I researched the AI policies across 25 universities. In the last 6 months, I conducted sessions at three of these Universities: IIT Madras, Singapore University of Technology and Design, and Ashoka University. Interestingly, these are the three lowest ranked universities in my analysis of AI policies. This is where I’m glad that correlation does not imply causation.
Yesterday, I was part of an IIM Bangalore interview panel at Hyderabad, along with Professor Subhabrata Das and Debajyoti. Panels typically comprise of two faculty and an alumni, and handle 8 interviews in the morning and eight in the evening, though in our case, we had 9 each. As we arrived, we were given a USB drive with the student’s resume, statement of purpose, and other documents that they had submitted, which included employment contracts, declarations, letters of recommendation, etc., depending on the student. Each interview was approximately 20 minutes. Luckily, Dr Das set a timer for 18, so we didn’t go too far beyond. ...
In his article on The Power of the Marginal, Paul Graham suggests (among other things) a way of picking courses at college. One way to tell whether a field has consistent standards is the overlap between the leading practitioners and the people who teach the subject in universities. At one end of the scale you have fields like math and physics, where nearly all the teachers are among the best practitioners. In the middle are medicine, law, history, architecture, and computer science, where many are. At the bottom are business, literature, and the visual arts, where there’s almost no overlap between the teachers and the leading practitioners. It’s this end that gives rise to phrases like “those who can’t do, teach.” ...
Tomorrow’s leaders: opinion on IIT/IIM grads by T N Ninan at Business Standard. From his interviews for the Aditya Birla scholarships, and observes that there is a lack of awareness about India among them, and that the real value of the IITs/IIMs is in the selection process, not the education. I disagree on the latter. I think the 4+2 years of intense competition also adds value. The curriculum, however, may or may not.
Open Courseware from MIT will be open to the public on Sep 30th. OCW is a set of MIT-designed courses that will be available online to the public. via MetaFilter
The IIM-B website has changed.
The reality of international interaction really came through today in the Mergers & MBOs class. Prof. Paulo Volpin commented that ‘So, eefectively, ve see Germany has a pooor accounting seestem." To which, immediately, a German pounced up and said, “I don’t go with this result,” and proceeded on a defence of why the system was right for Germany. A few other Germans joined in. Poor Prof. Volpin had to make a hasty retreat. Later, when making a similar comment about Belgium, he first clarified: “Are there any Belgians in the class?” ...
How would I compare LBS against IIM-B so far? Let’s see. Faculty: LBS probably wins marginally. More famous faculty, more industry experience, better communication. But like I said, marginal. IT infrastructure: IIM-B wins! IT management: LBS wins. They manage what they’ve got extremely well. Companies coming for placement: LBS wins. Placement process: Debatable. IIM-B definitely has a more student-friendly process. Library: Books-wise, IIM-B wins. Electronic resources-wise, LBS wins. Students: Comparable. Too early to tell the difference probably. The point is, however, that everyone in LBS has a lot of work-experience. Campus: IIM-B wins hands down. I mean, LBS faces Regent’s Park and all that, but it doesn’t really have a campus. Lecture rooms: LBS wins marginally. Slightly better rooms, better equipment. Hostel: IIM-B wins. LBS doesn’t have one. Location: LBS wins. Heart of London. Exchange programmes: LBS wins. LBS is ahead, but not by far. ...
Today was my first class at the London Business School, and I’ve written up my experiences on day 1. I plan to keep updating it.