Robert D. Voldl
and Pawpati Mukeriee2 University of Southern California LOS Angeles,
90007
Correlation of Indian Training with American School Requirements
This article was undertaken to help departmental appointment committees attempting to compare the qualifications of Indian applicants for assistantships with those of U.S.-educated students; individual American professors concerned with the quality of Indian applicants for predoctoral or postdoctoral research fellowshi~s: American Admissions Officers wrestling with the problems of how much credit to allow toward American degrees for work done in India; and interested Indian students or faculty members who may be contemplating coming to the U.S. for further study. The confusing complexity of the problem is evident from the wide variation in practices and the internal inconsistencies in the recommendations made in the various easily available sources of information (1-4). I n the older educational pattern secondary school was usually completed after ten years of total schooling followed by a four year college program to a bachelor's degree, with examinations for the I.Sc. degree (Intermediate in Science) after the first two years. I n the newer emerging system secondary school generally ~~~~~~
This author served as Visiting Professor of Physical Chemistry a t the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, in 195.557 with major responsibility for development of an independent Ph.D. program and for introduction of new fields of research. During this period he also visited many government laboratories and many universities such as Delhi, Madras, Calcutta, Bombay, Poona, Mysore, Annamalai, etc., discussing practices, requirements, and objectives. During the summer of 1965 he served as Science Consultant to an Institute for College Chemistry Teachers held at Jadavpur University under the auspices of the Indian University Grants Commission with American participation funded by the National Science Foundation on a program administered by The Ohio State University. For many years he has served on the departmental Graduste Student Orientation Committee s t the University of Southern California which advises entering graduate students on their first year program. This author received his BSc. (Hons) and MSc. degrees from Calcutta University, and his Ph.D. from the University of Southern California. After one year of postdoctoral work at U.S.C. and two years as Research Associate a t the Brookhaven National Laboratory he returned to India. to accept a posit,ion as Reader in Physical Chemistry at the Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science, Calcutta from 1959 to 1964, where he also served as an Honorary Lecturer to Postgraduate Classes a t Calcutta University. Subsequently, after six months as Guest-Scientist st the van't Hoff Laboratorium in the Netherlands, he returned to the United States and spent two years as a Senior Scientist in the Chemistry Department of the University of Southern California. Presently he is Professor of Pharmaceutical Chemistry a t the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. The text has also been checked for accuracy of the description of the Indian degree program and the meaning of the various degrees and quality ratings by Dr. Hakam Singh. Dr. Singh has served as s. Lecturer at the University of Delhi, a Reader a t Punjabi University, snd most recently ss Assistant Professor at the Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi.
lasts through the eleventh year of total schooling, followed by a three year university program leading directly to a bachelor's degree. The university program, as in England, generally involves concentrated study of a small number of subjects throughout the whole three years as contrasted with the much broader undergraduate curriculum of the American university. To assist in the evaluation of the credentials of Indian students we have collected information on the grading standards, and percentage of students receiving first class and second class degrees, at a number of Indian institutions. We have also assembled data on the performance in graduate work in chemistry at the University of Southern California of a number of students with Indian B.Sc. or BSc. (Hons) or M.Sc. degrees. Needless to say, the different Indian universities differ as widely in the quality of their program as do our own, and frequently even between different colleges affiliated to the same university, even though students may take the same externally set examinations. Table 1. Grading Standards and Grade Distributions at Indian Universities Minimum score (percentage of marks) required f
University
Examination B.Sc. B.Sc. (Hons) M.Sc.
o
r
.*-
Percentage of examination candidates -ILWXP~P~--
1st Class 60 60 60
2nd Class 50 50 50
60 60
48 48
1st Class 19 lo 46
2nd Class 33 44 51
45 lo
20 45
BSc. M.Sc. B.Sc. B.Sc. (Hons)" MSe. BSc. MSc. M.Sc. B.Sc. (Hons) MSe. BSc. MSe. BSc. MSc.
MSc.
fin --
4s
an ..
