Many Indians are proud of the IT Revolution because of various services companies in India that employ few lakh people which makes us look like we are the “Intellectual Hub of the World”. But the sad part is, many of those people working in such IT companies are having very limited knowledge about the current technology & trends in IT field.

The reason is here:

1) IT Services company doesn’t have to be creative and need to just do the work the customer provides. About 90% of the projects are regular work for most of the employees.
2) Employees spend more time in office doing their regular work and hence their urge to learn new things is almost nil. Because of this, learning stops after few years they begin their career in IT field.
3) Even if formal training is provided by the company to the employees at regular intervals, they are of not of much use as the ‘training is forced’ and not a natural process.
4) Major IT companies block many good websites as they think that they will reduce productivity of the employees & waste Internet bandwidth. Such rules will deter the “natural learning process” of employees.
5) Many IT companies encourages their employees to become managers rather than technical specialist as the career path in that organization is for the people who manage more people rather than technology.

There are exceptions in everything. But exceptions are still exceptions. Similarly, some of you may be exceptions in IT Services company doing a good job, learning a new thing every day, being creative, inventing new things, taking risk, etc. But still, you are all exceptions. Most of them are like “Frog in a well”.

In this article below, Prof. R Ananthan, Founder of The Physics Society, reveals the reason for him to start the society by honestly analyzing the present Education System.

The need to start “The Physics Society”

A question that arises quite naturally is the need for this kind of a Society. Aren’t there many colleges of repute in the city? Aren’t there many centers of research in the city? What new has the Society got to offer?

These questions surely require an honest response. But one must understand that an honest response may sometimes, more often than not, be a bitter pill to swallow. And this is one of the more often kind.

The Physics Society does not believe in mincing of words while expressing its views. A few of the observations and thoughts on the present-day education system in our country are presented below:

1. It is a known fact that our Educational System is purely examination-oriented. There is nothing wrong in getting trained for an examination, but unfortunately, it turns out that our examination system has been established in such a way that students find it extremely easy to pass creditably, even without understanding concepts! This statement is bound to bring about different, mostly opposing, opinions. But the Society remains convinced, after much thought and after- thought that such an examination does not foster creativity in our students.

2. In a highly memory-based examination system, learning, unfortunately, is not given the required priority. The primary focus is on obtaining the maximum securable marks, degrees and medals. Moreover, education has become a means of livelihood. As a result, students read because they ‘have to’ and not because they ‘want to’. The joy of learning is naturally lost!

3. Such an unsound examination system has serious repercussions for the society, for it is this very same system that delivers our teachers. It is a known fact that quality teachers are rare finds, these days.

4. Another important aspect is that it is only ‘coaching’ that is expected out of those few good teachers and not ‘teaching’. All that is required from a teacher is a way to train the students ‘successfully’ pass examinations with ‘flying colors’.

For those who continue to insist that all is well with this system, a few questions await their answers.

Every year, we produce lakhs of graduates and post-graduates and, at least a few thousand doctorates. Then why, in 58 years of independent India, have we not produced a Nobel Laureate? Almost every year we see an American or a German or a Japanese wins the Nobel Prize, but not a single Indian has made it so far. Well, we are a nation more bothered about winning an Oscar for a film rather than the Nobel. Not that it is wrong to bother about winning the Oscar, but is it not more important to be bothered about winning the Nobel Prize? One is reminded of a senior Cabinet Minister consoling a filmmaker for having lost out on the Oscar. What about our scientists? Well, scientists don’t get votes!

Why is there a mad rush for professional courses, while there are very few takers for pure sciences and humanities? Why does there exist such hype over Engineering and Medical admissions, while not many seem to bother about arts and sciences. In fact, a few colleges have even stopped offering courses in the pure sciences. Is it that arts and sciences are, in any way, inferior?

Why do talented youngsters not take up the teaching profession, if it is as ‘noble’ as it is claimed to be? One obvious reason is the discouraging pay scale that is dwarfed by those offered by software giants.

This article is from the website: http://www.physicssociety.com/?page_id=2

This was the speech made by Anna University VC Dr. P. Mannar Jawahar on 22-Mar-2009 (Sun) at Madras Institute of Technology, Chromepet, Chennai during Automobile Engineers Alumni Meet 2009.

Anna University VC on YouTube.

Many of us know “Richie Rich”. But how many of us know “Richie Poor”?

This guy “Richie Poor” is the father of a techie guy working for an IT company in India with a salary of Rs.1 lakh per month (with this salary, you can buy at least 80 grams of 22 carat gold in today’s market).

Why is he “Richie Poor”?
This question has two parts:

First, “why is he Rich”:
When he was young, he bought two grounds of land near a city in India with his salary from Government job. Today that ground is worth Rs.2 crores (in b&w market) and Rs.1.2 crores as per govt. guideline value. Assume that today this old man sells the land at “govt rate” and puts the money in bank for 10% interest. Then, he will get at least Rs.1 lakh per month from interest alone. Isn’t this guy rich?

Second, “why is he poor”:
Even though he has a potential of getting Rs. 1 lakh per month from his own property, since he didn’t sell the land (because it is where he lives in his old house), he just survives with his pension amount of Rs.2,000/-pm and Rs.3,000/-pm from his “rich son” who has a luxurious apartment, luxurious car and luxurious life style. Comparatively he gets only 5% of what his son gets every month to lead his simple life. Isn’t he poor?

There are many such old people in India who are “Richie Poor”.

What will you become when you are old? Richie Rich or Richie Poor?

One month back I gave some small gifts to my ex-colleagues through a friend. Since it was more than a month and only a few collected the gift from the anchor person, I wrote an email “Collect the gift before 24th March after that it won’t be available”. To this, one guy replied, “Viru, I’ve never heard of timeline for a gift”. Even though I replied with some inane excuse, his sentence worried me and made me think. Yesterday I went to my Alma matter (Madras Institute of Technology) to attend the Alumni Meet. There, I got an answer for the thing that worried me a lot.

Most of us are in touch with our school and college friends. But once we join the corporate world, the degree of closeness starts reducing when we move up the ladder. The reason is very simple. In a corporate company, the pyramid structure is followed. If a person joined the company after college, initially he/she along with his/her other batch mates will get promoted to the next level with a time factor (with less weightage on performance factor). After a few years, the ratio of People who get promoted to People who are eligible for promotion decreases due to “Pyramid Structure”. At that time, your own batch mates become your competitors (or ‘enemies’) and your manager may promote the person according to his/her perception. The persons who were denied promotion will start finding fault with his/her peers ( i.e. batch mates) and the “degree of closeness” will start decreasing. When they leave the company, the relationship vanishes in thin air.

But the school and college friends’ relationship continues because they were never considered as your competitors who would affect your image in the society. That’s why the social network websites continue to grow.

Coming back to “timeline for a gift”, I realized that, even though I left the company three years back, I still have some “degree of closeness” with my ex-colleagues which made me write to them in such a manner (which you can do only with your school & college friends). I was fortunate enough to quit the organization when I was in the critical place in the pyramid. I’m not sure whether I’ve good status or not, at least I’ve good friends who are my ex-colleagues.

I loved this article which was a “lesson” in English subject during my school days. Hope you may also like it.

Also, I had seen very few people who are as gentle as the person defined by Cardinal Newman in this article below. The person in whose name this website is named, is an example for such a gentleman.

Thanks and regards,
Viru

Hence it is that it is almost a definition of a gentleman to say that he is one who never inflicts pain. This description is both refined and, as far as it goes, accurate. He is mainly occupied in merely removing the obstacles which hinder the free and unembarrassed action of those about him; and he concurs with their movements rather than takes the initiative himself. His benefits may be considered as parallel to what are called comforts or conveniences in arrangements of a personal nature; like an easy chair or a good fire, which do their part in dispelling cold and fatigue, though nature provides both means of rest and animal heat without them. The true gentleman in like manner carefully avoids whatever may cause a jar or a jolt in the minds of those with whom he is cast — all clashing of opinion, or collision of feeling, all restraint, or suspicion, or gloom, or resentment; his great concern being to make every one at his ease and at home. He has his eyes on all his company; he is tender towards the bashful, gentle towards the distant, and merciful towards the absurd; he can recollect to whom he is speaking; he guards against unseasonable allusions, or topics which may irritate; he is seldom prominent in conversation, and never wearisome. He makes light of favors while he does them, and seems to be receiving when he is conferring. He never speaks of himself except when compelled, never defends himself by a mere retort; he has no ears for slander or gossip, is scrupulous in imputing motives to those who interfere with him, and interprets everything for the best. He is never mean or little in his disputes, never takes unfair advantage, never mistakes personalities or sharp saying for arguments, or insinuates evil which he dare not say out. From a long-sighted prudence, he observes the maxim of the ancient sage, that we should ever conduct ourselves towards our enemy as if he were one day to be our friend. He has too much good sense to be affronted at insults, he is too well employed to remember injuries, and too indolent to bear malice. He is patient, forbearing, and resigned, on philosophical principles; he submits to pain, because it is inevitable, to bereavement, because it is irreparable, and to death, because it is his destiny.

If he engages in controversy of any kind, his disciplined intellect preserves him from the blundering discourtesy of better, perhaps, but less educated minds; who, like blunt weapons, tear and hack instead of cutting clean, who mistake the point in argument, waste their strength on trifles, misconceive their adversary, and leave the question more involved than they find it. He may be right or wrong in his opinion, but he is too clear-headed to be unjust; he is as simple as he is forcible, and as brief as he is decisive. Nowhere shall we find greater candor, consideration, indulgence: he throws himself into the minds of his opponents, he accounts for their mistakes. He knows the weakness of human reason as well as its strength, its province and its limits.

If he be an unbeliever, he will be too profound and large-minded to ridicule religion or to act against it; he is too wise to be a dogmatist or fanatic in his infidelity. He respects piety and devotion; he even supports institutions as venerable, beautiful, or useful, to which he does not assent; he honors the ministers of religion, and it contents him to decline its mysteries without assailing or denouncing them. He is a friend of religious toleration, and that, not only because his philosophy has taught him to look on all forms of faith with an impartial eye, but also from the gentleness and effeminacy of feeling, which is the attendant on civilization.

Reference: http://www.his.com/~z/gentleman.html

Welcome to NarayanB.com

Here you can see some good articles related to IT as well personal things. Do pass your feedback to us.

Thanks and regards,
Viru

HomePlanGuru.com