“… he should not compartmentalise his knowledge,” Dr. Shubha Pandit, Principal of K. J. Somaiya College of Engineering, Vidyavihar, tells Shraddha Kamdar
She is lively, to the point and makes a strong case for higher education in the country. Spending a summer morning in her office interacting with her on the several issues that plague student development and more so higher education, my eyes opened up to seeing the glass half full instead of half empty. Dr. Shubha Pandit, Principal of K. J. Somaiya College of Engineering, Vidyavihar, talked of several aspects of higher education, including student involvement, preparing them for the world, encouraging interdisciplinary studies and lifelong learning. Excerpts:
Often, students complain of the syllabus being outdated. How do we tackle this in the classroom?
l Firstly, I feel that the term used here – outdated – is grossly wrong. Despite the fact that K. J. Somaiya College of Engineering is now autonomous and can work out a syllabus incorporating views of professionals, I feel that at any given point, the industry looks at the currency of technology at that given point. So we need to prepare the students with strong fundamentals, and prepare them for lifelong learning. That said, even if revisions in the syllabus at the university level could be done periodically, only about 30-35% could change, since the rest accounts for fundamental knowledge which every engineer should possess! Often, students do not realise this, and then start complaining that the syllabus is outdated.
In an engineering programme, the students are with an institute for four years, and within this time frame, a lot is possible.
Even then, let’s face it, some classes are boring, and students are open about expressing their opinion.
l The definition of boring is too loose. Often, students do not choose engineering as a personally preferred option, but out of peer or parental pressure. And due to several factors, engineering is now becoming a more ‘general’ programme rather than a ‘professional’ programme. For instance, the number of seats has gone up and so have the marks. And while the marks have gone up, the marks do not necessarily reflect the capability or the interest of the student. With the jump in the number of seats, the eligibility is also widening. Thus, the programme becomes more general and diluted. So with such diverse students coming on, not everyone is ready to take on the challenges of the programme. And that is why they tend to dub some subjects as boring, say for example, mathematical theory. Such students are not willing to dirty their hands with practical work. All they want is a post-dated degree. Herein lies the challenge.
How can such a challenge be overcome?
l We need to bring in those elements which will enhance the usefulness of such subjects to the students, and enable them to understand their importance. It could be done with online resources, there are plenty available and applicable. Apart from that, what we are doing at K. J. Somaiya College of Engineering is that we are introducing tutorials where students understand the relationship between subjects. For instance, the theory part of mathematics will be taught by that teacher, and then the other teacher will come in to take it forward by using the same mathematical theory towards practical aspects in other subjects. Students should also be engaged in a lot of hands on work.
Even with such engagement, do you find that students are often caught up with the number of marks they secure?
l Unfortunately, due to the sheer number of students, the easiest way to filter out is by using marks. It is not the best way, but it is the easiest. And students are victims of that. But during placements, the criteria for many companies serve as eye openers, since these companies have a completely different set of questions and they look at the capabilities and the capacity of the students rather than looking at the marks. There are so many cases where the marks secured do not match the capabilities in either way. However, since the same yardstick is used to measure the capabilities, the students’ minds are set.
Personally I feel that there are other ways of judging a student’s potential. Development needs to be looked at. Like playing a sport cultivates team spirit, develops positive habits. Students inculcate human relationship skills as well as learn how to manage time. These skills are extremely essential for overall development.
How important are softer skills in a student’s career?
l They may be necessary, but not over one’s knowledge. Clarity in any communication is essential, because the other person needs to understand. But other things will differ with the job profile. Say if a person has a research role, he may not have heavy emphasis on these skills as compared to a person who has to work in the front office or with clients. Students should look at the other ways in which they subconsciously communicate. Students are now aware that these skills need to be worked upon as well, and they should be consistent. But as I said before, there is no substitute for technical knowledge.
Should institutes look at the employability of students, considering the ultimate goal is to land a job?
l One thing I strongly feel and have mentioned before is that students should be trained for lifelong learning, and they should be equipped with fundamental knowledge. In the span of four years, a student should be able to define a problem, analyse the situations, look at probable solutions according to the situation and also look at the possibility of executing the solutions. If all of this is learnt, the student is definitely trainable, and consequently employable.
What is the one aspect that you think needs attention in the current scenario?
l According to me, interdisciplinary studies and activities should be encouraged by institutes and taken up by students. If we take a closer look, it is a necessity in society today. Say there can be a biological problem which could have a chemical base and could be solved in a mathematical manner by using a computer. Take a life example, for instance. Every doctor uses machinery and technology. This technology is developed by an engineer. So I feel that compartmentalization should be avoided, An engineer is an engineer, he should have an idea of all of the core disciplines. One should know to work with an electrical circuit, for example. They can’t say that an industrial engineer should not know anything about electronics. A hard look needs to be taken at this. In fact, at our college, we encourage this, we even encourage dual degree, since the university allows it.