.so ~
~
Only candidates with a First Class B.Se. degree are admitted to the Honors program in t,hese schools., , The above data refer to t,he universlt~esof Agra, Bangalore, Bombay, Calcutta, Delhi, Lucknow, Madras, Poona, and Rajasthan, but the order of presentation of !he data has been randomized. The aut,hors wish to take t h ~ sapportunlty to thank their Indian colleagues for making these data avadable. a
Volume 46, Number 12, December 1969 / 833
Evaluation of Grades and the Class of the Degree
Statistical information on Indian grades and grade distribution is presented in Table 1. For an undifferentiated B.Sc. degree the percentage of marks is generally calculated as the average of the marlis in all subjects covered in the degree examination, while for the BSc. (Hons) degree the percentage figure shown is usually that of the Honors subject only, provided passing grades have been obtained on the examinations in the subsidiary subjects. Most commonly the percentage of marks required for a First Class degree is 60%, with somewhat more variable requirements for a Second Class, the commonest minimum being in the vicinity of 50y0. The columns showing the percentage of examination candidates who are awarded a First or a Second class demonstrate the difficulty of obtaining a First Class degree and the very small fraction of students who attain this distinction. Considering that the figures given are in terms only of candidates passing the examination at any level, and do not include the many who are failed, it may be fairly stated that the percentage of all entering college students awarded a First Class Honors degree a t the bachelor's level is of the order of 1% to 2%. I n some universities a student with a good Second Class Honors degree with, for example, 58y0 of marks scored in the Honors subject, may still
rank in the upper 10% of the Honors examination candidates, and among the upper 3 to 4% of all college students. In view of the selectivity exercised in admission to the MSc. program, it is not surprising to find a much higher percentage of First Class M.So. degrees than of B.Sc. degrees. However, if the rating has been primarily on the thesis without further advanced course work beyond the B.Sc. level, this in itself may not necessarily be as good an indicator of presumptive success in a United States graduate school as the rating achieved at the B.Sc. level. Performance of Indian Predoctoral Candidates at USC
Over the last sixteen years an appreciable number of Indian students have elected to pursue their higher education in chemistry at the University of Southern California. Data illustrative of their Indian background and their subsequent performance in graduate work in the United States is assembled in Table 2. Although the numbers are too small to be statistically very significant, they are sufficient to allow deduction of a number of conclusions which appear to be reasonably valid. Out of the total of 26 candidates only three have failed so far to earn an America11 Ph.D., either at U.S.C. or elsewhere. Of these only one was actually
Table 2.
Records of Indian Predoctoral Students in Chemistry at U.S.C. Grade Point
A"..
Indian Univ.
1. Bombay 2. Ddhi 3. Calcutts
4. Madras 5. Ddhi 6. Punjab 7. Delhi 8. Punjab 9. Andhra 10. Punjsb 11. Bombay 12. poona 13. C ~ l o u t t a 14. Punjab 15. Punjab 16. osmania 17. Jadavpur 18. Madras 19. Madras Hawaii
20. Punjab Indian Inst. Tech. New Delhi 21. Madras Banaras Hindu 22. Madras
23. Utkal 24. Andhra
25. Madras 26. Madras a
Indian Dssree
Claas Awarded
Date of Entrance
at USC
-Graduate Quant.
Reasonrng
Record ErsmAdvsoced Verbal ~ e s t
. USC non-~~
researoh
gmduats
oredd cour~w
USC Degree earned; date
BSo.
B.&. (Teoh)
B.80. (Hans) MS0. Bso. (Eons)
MSo.
B.sc. (Hons) HSo. (Eons) MSc. B.Sn. (Hona) MSG.(Hons) B.Sc. (Hons) M.S& Bso. (Hons) MSG.(Hons) MSe.
Ph.D.. 1958 PLD., 1957 Ph.D.. 1956
PLD., 1958 Pb.D.. 1958 Ph.D.. 1961 Pb.D., I960
B.Sc. (Hons)
Ph.D.. 1962
BSc. (Hons) MSG.
Ph.D.. 1964 Ph.D. from Wayne univ.. Detroit
MA.
i3.S~. R.So. (Hona) MSG.
M.88. t r s o . (Hone)
MSG.
B.Sc. (Hons) M s c . (Hons) RSc. (Hons) MSG.
II.Sc.
Withdrew from program
ph.D. from Univ. of Wisconsin Ph.D.. 1965 ph.D. from Univ. of Wisoonsin Dis~uslified I n progress
13.so. (Hons) Bso. MSG.(Tech) BSo.
Transierred t o
RSc.
In progress
M.S.
MSG.
Ph.D., 1969
Chem.Engr.
BSo.
I n progreaa
B.So. MSG. nsc. M.Sc. B.SG MSD. n.sc. MSc. u.so.
I n promem
M.Sa.
MSc.
In progress I n progress
I" progress In progress
A, 4: B, 3: C, 2; D, 1
disqualified for inadequate scholarship or inadequate research a h i l i t ~ . ~One transferred to Engineering and one, who already had an Indian Ph.D., concluded that his time in this country would he better spent in advanced research rather than in satisfying the course requirements for an American Ph.D., as had been his original intention. During this same period only about 60% of all students allowed to take our Background Examinations for new graduate students succeeded in passing these examinations, enrolling as regular graduate students, meeting all the requirements, and earning a higher degree. So it is clear that carefully selected Indian applicants with superior records are likely to be successful also in graduate work in the United States, despite the differences in the academic system in the two countries. Many, however, because of the differences in the educational system in the two countries (3, 5), have difficulty initially in adapting to our problem-solving approach to chemistry, and may do poorly on the sort of standard screening examinations given new graduate students. However, after a semester of study in this country, sometimes involving attendance at undergraduate courses, they have generally done well on 8 Since this article was written there was another Indian student who failed the Ph.D. Qualifying. Examination on his second and last attempt despite the fact that he made an adequate record in course work.
examinations of this type on a second attempt. Some comment on the use of the Graduate Record Examination as an aid to predicting success is in order, since this examination is now available world-wide. I n our experience, in the case of all foreign studentsnot Indians alone-the score on the advanced test in chemistry is the most useful indicator in this battery of tests, the score on the quantitative reasoning part of the general test is of some but limited value, while the score on the verbal part of the general test is virtually worthless. That the latter should be the case is really just as might be expected, considering the differences between the Indian. culture and the Anglo-American culture which this part of the test takes for granted, a point which was well made in popular terms in a recent article in Time (6) dealing with Caucasian scores on an I& test with a black rather than white bias. Conversely, in the case of American students, scores on the Advanced Test suffice to identify the obviously inrompetmr but fail to din'errntiatr ndn;u:~tclybetwr;l good : ~ n dpoor :~d~niosil~lr -rudent~. Hrre the Qu:~rititative Reasoning score on the general test seems to be the most significant criterion of the three. But with both foreign and American students v e have found it more valid to place greater emphasis on the transcript record and letters of recommendation, and have found it desirable to utilize departmental screening tests (Entrance Examinations) after arrival of the student at the university. Volume 46, Number 12, December 1969
/
835
Problems of Evaluation
There are two major problems involved in assessing a t what academic level an Indian student coming to the United States should be placed, what educational requirements he should he made to fulfill here, and what credit he can be allowed toward an American degree for work done in India. One is the differencein the nature of the undergraduate curriculum in the two countries, and Che other is the difference in the period of schooling prior to university work, and in the length of time required to earn the bachelor's degree. The average United States undergraduate curriculum is considerably broader, more varied, and less specialized than its Indian counterpart. Hence, if an Indian student is accepted a t the undergraduate level as a candidate for an American bachelor's degree it is likely that he will have to make up some deficiencies, even if he is given formal credit for his years of university work in India. However, we are not concerned primarily with placement at the undergraduate level, since most Indian students of chemistry come to this country for advanced training at the graduate level. The problem at the graduate level is more invoIved, and requires a philosophical decision. As a result of the intensive specialization in chemistry, physics, and mathematics or related sciences during the three year period required for earning an Indian B.Sc. degree on the new system, such a student may be entirely adequately prepared to commence graduate work in the United States with no additional undergraduate worlc. However, he may well he lacking experience with some of the general subjects found in the American undergraduate curriculum. So the question arises as to whether, in cases such as this, t,he student should be required to make up undergraduate deficiencies in subjects other than those needed for competent graduate worlc in chemistry, such as social sciences or history. I t would seem reasonable that the answer to this question should be in the negative, since his undergraduate background is acceptable in his own environment, the advanced degree he earns in this country is essentially a demonstration of professional competence rather than of unspecialized general education, and he is made to satisfy all the requirements for the American Ph.D. If this view is accepted, then the chief concern of the American graduate department is to determine (1) whether the student is sufficiently well prepared in chemistry, physics, mathematics, and English to undertake graduate work in chemistry successfully, (2) whether, in the case of students with MSc. degrees, any of their advanced courses or research experience are equivalent to similar courses as given at the American university, and (3) to what extent graduate credit toward the American Ph.D. can be aIIotted for graduate worlc done in India for the Indian M.Sc. degree. Here recommendations and practices differ widely. The official recommendations (1) of the Council on Evaluation of Foreign Student Credentials, meeting in 1962, propose that Indian students with a 3-yr B.Sc. degree beyond the Higher Secondary School certificate not be admitted to graduate study in the United States or, if allowed to bypass the American bachelor's degree, that they be required to make up all important background and foundation courses before becoming candidates for an American M.S. or Ph.D. degree. From the 836
