

2. The Aim of Education is to enhance the Knowledge of the Student


In a nutshell:

Training pertains to skill development

Education pertains to enhancement of knowledge

If so  what are various “Education Philosophies” akin to “Training Philosophies”?

Hey 
 you academics and thinkers and educationists out there.


Please throw some more light on this subject  so that we don’t confuse Training with Education  and vice versa. 



FOOD FOR THOUGHT

In a developing country like India – we need a skilled workforce.

Sadly – in India – we focus too much on Education. 

We have too many highly qualified individuals who are unemployable because they do not have the requisite skills.

Even Engineering and Technology Courses focus more on bookish knowledge than practical skill development.

Owing to this – most industrial organisations have to conduct induction training to develop the requisite skills  and make these degree engineers ready for work on the shopfloor – to put is metaphorically – and even I have had the opportunity to conduct Induction Training for newly recruited engineers and scientists.

Indian needs SKILL DEVELOPMENT – and – to achieve this – we have to focus more on TRAINING – rather than Degree Oriented Bookish EDUCATION.

We keep opening IITs (Indian Institutes of Technology) – but - in actual fact – we need more ITIs (Industrial Training Institutes).

In any case – most IIT students migrate abroad to USA for lucrative careers and to realize their American Dream – so  India does not gain much from IITs.

On the other hand – ITI trainees work in Indian Industries.

We need more ITIs – maybe an ITI in each district.

So – we should proliferating IITs – and start opening ITIs instead.

Yes – in order to achieve skill development  India needs more ITIs than IITs.

VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve 
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:
All stories in this blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the story are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:
No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.
Copyright © Vikram Karve (All Rights Reserved)
     
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.
 

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

HAPPY TEACHERS DAY - Part 5 - WHY I STOPPED TEACHING


HAPPY TEACHERS DAY  -  Part 5
WHY I STOPPED TEACHING
By
VIKRAM KARVE

The Navy is a wonderful place. You are tasked to do all sorts of jobs - on board ships and ashore. After a few eventful years at sea, one fine day in the latter half of the year 1980, suddenly, out of the blue, I was appointed as an instructor to teach and train officers. At first, I was disappointed, for this would mean leaving Mumbai, which I loved (in fact, I was expecting an appointment ashore in Mumbai). But then, since I had no choice, I took it in my stride and decided to do my best. To my surprise, I realized that I enjoyed teaching, and my students too thought that I was a good teacher.

I am sure you have heard about the work continuum:
JOB – CAREER – CALLING

I believe that a person’s work life is defined by three stages:
1. Job
2. Career
3. Calling 

job is something you do for which you get paid. I got paid for being an Electrical Engineer (or more precisely an Electronics and Communications Engineer). That was my basic job. 

Your job provides you the instrumental means of fulfilling  your financial needs.

During my career in the Navy I did a number of jobs, afloat and ashore (pertaining to Electrical, Electronics, Radar and Communications Engineering). 

Your career fulfils your needs for achievement and accomplishment.

I was in operations, maintenance, production, industrial engineering, projects, design, quality assurance, engineering management, training, teaching assignments, and later, after I obtained management qualifications, I worked as a Human Resource Leader, an HR Manager, a Training Designer and Director, a Trainer, a Teacher and a Professor.

I enjoyed most of the varied jobs I did during the course of my career, but the job I enjoyed most was Teaching and Training – yes, I had discovered my “calling” or vocation, so I spent many years working as a teacher and an trainer.

To summarize:

JOB is something you are paid for doing.

CAREER is a line of work.

You discover your CALLING when you find your work intrinsically fulfilling and you are not doing it to achieve something else.

After I discovered that Teaching and Training was my Calling, I always took up opportunities to Teach and Train. I enjoyed teaching and was very good at it. 

One day I decided to give up teaching and then I found my metier in Creative Writing and Blogging.

Many people, especially my ex-students and colleagues, ask me why did I decide to quit teaching.

In answer, I tell them this apocryphal story - The Story of the Sundial

THE STORY OF THE SUNDIAL

Long ago, there was once a King who cared for his populace.

His kingdom was in an undeveloped part of the world and the people were quite backward. The king wanted his people to progress. So he decided to visit the developed part of the world and see for himself how he could harness the fruits of development for his people.

During his visit he saw a sundial. Curious he asked what this strange contraption was.

“A sundial is a device that determines the time of day by the position of the Sun,” they told him, “you can tell the time by looking at the shadow cast by the Sun as it shines on the pointer of a sundial. As the sun moves across the sky, the shadow-edge aligns with different hour-lines. Thus, you can tell the time of the day.”

