Raghav – Quincy Jones http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fS8b5Zf-Prc

Its got such as spanish theme going to it, luving it !!!

Thanks for the link!

Finally, in the 70s one would have been hard put to find institutions of the caliber of Jadavpur or JNU or D-School in a comparable developing country.

May be true. But still, I don’t know how much of that caliber is attributable to the vision of the administration (as opposed to the individual research efforts of some faculty + the selected student population).

Oil Benefits to Texas Higher Education

Many thousands of students attending Texas universities have benefited from oil. The boon that they have enjoyed began with Mirabeau B. Lamar, known as the “Father of Texas Education.” During his tenure as president of the Republic of Texas, he urged the Texas Congress to appropriate public domain to support education. In 1839, the Congress set aside 50 leagues (221,400 acres) of land for the endowment of a university. (Land was also set aside in a separate endowment for public elementary and secondary schools.) In 1858, the university endowment was increased to 1 million acres, with the stipulation that the endowment be good agricultural land.

However, the writers of the Constitution of 1876 evidently felt there was no need to appropriate arable land for an as-yet-nonexistent university. The first million acres in the endowment were located in Schleicher, Crockett, Terrell, Pecos, Upton, Reagan and Irion counties in arid far-west Texas.

When the University of Texas opened in 1883, the legislature added a second million acres in Andrews, Crane, Culberson, Dawson, Ector, El Paso, Gaines, Hudspeth, Loving, Martin, Ward and Winkler counties. The fledgling university was backed by an endowment of a vast amount of land of extremely dubious value.

Around the turn of the century, the University’s Bureau of Economic Geology began exploring the possibility of finding oil and gas on University Lands. In 1916, although most other geologists disagreed, the University’s Dr. Johan A. Udden reported that oil could be found lying atop an underground fold of rock that was believed to run from the Marathon area through Pecos County and into Upton and Reagan counties.

Though erroneous, Udden’s theory led to the first major oil discovery in the West Texas Permian Basin. The Santa Rita No. 1, discovery well of the Big Lake Field, blew in on May 28, 1923, in Reagan County. It was drilled on University Lands by Frank Pickerell and Carl G. Cromwell of Texon Oil and Land Company.

Within a year, there were 17 producing wells in the Big Lake Field, and the University of Texas was on its way to becoming a very wealthy school. …………..

.……the article continues………..

This is something you cannot do every where. The history of US lends itself to an unique opportunity.

Thanks for the info! Can you please share any reference?

In India, the land could be earmarked. Vision drives practice.

I understand that these universities gather money from their respective hinterlands. But, it is also true that big scale fund raising goes on in the US universities from private parties. I remember reading on CNN that Cornell has just started off a campaign to raise $ 4 billion. That’s a modest Rs. 18,000 crores. Columbia and Stanford are eyeing similar numbers. The number of fund raising staff at Cornell was close to 120, and the ‘star’ fundraisers’ salary was $ 2,00,000 or more.

We know from Dutta and Robinson that Tagore also raise funds (I think Amardeep wrote about it), Vivekananda also did. Capital is indeed important. Ask Gurukant Desai.

Recently Calcutta University received a grant of a paltry Rs.100 crore in its 150th anniversary year.

US Universities is a product of a very wealthy nation. Land, sea, and air grant just means that their funding at the state level is appropriated through revenues from land, sea, air. Broadly speaking, it is revenues from tax payer’s money. A land grant has money appropriated from revenues from land of that state – namely farming, etc. Historically, then they (Unis) would then have serious outreach for people who funded them (local people). A land grant Uni. would have departments related to land based economy of that state. A sea grant would cater to sea-based economy of coastal states. These are state Universities who appropriate their funds to education as they see fit, and beneficial to their state. Texas A & M and UT Austin own oil wells in Texas that were appropriated to them 100s of years ago by the State. A private University like, Cornell U. has shares in diamond mines in South Africa.

However, the bulk of research in US Universities are done through Federal grants, be it private or public, and they have nothing to do with their classification (land, sea, air) but their infrastructure, personal, and grantsmanship potential.

Indian U. are also funded by tax payers money in a similar manner (state funding/ DST (Department of Science and Technology)/ local concerns and all) – the kitty is orders of magnitude smaller – that is where whole the difference shows up. Research requires money, lots of money.

