I am no longer a Professor at IIT Kanpur and I have not posted any new blog on JEE counseling for many years now. But still, I keep getting emails, phone calls and even personal visits to seek clarity on ordering choices. It is indeed a very stressful period for students and parents.
What amazes me every year is the lack of application of common sense from people who are the "best" students of the country. When someone asks me whether they should prefer choice 'A' or choice 'B', my first question is what is the source of confusion. In my thinking, the source could be that they don't have enough information about the two choices and they are seeking information from me, or they are unable to interpret that information into positives and negatives for the two choices and they are seeking my help in doing that, or they are unable to evaluate those positives and negatives in the context of this particular student and they are asking me how to do that.
Often, it is none of these. The source of confusion is this. Last year data shows that many students preferred 'A' while many others preferred 'B'. So I don't know which herd to follow. Between choices where the closing ranks last year were widely separated, there is no confusion at all. I know what the herd decided, and I believe in the wisdom of the masses. But if the masses were not sure, how can I be sure.
My response is that if there are two programs such that 50% students preferred one and the other 50% preferred the other, and if you believe in the wisdom of the herd, then you should perhaps decide on the basis of convenience (geography, for example), or on the basis of a toss of a coin. And people take offense, because even though just admitted that most of their choices were based on last year's closing ranks, they still want to portray that they are evaluating choices on some merit criteria that they can't explain.
Having done this for almost 30 years, my take is that the stress happens when there is a conflict between the thought that the decision should be based on merit of each program (whatever that means) and the thought that doing it on the basis of wisdom of the herd will give them maximum brownie points in the community. (You choose Civil over CS, and you will have to face a barrage of criticism from all near and dear ones.)
If you were to consider the choices logically, it is actually not a very big problem. Just yesterday, a student asked me for advice between 5-year BTech-MTech dual degree in CSE at IIT-KGP versus a 4-year BTech (CSE) from IIT Roorkee. In this particular case, the student was very logical, and I wrote to him a 2-line email, and he understood and came back with the right way of choosing. But I was thinking of hundreds of discussion on similar lines and I thought I will illustrate how I have dealt with this particular choice issue in the past.
I will first ask: What would have been your choice between 4-year BTech (CSE) at KGP and the same program at Roorkee. The answer is always, KGP.
I will ask why KGP. And there are some mumblings. Obviously, the student hasn't thought through and it is purely wisdom of the herd. But the claim will be that we have heard better this or better that at KGP.
Me: Now, KGP is putting a condition on you. They are saying that you will have to spend an extra year. But in this extra year, we will not charge you any tuition, and we will give you enough scholarship to take care of all your costs. So you won't be dependent on your parents. And to top it, we will throw in an extra KGP degree at the end of the year. Isn't all adding value to the 4-year program. If you would have preferred the 4-year program and the 5-year program is better than the 4-year program, then shouldn't you prefer the 5-year program.
The student is confused and has no reply. I would then suggest to think of what could make the 5-year program less attractive than the 4-year program (and some of that is in my old blogs). The student remains confused but with some prodding, is able to point out that you lose one year's income in a 5-year program.
I will then say how strongly you would prefer the 4-year program at KGP over 4-year program over Roorkee. If that preference is very strong, and you really believe that this will help your career in a significant way then wouldn't you recoup the one year loss of income during the 50-year long career you are expected to have. Would you not believe that the "better" education would result in even 1-2% higher income or higher happiness per year. So if the preference of KGP was strong then at least to the extent of this logic, one should accept the 5-year program. If the preference of KGP was mild, then perhaps 4-year at Roorkee is OK. Note that if earning as soon as possible was a necessity (when the student is from a very poor background and need to start supporting family at the earliest), the student would not be having this discussion. They will choose the 4-year program only.
Why is 4-year at Roorkee OK in case of mild preference for KGP. Well, because, I am not a big fan of asking a 12th class student to commit to doing a thesis 4 years from now. That is a personal preference.
So once you have noted down pluses and minuses of the two choices, it will boil down to whether you believe that the so-called advantage that you perceive of studying in KGP is so much that it compensates for the so-called disadvantage of an extra year. May be you will start believing that there is no disadvantage of an extra year. And once you have noted down these things, the choice becomes easy. And one is confident about making those choices and not be stressed about this process.
Posts