The King was so fascinated as he witnessed the working of sundial next day that he bought the sundial, took it back to his Kingdom and had the sundial installed in the centre square of the city as a gift for his people.

The sundial changed the life of the people in the kingdom. They began to differentiate parts of the day and to divide up their time – in short, they became adept at time management.

Yes, the sundial made the people of that kingdom conscious about the concept of time since before the advent of the sundial they knew only about night and day. they became more punctual, prompt, orderly, reliable and industrious; thereby producing great wealth and achieving a high standard of living.

The sundial had enabled them to realize the importance of the adroit use of time which resulted in great prosperity for the people of the kingdom.

One day the king died. His devoted subjects gathered together after his grand yet tearful funeral to decide how they could pay a fitting tribute to their beloved king.

When they enumerated the king’s achievements, they all thought of the Sundial, which their benevolent king had gifted them long back.

Because the Sundial symbolized the king’s generosity and because it was the Sundial which was the main reason for their prosperity and success, the citizen’s decided to build around the sundial a grand temple with a golden cupola – yes, they decided that it would be a fitting honour to the departed king and the best gift he had given them – a fabulous temple with a beautiful golden dome to adorn the sundial.

But, when the magnificent temple was built and the imposing golden cupola soared above the sundial, the rays of the sun no longer reached the gnomon of the sundial.

Yes, as the sundial was now completely covered by the magnificent temple with its impressive golden dome the sun’s rays could not reach the sundial and the shadow disappeared.

The covered sundial no longer worked, and its shadow, which had told the time to the citizens of the kingdom, had vanished.

Now, since the sundial did not work, the citizens could not discern the time of the day and they started losing their sense of punctuality and promptness.

Deprived of their standard of time, they soon reverted back to their old ways, their pre-sundial laid-back lifestyle, and it was just a matter of time before their prosperity dissipated away and the kingdom collapsed.

MORAL OF THE STORY

Imagine that the Sun is a Teacher and the Sundial is the Student.

If you allow the Sun (Teacher) to seamlessly illuminate the Sundial (Student) then the best learning will take place. But if you put a barrier or obstruction between the teacher and student (like covering the sundial with a structure of temple and dome) the this can impede the learning process. 

This “obstacle” can be the “education system”, the “administrative hierarchy”, the “rules, regulations and red tape”, the “academic environment” in the particular place, anything which is detrimental to seamless teaching and effective learning.

Let me give you my personal experience.

A few years ago I used to teach Electronics and Communications Engineering at the Post Graduate Level (for the M. Tech. students). 

I found that that the syllabus was archaic, outdated and irrelevant as technology had progressed at a fast pace. 

Therefore, I recommended a revision and updating of syllabus but this got stuck in red tape since the procedure for curriculum revision was a cumbersome time-consuming bureaucratic process. 

Meanwhile, I started teaching my students the state-of-the-art technologies and cutting-edge developments. 

My students were very happy and appreciative of my initiative and were delighted that they were being given the latest knowledge.

However, the status-quoist “academic babus” who ruled the roost were not at all happy. They thought I was being over-smart and that I was exceeding my brief.

Meanwhile, some progressive students cited my example and asked some teachers why they were teaching obsolete things which had no practical utility in the modern industry. 

When the teachers gave the excuse that they had to teach as per the syllabus, the students retorted that if I could go beyond the syllabus and teach the state-of-the-art, then why couldn’t they too follow my example. 

Now, most of the faculty was quite happy with the old outdated syllabus since they had stopped updating themselves with the state-of-the-art and given up learning new things long ago.

I looked around and observed that full-time Professors had a very cosy and comfortable life with excellent salaries and perks and permanent non-transferable jobs with total job security. Moreover, they enjoyed assured career progression ensuring time bound seniority based promotions and a late retirement age. These complacent teachers had become so secure in their “academic cocoons” that they had developed a total disconnect with the outside world, and were content with maintaining status-quo.

The upshot was that I was criticised for teaching “out of the syllabus” and I was pulled up for not confining myself to the approved textbook. 

Some disgruntled colleagues passed snide remarks that I was “inciting” the students and putting “wrong ideas” into their heads thanks to my over-smart initiative and over-enthusiastic efforts and that I was trying to “rock the boat”. 

My faculty colleagues had an inferiority complex because I had extensive professional and industrial experience prior to my joining academics, unlike most of them who had spent their entire life in academia. They bore a grudge against me because I did not belong to the “academic mafia”.

