IISc slides 130 rungs in global varsity rankings

Seva Lamberdar wrote:BANGALORE: On an average, at least 10 institutions have overtaken Indian Institute of Science (IISc) every year in the global ratings since 2003, even though it continues to be the only one from India in the top 500. It has dropped 130 ranks in 11 years.

IISc, just like in 2013, continues to be ranked among the top 500 institutes in the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) 2014 done by the Center for World-Class Universities at Shanghai Jiao Tong University.

However, in 2013, it was close to 300, while its ranking is near 400 now, with over 50 institutes having overtaken it.

ARWU ranks universities on the basis of academic and research performance, including highly cited researchers, papers published, indexed in major citation indices, and per capita academic performance.

When IISc first made it to ARWU's list of top 500 institutes in 2003, it was in the 270-275 range. A decade later, it's near the 400 mark, dropping 130 ranks.

ARWU attributes this to the consistent drop in performance in subject-wise ranking. In 2013, IISc ranked 43 in Chemistry, while the ranking dropped to the 51-75 group this year. In 2009 (Chemistry), it ranked in the group of 76-101, retained the same position in 2010, jumped to 49th rank in 2011, 45th in 2012 and 43rd in 2013. But dropped to the 51-75 range this year.

In Computer Science, from the 51-75 group in 2013, IISc dropped to 101-150 this year. In English, where it had been in the 76-100 group since 2009, it dropped to the 101-150 group in 2014.

In natural sciences, the institute has stayed in the 151-200 group, the same as last year.

Sources in IISc credit other institutions of having performed well and feel the quality at the institute hasn't really dropped. IISc director Prof Anurag Kumar argues that the results of the efforts put in the past decade will yield results in a couple of years. ....

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/IISc-slides-130-rungs-in-global-varsity-rankings/articleshow/40878979.cms

michelle2 wrote: i wonder if there's a ministry of science.

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

michelle2 wrote: i wonder if there's a ministry of science.

The ministry of science means more quotas based on caste, religion etc. in schools and colleges (both at student and prof. level). Do you really want that?

michelle2 wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

michelle2 wrote: i wonder if there's a ministry of science.

The ministry of science means more quotas based on caste, religion etc. in schools and colleges (both at student and prof. level). Do you really want that?

how should science be nurtured, given that it is highly risky, for much of its payoff may come decades later or not at all? should government have a role in science? which of these should be eliminated: government support for science or quotas? some examples from the u.s.: the national institutes of health, fermi national lab, the human genome project.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

michelle2 wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

michelle2 wrote: i wonder if there's a ministry of science.

The ministry of science means more quotas based on caste, religion etc. in schools and colleges (both at student and prof. level). Do you really want that?

how should science be nurtured, given that it is highly risky, for much of its payoff may come decades later or not at all? should government have a role in science? which of these should be eliminated: government support for science or quotas? some examples from the u.s.: the national institutes of health, fermi national lab, the human genome project.

I have said this and repeat it here..

The IITs and IISc and other Statistical, math institutes should be rejigged to focus exclusively on Graduate and interdisciplinary subjects. Take Undergraduate programs out of this. With all RECs being called NITs, these can serve the undergraduate roles. India has a serious shortage of higher educational programs and research (quality) is laughable.  Is it any wonder Indian institutions seriousl lag behind in 3 to 4 criteria in any ranking?

It is also true that research capability and productivity of the "top" chinese universities are overblown.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

michelle2 wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

michelle2 wrote: i wonder if there's a ministry of science.

The ministry of science means more quotas based on caste, religion etc. in schools and colleges (both at student and prof. level). Do you really want that?

how should science be nurtured, given that it is highly risky, for much of its payoff may come decades later or not at all? should government have a role in science? which of these should be eliminated: government support for science or quotas? some examples from the u.s.: the national institutes of health, fermi national lab, the human genome project.

I have said this and repeat it here..

The IITs and IISc and other Statistical, math institutes should be rejigged to focus exclusively on Graduate and interdisciplinary subjects. Take Undergraduate programs out of this. With all RECs being called NITs, these can serve the undergraduate roles. India has a serious shortage of higher educational programs and research (quality) is laughable.  Is it any wonder Indian institutions seriousl lag behind in 3 to 4 criteria in any ranking?

It is also true that research capability and productivity of the "top" chinese universities are overblown.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

michelle2 wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

michelle2 wrote: i wonder if there's a ministry of science.

The ministry of science means more quotas based on caste, religion etc. in schools and colleges (both at student and prof. level). Do you really want that?

how should science be nurtured, given that it is highly risky, for much of its payoff may come decades later or not at all? should government have a role in science? which of these should be eliminated: government support for science or quotas? some examples from the u.s.: the national institutes of health, fermi national lab, the human genome project.

I have said this and repeat it here..

The IITs and IISc and other Statistical, math institutes should be rejigged to focus exclusively on Graduate and interdisciplinary subjects. Take Undergraduate programs out of this. With all RECs being called NITs, these can serve the undergraduate roles. India has a serious shortage of higher educational programs and research (quality) is laughable.  Is it any wonder Indian institutions seriousl lag behind in 3 to 4 criteria in any ranking?

It is also true that research capability and productivity of the "top" chinese universities are overblown.

to my knowledge the IISc does not have undergraduate programs.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:my own sporadic contacts with the institutes suggest that the reasons for the poor results at the IITs are not funding related any more. if anything, the IITs have a significant advantage -- they have been attracting funding in the form of equipment from big american corporations like applied materials and intel.  these companies in addition to providing equipment have also been providing personnel on a temporary basis for training students.  and when it comes to govt funding, the IITs along with IISc soak up the lion's share since the process of awarding govt funding is not as competitive as it is in the american system which relies on rigorous peer review.  so the average size of a research grant at the IITs is probably comparable (after adjusting for cost of living) to that at a second tier american university.  i have no insight to offer, but just these observations.

and there is absolutely no reason why the IITs and the IISc should not be excelling in theoretical physics and mathematics.

swapna wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:my own sporadic contacts with the institutes suggest that the reasons for the poor results at the IITs are not funding related any more. if anything, the IITs have a significant advantage -- they have been attracting funding in the form of equipment from big american corporations like applied materials and intel.  these companies in addition to providing equipment have also been providing personnel on a temporary basis for training students.  and when it comes to govt funding, the IITs along with IISc soak up the lion's share since the process of awarding govt funding is not as competitive as it is in the american system which relies on rigorous peer review.  so the average size of a research grant at the IITs is probably comparable (after adjusting for cost of living) to that at a second tier american university.  i have no insight to offer, but just these observations.

and there is absolutely no reason why the IITs and the IISc should not be excelling in theoretical physics and mathematics.

that's a surprising assertion; I haven't heard of any record of excellence in physics and mathematics that the iits and IISc have established over the last 50 or 60 years.

bw wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manindra_Agrawal

He co-created the AKS primality test with Neeraj Kayal and Nitin Saxena, for which he and his co-authors won the 2002 Clay Research Award, the 2006 Fulkerson Prize, and the 2006 Gödel Prize. The test is the first deterministic algorithm to test an n-digit number for primality in a time that has been proven to be polynomial in n.