Science Where It Matters
- 9 killed, over 40 injured as Bengaluru-Ernakulam Express train derails near Hosur
- SC says allegations grave, but grants relief to Teesta Setalvad in cheating case
- All you need to know about AAP's WiFi Delhi promise
- 19 killed as militants storm Shia mosque in Pakistan
- Modi’s cricket diplomacy: Renewing political contact with Pakistan
The news that Indian science education is going through a huge transformation for the better warms the cockles of one's heart. Science doctorates went up from around 5000 at the beginning of the Tenth Plan to more than 9000 in the Eleventh Plan. The upsurge goes to funding of newer institutions, of a networking kind but also building around clusters at the beginning of the last decade. It was in the second half of the nineties that the core ideas, catching them young, creating interest in science at the school level and keeping it up, institutions integrating teaching and research, institutions putting in team effort for solving scientific problems and institutions cutting across status and narrow disciplinary walls was being pushed forward by a number of scientists and out of the box science administrators. It clicked and the UPA government funded the better of these ideas.
Interestingly the unsung heroes were not very well known to the media scientists and science administrators. I remember as Science Minister writing to all our Ambassadors on fresh ideas implemented in the country in which they were serving. When I got the replies we were implementing many of them. But China had a scheme called 8/92. Theirs is a pictorial language and the words stood for August 1992 when they implemented a scheme where more than a score of young Chinese scientists after a national search process were given a five-year stipend with top level salaries and whats more were given a handsome laboratory equipment grant and funds to go abroad for a year out of five years on Chinese money. This was the origin of our Suvarna Jayanti Fellowship Scheme later improved and replicated. But at that time, I was criticized by one of our top scientists for denying these funds to senior scientists.