Next semester, my subject was allotted to a conservative status-quoist “over-the-hill” professor, who was clearly past his prime, and who believed in strictly following the obsolete syllabus and dictating notes verbatim from the prescribed text-book.

Thus, I, the Teacher (Sun) was not allowed to illuminate the Students (Sundial) because of the Education System (Obstruction).

This is one of the reasons I quit teaching Engineering and Management, and I shifted to Induction Training, where I had a free hand. 

A teacher must be given a free hand - yes, recruit the best teacher, trust him totally, and give him a free hand, and you will be amazed by the results.

I strongly feel, that for effective learning, the teacher and student must be allowed to have a seamless relationship and there must be no hindrances, restrictions or irritations put in by the education system and academic administration.

At least in India, the education system at all levels has become an huge academic bureaucracy rather than a learning organization. If you look around you will observe that many Professors and Teachers seem to be more of “academic babus” rather than genuine passionate teachers - they prefer to administrate rather than teach. That is why more and more “obstructions” of red tape, rules and regulations are being placed between the Sun (Teacher) and the Sundial (Students) and all this is proving to be a barrier to enjoyable and effective teaching and learning.

It is for the powers-that-be to ensure that they do not “build temples” around “sundials” which act as a barrier to effective learning – we must let the “sun” shine brightly and unhindered on the “sundial”.

HAPPY TEACHERS DAY

I look forward to your comments, views and feedback.

VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve 2012
Vikram Karve has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this work. 
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Did you like reading this blog post?
Did you like the Teaching Story?
I am sure you will like all the 27 stories in my recently published book of short stories COCKTAIL
To order your COCKTAIL please click any of the links below:

http://www.flipkart.com/cocktail-vikram-karve-short-stories-book-8191091844?affid=nme
http://www.indiaplaza.in/cocktail-vikram-karve/books/9788191091847.htm
http://www.apkpublishers.com/books/short-stories/cocktail-by-vikram-karve.html

COCKTAIL ebook
If you prefer reading ebooks on Kindle or your ebook reader, please order Cocktail E-book by clicking the links below:
AMAZON

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005MGERZ6
SMASHWORDS
http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/87925

Foodie Book:  Appetite for a Stroll
http://www.flipkart.com/appetite-stroll-vikram-karve/8190690094-gw23f9mr2o

About Vikram Karve

A creative person with a zest for life, Vikram Karve is a retired Naval Officer turned full time writer. Educated at IIT Delhi, ITBHU Varanasi, The Lawrence School Lovedale and Bishops School Pune, Vikram has published two books: COCKTAIL a collection of fiction short stories about relationships (2011) and APPETITE FOR A STROLL a book of Foodie Adventures (2008) and is currently working on his novel and a book of vignettes and short fiction. An avid blogger, he has written a number of fiction short stories, creative non-fiction articles on a variety of topics including food, travel, philosophy, academics, technology, management, health, pet parenting, teaching stories and self help in magazines and published a large number of professional research papers in journals and edited in-house journals for many years, before the advent of blogging. Vikram has taught at a University as a Professor for 15 years and now teaches as a visiting faculty and devotes most of his time to creative writing. Vikram lives in Pune India with his family and muse - his pet dog Sherry with whom he takes long walks thinking creative thoughts.


Vikram Karve Academic and Creative Writing Journal: http://karvediat.blogspot.com
Professional Profile Vikram Karve: http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve
Vikram Karve Facebook Page:  https://www.facebook.com/vikramkarve
Vikram Karve Creative Writing Blog: http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com/blog/posts.htm
Email: vikramkarve@sify.com


© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Saturday, October 16, 2010

TECHNICAL EDUCATION and INDUSTRY REQUIREMENTS - Match or Mismatch

Restructuring Higher Technical Education

SOFT SYSTEMS APPROACH TO HIGHER EDUCATION
ROOT DEFINITION & CATWOE MODEL
By
VIKRAM KARVE

Musings on a Systems Approach to Restructuring Technical and Engineering Education in India

ROOT DEFINITION

The first step in Soft Systems Methodology ( SSM ) is to formulate the Root Definition of the System you are studying, analysing or designing.

A Root Definition is a structured description of a system. It is a clear statement of activities which take place (or might take place) in the organisation being studied.
A properly structured root definition comprises three elements [what, how, why] and is of the form: A System to do X, by (means of) Y, in order to achieve Z.

X – What the System does
Y – How it does it
Z – Why it is being done

The 'what' is the immediate aim of the system,
The 'how' is the means of achieving that aim,
The 'why' is the longer term aim of the purposeful activity.

