Just trying to answer the question you asked ...
************************Why engineering universities are not busy in any research: the question about their fruit of research is secondary.
What are objectives of universities? Awarding degrees. They can easily get away with zero research. Any research you find in universities is due to staff seeing an incentive to publish maybe to get promotion ...
To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
From: amnaqvi@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 23:29:34 -0400
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] Re: About Siachen Disaster
************************Why engineering universities are not busy in any research: the question about their fruit of research is secondary.
What are objectives of universities? Awarding degrees. They can easily get away with zero research. Any research you find in universities is due to staff seeing an incentive to publish maybe to get promotion ...
Private high education universities ( a non existing thing in europe but may exist in US) have no incentive to research for benefit of society. They are not funded by society and not steered by society. They are accountable to nobody. This is pretty dangerous. They can be funded by anybody and their policies will turn to funders wishes. Moreover, their market is young gullibles and young gullibles are the second center of attention of institutional attention.
In europe, universities are amazingly closely connected to needs of society and industry. Both society and industry are served well by the knowkedge created by universities in terms of competiveness. Universities are accountable to society and tax money they absorb.
My solutions are 1) Formation of research institutes close to universities 2) Discourage private higher education 3) Identification of bad apples who create hurdles in projects good for society (try them in courts as traitors and imprison them because they are dangerous for society if allowed to be free) 4) Realization that we have failed and try to adopt best practices from successful nations (preferably west, not india and china)
Regards,
Usman Rafique
To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
From: amnaqvi@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 23:29:34 -0400
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] Re: About Siachen Disaster
Dear fellows,
The notion that the lack of engineering prowess in Pakistan was due to a deliberate preference/negligence by the funds allocators in favor of basic sciences has several underlying assumptions, such as:
- Basic research is snatching the funding which was supposed to be allocated for research in engineering or technology disciplines.
- The researchers in Pakistan are busy in high impact factor publications rather than doing innovation-based technological research that could yield patents
We need an unemotional & rational analysis.
Comparative distribution of research efforts in Pakistan based on various disciplines should be studied. I do not currently have quick access to such data which would list all applied engineering and technology publications with those in basic sciences but in 2010, HEC reports 233 papers in IT & Engineering disciplines as compared to 3600+ in natural sciences. This huge disbalance cannot be because of the above assumptions.
Rather, several things can account for this trend including the following:
- Comparison of advanced/terminal degree holder faculty members in the basic and Engineering disciplines: Their faculty holding phd degrees had consistently been much low as compared to that in basic sciences areas.
- Traditional quick placement prospects for engineering graduates as compared to basic science graduates: traditionally has been more promising in terms of job-placement than basic sciences. Consequently, the bulk of our students often aim too low in engineering by taking up a mediocre job after earning a mere bachelors. This doesn't mean that basic sciences student go all the way up. But for them, there is no considerable attraction in going to industry after Bachelors.
- Until recently Engineering colleges/universities were mostly colleges with no graduate programs (MS, PhD) at all in any engineering disciplines!
For me, a bigger question is why engineering universities are not busy in any research: the question about their fruit of research is secondary.
With this perspective, I find Mansoor Malik Saheb somewhat carried away in our national emotional exuberance. I do not know whether he really meant what he literally wrote (when he suggested discrediting of publications compared to patents) or he was just conveying the sentiment. I unfortunately found them amusingly baseless!
with kind regards,
Khayal Naqvi
The notion that the lack of engineering prowess in Pakistan was due to a deliberate preference/negligence by the funds allocators in favor of basic sciences has several underlying assumptions, such as:
- Basic research is snatching the funding which was supposed to be allocated for research in engineering or technology disciplines.
- The researchers in Pakistan are busy in high impact factor publications rather than doing innovation-based technological research that could yield patents
We need an unemotional & rational analysis.
Comparative distribution of research efforts in Pakistan based on various disciplines should be studied. I do not currently have quick access to such data which would list all applied engineering and technology publications with those in basic sciences but in 2010, HEC reports 233 papers in IT & Engineering disciplines as compared to 3600+ in natural sciences. This huge disbalance cannot be because of the above assumptions.
Rather, several things can account for this trend including the following:
- Comparison of advanced/terminal degree holder faculty members in the basic and Engineering disciplines: Their faculty holding phd degrees had consistently been much low as compared to that in basic sciences areas.
- Traditional quick placement prospects for engineering graduates as compared to basic science graduates: traditionally has been more promising in terms of job-placement than basic sciences. Consequently, the bulk of our students often aim too low in engineering by taking up a mediocre job after earning a mere bachelors. This doesn't mean that basic sciences student go all the way up. But for them, there is no considerable attraction in going to industry after Bachelors.
- Until recently Engineering colleges/universities were mostly colleges with no graduate programs (MS, PhD) at all in any engineering disciplines!
For me, a bigger question is why engineering universities are not busy in any research: the question about their fruit of research is secondary.
With this perspective, I find Mansoor Malik Saheb somewhat carried away in our national emotional exuberance. I do not know whether he really meant what he literally wrote (when he suggested discrediting of publications compared to patents) or he was just conveying the sentiment. I unfortunately found them amusingly baseless!
with kind regards,
Khayal Naqvi
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 9:02 PM, Ashiq Anjum <ashiq.anjum@cern.ch> wrote:
What percentage of resources are you spending on basic research? Pakistan is one of the lowest ranked countries in the world in terms on spending on basic research.
