Set up during the period 1951-63, the IITs were planned to provide a major departure from prevalent methods of engineering instruction and pattern of control to provide ‘creative scientist engineers’, technical leaders with a broad human outlook and individuals with ‘creative initiative in future situations’. The characteristic feature of the undergraduate curriculum at various IITs, notwithstanding significant variations in details, indigenous traditions and conventions, has been a strong emphasis on fundamental principles rather than specialised knowledge. It was recognised that engineering is essentially a creative profession and that engineering curricula evolved through a continuous translation of newer scientific developments into engineering practice.

Emphasis on basic and engineering sciences has been the thrust of the academic programs at IIT Kanpur, ever since its first structured B.Tech. program was adopted in 1964. A striking feature of the first undergraduate program was that the contribution of the departmental courses added to about 35% of the total. Underlying the apparently low percentage of specialised engineering courses was the philosophy that only a strong core program consisting of basic and engineering sciences, technical arts and humanities can provide for a professional engineering training, which is both flexible and adaptable to specialised needs.

The relative space occupied by the core and professional courses in the overall scheme and their mutual integration have, however, been matters of debate and contention through each of the curriculum review exercises, undertaken every ten years. The reduction of the duration of the undergraduate program from five to four years resulted in an erosion of the philosophy emphasising the core program. The core component plus electives, in the four-year program, in the nineties, was of the order of 55% at IIT Kanpur. The ongoing Mallik committee review exercise, without any major deviation from this percentage, proposes to spread the basic science courses all through the four years instead of confining them to the first two years of instruction. The acceptance of basic sciences as co-requisites of engineering, instead of pre-requisites as at the present, marks a major elevation in educational philosophy. It is a reassertion of the fact that, in an environment changing more rapidly than ever before, newer and enlarged engineering endeavour requires continuous and updated foundations in basic sciences. The Mallik Committee, also sets its focus upon strengthening of laboratory courses and the elective choices available to students. Inadequate communication skills in the students is also identified as a matter of concern during the present review.

S.S.Prabhu, in the lead article of this issue of Directions, traces the evolution of the undergraduate curriculum at IIT Kanpur. Sharing concerns common with those of Mallik Committee, he also articulates on the contents of the Engineering Science and Technical Arts components of the curriculum and the continuation of Lectures as our predominant mode of instruction. Pankaj Jalote spells out the imperatives for CSE education and argues for a flexibility in the program which can permit individualisation for a brighter student. In a related article, A.K.Sharma dwells on the need for increased support and a new orientation for the research program in Humanities and Social Sciences.

The previous issue of Directions carried a critique of the JEE by Vijay Gupta. M.R.Madhav, in the present issue says - ‘While we are having major revisions in our curricula every ten years ………….. no such major effort appears to have taken place with regard to the concept and conduct of JEE.’