CATWOE analysis helps in proper formulation of a Root Definition. CATWOE is a mnemonic which helps identify and categorize all stakeholders [people, processes, environment, entities] of the System being analysed for formulating the Root Definition.

CATWOE MODEL
C = CUSTOMERS OR CLIENTS
A = ACTORS OR AGENTS
T = TRANSFORMATION PROCESS
W =WELTANSCHAUUNG or WORLD VIEW
O = OWNERS
E = ENVIRONMENT

To elaborate a bit:

C: The ‘customers of the system’ , clients or System Beneficiaries. In this context ‘customers’ means those who are on the receiving end of whatever it is that the system does. Is it clear from your definition of “C” as to who are the beneficiaries of the system?

A: The ‘actors’, meaning those who would actually carry out the activities envisaged in the notional system being defined. Actors transform inputs into outputs.

T: The ‘transformation process’. What does the system do to the inputs to convert them into the outputs?

W: Weltanschauung - The ‘world view’ that lies behind the Root Definition; the perspective from which the Root Definition if formulated. Putting the system into its wider context can highlight the consequences of the overall system. For example the system may be in place to assist in making the world environmentally safer, and the consequences of system failure could be significant pollution.

O: The ‘owner(s)’ – The person(s) who has commissioned the system and who has sufficient formal power over the system to stop it existing if they so wished (though they won’t usually want to do this).

E: The ‘environmental constraints’. These include things such as ethical limits, regulations, financial constraints, resource limitations, limits set by terms of reference, and so on.

 

EDUCATION SYSTEM CHARACTERISATION

CATWOE Analysis yields a more elaborate all encompassing Root Definition of the form:

A System owned by O to do W by A by means of T given the constraints of E in order to achieve X for C.

[A briefer version – a T system in which A do W for C]

Here is a CATWOE Model of a hypothetical Higher Education System (a University or College):

C – Students
A – Teachers
T – School Pass Outs are transformed into Graduates [Degree Holders]
W – Graduation [a Degree] is a means of assurance to potential employers that the Graduate [Degree Holder] possesses a specified standard of proficiency and skills in the domain of qualification.
O – The University or College Governing Body or Top Management
E – The Prescribed Educational, Academic Quality, Assessment and Accreditation Standards and Requirements.

Now this CATWOE Analysis may yield a Root Definition that this particular Higher Education Institution is a university owned system to award degrees to students (X) who successfully qualify assessment (Y) in accordance with prescribed standards in order to certify assurance (Z) to potential employers that the students possess the requisite proficiency, capabilities and skills.

Is this Root Definition okay or is there something amiss?

Suppose we define Potential Employers [or Industry] as CUSTOMERS [C] and include students as ACTORS [A] along with teachers – won’t we then get a more apt Root Definition and consequently realise a better Educational System in keeping with current needs and ground reality?

 
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
At a recent alumni meet of a prestigious Engineering College I asked a few recently passed out alumni [who were working for a leading IT company for just over a year] as to how much of what was taught in his four year Engineering Degree Course in his college was useful in his work. They said: “Less than 5% (five percent)” – which means that his employer had to invest heavily [almost 95%] in his training and the rest he had to learn on the job.


Maybe the educational institution needs to introspect and have a relook at its CATWOE Model and reformulate its ROOT DEFINITION and restructure its curriculum and revitalize its pedagogic methodology to meet the challenges of current needs and envisage seamless integration of fresh BE and B. Tech. Engineering Graduates into the industry. A Systemic approach to education incorporating increased partnership and congruence between the industry and universities is the sine qua non of optimal human resource development in science and technology.
The disconnect between the industry and educational system must be bridged.

VIKRAM KARVE
       
Copyright © Vikram Karve 2010
Vikram Karve has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this work.
 

VIKRAM KARVE educated at IIT Delhi, ITBHU, Lawrence School Lovedale, and Bishop’s School Pune, is an Electronics and Communications Engineer by profession, a Human Resource Manager and Trainer by occupation, a Teacher by vocation, a Creative Writer by inclination and a Foodie by passion. An avid blogger, he has written a number of fiction short stories and creative non-fiction articles in magazines and journals for many years before the advent of blogging. His delicious foodie blogs have been compiled in a book "Appetite for a Stroll". Vikram lives in Pune with his family and pet Doberman girl Sherry, with whom he takes long walks thinking creative thoughts.
 