IITs are modeled on MIT. In fact, even to the syllabi level, again difference in the wealth of the nation. IIT (Kanpur) and IIT (Kharagpur) had a lot of input from US through PL 480/ Ford Foundation grants, especially at their birth.

So, Infosys owes it to Bhaskara! And this dork thought Infosys owes it to the liberalization and the tenacity of its founder team.

Another gem: “IT is a hugely interactive operation and in many ways Indian IT has depended on what we can call TI, that is, “talkative Indians.” So the more you talk, the more you get better at coding!

The US had its land grant universities as early as 1862, and Nehru could have learnt some lessons from that initiative (he had close to 85 years of history to learn from) to start India-wide institutions. And we know that not much research gets done at the IITs and IIMs; they are mostly a ticket to prosperity. The excellent US universities spread all over this country make me immensely envious. Everyday I note down the practices that catch my eye. The lack of it in India only frustrates. We missed that opportunity in independent India’s formative years. The lesser said about Nehru, the better.

Ram Guha had a good article in The Telegraph few days ago. There are no good quality journals, and talkative Indians seldom take action. Even for sustaining debates, you need institutions that will make sure the argumentation continues (example – Sepia Mutiny). Sadly, those who are known to be master arguers, have not created any such institution in India. The challenge as I see it, is to break free from text. The West knows it. They harp on things that matter – architecture that inspires, infrastructure, institutions and discussions amongst talkative Indians degenerate into text, and the esoteric. Tagore did. Vivekananda did. That was sincerity, not mere argumentation.

Now that that’s out of the way — just a few days ago, Deep, Ami and I were interviewed at AVS and one of the questions we all were asked was whether the community should support the artists within it. That question is quite profound at this point where media-shaped perception impacts and will continue to impact our and our children’s daily lives in both subtle and major ways.

The MTV Desi issue fits in two ways -

1. Recycling content is not the way to reach the audience here. Companies see it as a cheap way to get in, but it’ll fail. Companies should be ready to spend the money to support the voices emerging from within the communities here to garner and earn the interest of the communities here. Did MTV do that when it created MTV Desi? Not really. I think they put out a shoestring budget and expected it to just fly (or it was a smart loss-leader campaign for what will definitely become viable online properties)

2. Now, whether the community should go out and spend dollars to prop up a commercial venture that is targetted to them is a trickier question — but one that we must consider. Your answer might vary on whether you believe there is a connection between media and your own daily life. I believe we should support voices that show our own selves through the eyes of our artists – good, bad and ugly. I’m not saying the community is obligated to pay for this — but I do believe the community should atleast consider supporting this, and should most certainly avoid buying pirated product or renting illegal VHS bootlegs for heavens sake!

Sorry if my comments seem tangential, they are all well-connected in my head, believe me. But its late. I’m tired. And I’m off to bed!

Ciao! Nikhil

But you have to be blind to not see the amazing strides it’s making.

As for you people who claim that India’s growth “excludes all but the ultra rich”, take a look at this little statistic:

CHINA – Richest 1 percent of population owns 60 percent of the wealth USA – Richest 5 percent of population owns 60 percent of the wealth INDIA – Richest 10 percent of population owns 53 percent of the wealth

Take a look at the GINI index. India has less wealth disparity than US, China, Mexico, and Brazil.

Disparity will increase (obviously), but the wealth will trickle down. Take a look at America. Read a history book, the United States of America had the EXACT same situation (if not worse) during the Gilded Age. That era in US history is characterized by economic growth, growing wealth disparity, and widespread corruption. Sound familiar? It’s called a future world power.

Thank god I never paid for a channel that shows such an ignorant, narrow view of India. He literally said that you shouldn’t be proud to be Indian (based on extremely weak arguments). And I can’t believe that he compared India with the rest of South Asia. The chances of India “falling apart” are VERY low. According to a number of western studies (foreign policy magazine, fund for peace, cia, etc), India is far, far more stable than every South Asian country, Middle Eastern country, Latin american country, African country and even China.

So before you guys embark on your little “India hate rants”, take a look at the facts. And remember, I’m not saying that India is currently the world’s only super power, I’m saying that it is pretty much guaranteed an excellent future.

Here’s one fact I like to leave with people who seem to be blind to the fact that India’s is growing:

1950 – Life expectancy of the average Indian = 32 years 2007 – Life expectancy of the average Indian = 65 years