And more importantly, who has stopped the decision makers/common people/engineers in investing time and resources for innovation? Only less than one percent resources (people, money) are being spent on basic research. Where do the remaining 99 percent of the resources go and why cannot this be channelled out for innovation? This is a weak argument that we can not innovate due to spending in basic research.Without basic research, you may successfully copy things but cannot innovate. Look at the percentage of the patents applications that were filed without a well thought out research plan and you will notice that most applications will be turned down. Only those people managed to get some success (in terms of patents) who graduated (phds) from good universities and then spent few years in R&D environments. I am happy to be proved wrong.Low spending on basic research is impeding the innovation and not the vice versa. Indian/Chinese succeeded because they spent billions to train their human resources, who then progressed in rank and file and conquered the enterprise world with their talent. This talent helped them to win projects and appreciation and now reverse brain drain is happening. We should encourage HEC and Govt to spend as much as they can on talent development and only then mass scale innovation will be possible.Best regardsAshiq Anjum> To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
--- In pakgrid@yahoogroups.com, mansoor malik <manmalik@...> wrote:
>
>
> I think we should hit the nail first. Every body appears to be hitting the ground only. We have to first decide the balance between APPLIED RESEARCH and BASIC RESEARCH. Pakistan has been unfortunate to have most of its S&T leaders from the scientific community instead of a mix from Sciences, Engineering and Technology and therefore the sacrosanct word IMPACT FACTOR has always prevailed. Lets bury this once and for all and start encouraging our researchers to file PATENTS, COPY RIGHTS, DESIGN RIGHTS etc.
>
> No research should be encouraged in Pakistan for the next ten years which does not generate an IPR (Intellectual Property Right) as well as an END USER in sight. The impact factor should be weighed 100 times less than an accepted Patent or other IPRs' to bring a semblance of balance between APPLIED RESEARCH and BASIC RESEARCH. This is the only way to do something worthwhile for our country as ENGINEERS. It is embarrassing to see the Technical Tools being used to recover our brothers and sons who are buried under the snow in Siachen. Our Disaster Management Organizations need to concentrate less on Five Wheelers and lavish Office Spaces and start building the capacities of Technical Tooling procurement instead.
>
> Engr. Mansoor Malik
>
>
> EMSQUARE
>
> From: anjum.research@...
> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2012 22:55:41 +0500
> Subject: Re: [pakgrid] About Siachen Disaster
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Assalam o Alaikum,
>
> HEC may play effective regulatory role to keep research on track to achieve national objectives. Following may be considered in this regard;
>
> a) National need based research priorities may be defined
>
> b) Research may be regulated by the board/authority (associated with HEC), having representatives from academia, industry, and government
> c) Unnessary course work may be avoided
> d) Activities of specific technical focus groups may be accelerated and integrated
>
> e) Open research incubators and repositories may be established
>
> (Thanks Dr. SMJR for good ideas)
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Usman Rafique rafiqusman@... wrote:> To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Seemingly these are foreign entities. Why research on disasters mitigation and response is not done in Pakistan? Where environmental disasters of every kind is a norm than exception? If someone claim they have done something or doing something why they don't come to surface when the need comes?
>
> Are right kind of people inducted in research? The universities administration don't have a clue how to help society in meaningful way? What is the source of failure? Institutional failure is also a norm in Pakistan. Is failure of universities related to (same causes) failure of other institutions in the country? Is it so that all good brains already gone to west and only garbage is left behind?
>
>
> From: qamar_mahboob@...> http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~adk/http://www.era.bv.tum.de/index.php?id=5
> Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 12:49:42 +0100
>
> Subject: [pakgrid] About Siachen Disaster
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Following are two groups that are working on probabilistic modeling of risks arising from avalanche and other natural hazards.
>
>> Von: Syeda Umema Hani umema_hani@...
>
> One can download interesting presentations from their website, too. If one is interested in some of their wrok, please, leet me know.
>
>
> Any way, it is time to start working on ''Risk-based decision making'' on engineering and natural systems.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Qamar Mahboob(PhD student)TU Dresden,
> Germany
>
>
>
>
> An: "pakgrid@yahoogroups.com" pakgrid@yahoogroups.com; Usman Rafique rafiqusman@...
>> www.ssuet.edu.pk/~suhani, suhani@..., ++92-21-111994994(STI department)
> Gesendet: 10:42 Mittwoch, 18.April 2012
> Betreff: Re: [pakgrid] About Siachen Disaster
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Nice email brother ! I hope our high fi universities could make some effort in utilizing their research work in real life insahAllah.
> With regards,
>
> Syeda Umema Hani,
> Assistant Professor, Computer Engineering Department, www.ssuet.edu.pk,
>
> PhD (Software Engineering) fellow, GSESIT, www.hamdard.edu.pk,
>
>
> From: Usman Rafique rafiqusman@...
> To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
>
> Sent: Tuesday, 17 April 2012, 23:11
> Subject: [pakgrid] About Siachen Disaster
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I wonder what technologies could have been used to save lives of soldiers of Giari Sector in Siachin. How far our society and specially universities will have to go to get into the position to help the nation in the time of need?
>
>
> For example there is a chip that uses nanotechnology to have sniffing power (meeting or even exceeding) to those of dogs and can be programmed for specialized ordors. Since dogs cannot sniff humans at such height of snow rubble and pin point exact locations of bodies, such chip could have been used at bore head to go inside snow for sniffing of human bodies. Similary some ground based sonar or radar waves could have been used.
>
>
> This time is gone but how in future we can develop capacity (proactively) to take swift action to be able to help society in such citicial events? It is useless to expect national level stuff from private universities as they are busy
> counting cash, so all hope is from public sector universities that they come ahead and demonstrate their impact on society.
>
> Regards,
> Usman Rafique
>
__._,_.___
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment