Question to all (maybe first to Mr Gadgil): Is there a difference between "Future Ready" and "Job-ready on Day 1"? The latter is easier to define, and is obviously attractive in the short term to institutions (good placements) and industry (immediate hiring needs), but possibly detrimental to the graduate's long-term success in a rapidly changing world of work. Your thoughts?

A question to Ashwani Sharma - How does Google Research select academic institutions to have access to computational and data resources to carry out research?

If the industry is neutrally and objectively willing to look at the curriculum and advise on what new relevant topics and skills need to be taught in today's scenario, that would be more healthy collaboration between academia and industry. However, hijacking the students from the universities in the 3rd year itself as additional pair of hands at low stipend and telling that university education is irrelevant will not nurture healthy relationship between industry and academia.

One of the casualty in CS/IT industry in early offers or great packages just after graduation, is many of good students not choosing to go for their masters immediately after, some never do. Perhaps that is where most of the soft skill development or maturity development or how to learn etc really happens. Any thoughts on how this catch-22 can be handled ?

One of the casualty in CS/IT industry in early offers or great packages just after graduation, is many of good students not choosing to go for their masters immediately after, some never do. Perhaps that is where most of the soft skill development or maturity development or how to learn etc really happens. Any thoughts on how this catch-22 can be handled ?

From Prof. Keskar: One of the casualty in CS/IT industry in early offers or great packages just after graduation, is many of good students not choosing to go for their masters immediately after, some never do. Perhaps that is where most of the soft skill development or maturity development or how to learn etc really happens. Any thoughts on how this catch-22 can be handled ?

Prof Keskar to your question. Should students go for masters immediately after their graduation? The individual, many times is not clear on which area his real interest lies when s/he graduates and tends to choose the most attractive/ popular subject for Masters. Then as a part of the career does no work related to the area in which s/he has invested 2 years.

I believe there is a need for Industry collaboration in the course content and delivery will add more value to the NPTEL MOOC courses.

Yes of course, scientists from Google have been co-teaching the Machine Learning course on NPTEL. And Persistent actually runs the tech platform today while TCS runs the certification exams.

Yes of course, scientists from Google have been co-teaching the Machine Learning course on NPTEL. And Persistent actually runs the tech platform today while TCS runs the certification exams. - Response by Ashwini Sharma, Google Research

Yes Sir! More such collaborations in other courses as well will be really great! Especially in the core engineering courses.

The space is open. NPTEL policies want a professor to be the lead instructor but that co-instructor can be from any organization. It will add a lot of value to the courses. One course called Modern Application Development was being run by Prof Gaurav Raina at IITM in collaboration with a startup.

True Sir. This is really a great way of collaboration being a co-instructor from industry and startups.

1 or 2 credit Value added courses can also be offered jointly by a faculty member and industry professionals.

A wonderful session indeed

Thank you Hemant!

Thank you

Great session. Thanks Dr Hemant and all the distinguished panellists. Thanks.

Thank you. It was a pleasure to be on the panel.

Great Session and thank you

@Hemant P very well moderated.

COMPUTE'20 Feedback Form: https://forms.gle/zh3PbqpGXDsVCXnS8

Feedback for the whole event

Have you compared it with the existing vlabs?

can't hear

Do you have the “proportion” of female participants? I.e. instead of absolute numbers, among the female students enrolled, what percentage participated, among the male students enrolled, what percentage participated ~~ won’t that be a better comparison?

Given that already the enrolments are skewed

The analysis is based on percentages

did you find out the reasons for low female participation

Any analysis on the reasons for the skew?

actually the the number of female students getting enrolled in eng..is much lesser than males ...

COMPUTE'20 Feedback Form: https://forms.gle/zh3PbqpGXDsVCXnS8

Thank You Sir