Vikram Karve Creative Writing Blog -  http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com  
Academic Journal Vikram Karve –  http://karvediat.blogspot.com
Professional Profile of Vikram Karve -  http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve 

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Restructuring Higher Technical Education

SOFT SYSTEMS APPROACH TO HIGHER EDUCATION

ROOT DEFINITION & CATWOE MODEL

By

VIKRAM KARVE


ROOT DEFINITION

The first step in Soft Systems Methodology ( SSM ) is to formulate the Root Definition of the System you are studying, analysing or designing.

A Root Definition is a structured description of a system. It is a clear statement of activities which take place (or might take place) in the organisation being studied.

A properly structured root definition comprises three elements [what, how, why] and is of the form: A System to do X, by (means of) Y, in order to achieve Z.

X – What the System does
Y – How it does it
Z – Why it is being done

The 'what' is the immediate aim of the system,
The 'how' is the means of achieving that aim,
The 'why' is the longer term aim of the purposeful activity.

CATWOE analysis helps in proper formulation of a Root Definition. CATWOE is a mnemonic which helps identify and categorize all stakeholders [people, processes, environment, entities] of the System being analysed for formulating the Root Definition.


CATWOE MODEL

C = CUSTOMERS OR CLIENTS
A = ACTORS OR AGENTS
T = TRANSFORMATION PROCESS
W =WELTANSCHAUUNG or WORLD VIEW
O = OWNERS
E = ENVIRONMENT

To elaborate a bit:

C: The ‘customers of the system’ , clients or System Beneficiaries. In this context ‘customers’ means those who are on the receiving end of whatever it is that the system does. Is it clear from your definition of “C” as to who are the beneficiaries of the system?

A: The ‘actors’, meaning those who would actually carry out the activities envisaged in the notional system being defined. Actors transform inputs into outputs.

T: The ‘transformation process’. What does the system do to the inputs to convert them into the outputs?

W: Weltanschauung - The ‘world view’ that lies behind the Root Definition; the perspective from which the Root Definition if formulated. Putting the system into its wider context can highlight the consequences of the overall system. For example the system may be in place to assist in making the world environmentally safer, and the consequences of system failure could be significant pollution.

O: The ‘owner(s)’ – The person(s) who has commissioned the system and who has sufficient formal power over the system to stop it existing if they so wished (though they won’t usually want to do this).

E: The ‘environmental constraints’. These include things such as ethical limits, regulations, financial constraints, resource limitations, limits set by terms of reference, and so on.


EDUCATION SYSTEM CHARACTERISATION


CATWOE Analysis yields a more elaborate all encompassing Root Definition of the form:

A System owned by O to do W by A by means of T given the constraints of E in order to achieve X for C.

[A briefer version – a T system in which A do W for C]

Here is a CATWOE Model of a hypothetical Higher Education System [a University or College:

C – Students
A – Teachers
T – School Pass Outs are transformed into Graduates [Degree Holders]
W – Graduation [a Degree] is a means of assurance to potential employers that the Graduate [Degree Holder] possesses a specified standard of proficiency and skills in the domain of qualification.
O – The University or College Governing Body or Top Management
E – The Prescribed Educational, Academic Quality, Assessment and Accreditation Standards and Requirements.

Now this CATWOE Analysis may yield a Root Definition that this particular Higher Education Institution is a university owned system to award degrees to students (X) who successfully qualify assessment (Y) in accordance with prescribed standards in order to certify assurance (Z) to potential employers that the students possess the requisite proficiency, capabilities and skills.

Is this Root Definition okay or is there something amiss?

Suppose we define Potential Employers [or Industry] as CUSTOMERS [C] and include students as ACTORS [A] along with teachers – won’t we then get a more apt Root Definition and consequently realise a better Educational System in keeping with current needs and ground reality?


FOOD FOR THOUGHT


At a recent alumni meet of a prestigious Engineering College I asked a few recently passed out alumni [who were working for a leading IT company for just over a year] as to how much of what was taught in his four year Engineering Degree Course in his college was useful in his work. They said: “Less than 5% (five percent)” – which means that his employer had to invest heavily [almost 95%] in his training and the rest he had to learn on the job.


Maybe the educational institution needs to introspect and have a relook at its CATWOE Model and reformulate its ROOT DEFINITION and restructure its curriculum and revitalize its pedagogic methodology to meet the challenges of current needs and envisage seamless integration of fresh BE and B. Tech. Engineering Graduates into the industry. A Systemic approach to education incorporating increased partnership and congruence between the industry and universities is the sine qua non of optimal human resource development in science and technology.

The disconnect between the industry and educational system must be bridged.


VIKRAM KARVE

http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve

http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com

vikramkarve@sify.com