/
Journal of Chemical Education
standpoint of preparation to undertake graduate work in his professional field such a recommendation is nonsensical, since the student may well have studied far more chemistry in his Indian three year program than our students in their four year program. I n the case of Indian students with M.Sc. degrees this same report (1) goes on to recommend that placement as first year graduate students with no advanced credit should bc the norm, on the grounds that the M.Sc. program tends ". . .to supplement the generally too-short Indian hachelor's degree and to round out the undergraduate major," even though the report itself recognizes that the M.Sc. curriculum frequently consists of a single subject area. Here again these recommendations do not make much sense so far as chemistry is concerned. An Indian student who takes an additional one or two years of advanced course work beyond his B.Sc. degree, if he comes from a good university, may well have studied the same advanced material from the same graduate text book as a beginning American graduate student, particularly in view of the considerable number of Indo-American joint ventures in education in the last fifteen years. Thus we have found in specific cases that certain Indian students could be exempted from such graduate courses as Chemical Thermodynamics or Introduction to Molecular Spectroscopy, since informal examination disclosed that they had already covered similar material in India and had acquired a sufficient grasp of the subject. I n such cases it is difficult to understand a policy which would give no transfer graduate credit for such work. In corroboration of this view Dr. Farrington Daniels adds a suggestion to Admissions Officers near t.he end of the guide (1) to the effect that an Indian i\t.Sc. from one of the good universities or institutes of technology may be a better degree than the average United States master's degree, and that American students in general receive a broader training than do Indian students but not necessarily a better one. Probably the best solution is to adopt a flexible policy with respect to transfcr graduate credit toward an American Ph.D. degree for graduate work done for the Indian A"I.Sc. degree. The amount of transfer credit to he allowed might well be determined in terms of the Indian student's performance on the Screening or Entrance or Background Examinations commonly given new graduate students at American universities, or perhaps better yet, on the adequacy of his performance in American advanced courses during the first semester or the first year of his graduate work here. The other problem, not in itself so involved, but capable of causing grcat difficultyfor clerical personnel in Offices of Admission, has to do with the normal length of schooling in India and the United States. I n this country there are normally twelve years of school to high school graduation, although bright children frequently "skip" grades, and may complete the program in ten or eleven years. This is then followed normally by four years of university study to the B.S. degree. I n India the emerging pattern is eleven years of schooling to complete the secondary school (high school) with the examination leading to the Higher Secondary School Certificate. The BSc. or B.Sc. (Hons) degree can then bc earned with three additional years of university education. Hence, to
those who merely count numbers without regard to content, the temptation is strong to conclude that the Indian student with a BSc. degree should be admitted to Junior standing as an undergraduate, since his total years of schooling are likely to be the same as those of the normal United States student who has completed only two of the four years of university work required for the American bachelor's degree. I t is this same approach which leads to the recommendation that the Indian student with an M.Sc. degree he admitted to graduate standing but with no transfer graduate credit, on the reasoning that the additional two years of graduate work in India for the M.Sc. degree then gives such an Indian student the same number of years of total schooling as the normal United States student with a B.S. degree who has never skipped a grade or participated in an accelerated program. In view of what has already been said concerning the subject content of the Indian undergraduate and graduate curriculum, it should be obvious that this method of evaluation, at least at the graduate level, is not likely to be reliable. The point should be not how long the student has attended school but what he has learned. I t would seem far more reasonable with respect to graduate work in chemistry to accept the Indian B.Sc.
or BSc. (Hons) degree with high standing as presumptive evidence of the fulfillment of the requirement of an undergraduate major for purposes of admission as a graduate student, determining the exact level of placement in the program by examination after the arrival of the student in this country. Similarly, Indian students with graduate worlc in India might well be given appropriate graduate credit in the American university, provided they can demonstrate the quality of their preparation either by examination or by satisfactory performance in advanced course worlc at the American university. Literature Cited (1)
(2) (3)
WILLARD,F. M., "A Study of the Educationd System of India and Guide to the Academic Placement of Students from India in United States InstituLions." World Education Series, 1964. VOLD,R. D., J . CHEM.EDUC.,35,522 (1958). BRASTED, R. C., J . CHEM.EDUC.,42, 358 (1965); 42, 632 (196.5~. - - - - ,. "Chernistryin Indian Universities," Report of the University Grants Commission Review Committee, University Grants Commission, Msthura Road, New Delhi, 1963. HAFNER, E. M., P h y a i ~ sToday, 2 0 , [ti], 44 (1967). Time Magazine, July 12, 1968, p. 40. \
(4) (5) (6)
Volume 46, Number 12, December 1969
/
837
