Hacker News Reader

I think the part that really makes this story stand out to me is the fact that even the ones who make it into this prestigious program don't actually wind up in some top echelon. The article says they find the skill gap between what the industry wants and what they have studied is too big.

It heavily implies that. The story says "Despite all the hard work engineering students put in, a survey conducted in 2019 found that 80 per cent of engineers “are not fit for any job in the knowledge economy and only 2.5 per cent of them possess technical skills in Artificial Intelligence (AI) that industry requires”."

But if you follow the link it goes here: https://www.businesstoday.in/current/corporate/indian-engine...

That story is about engineers in general, not IIT graduates specifically. It seems disingenuous to highlight the exceptional efforts required to become an IIT graduate yet downplay graduates' post-graduation prospects by referring to engineers in general.

It seems to me that the problem is what these students should be the "best" at.

Taking tests and learning academic material? They appear to be super successful. Being able to navigate the world of business and working with other people? Well, they aren't learning all the soft skills and life experience they need.

I see this partially as a failure of the metrics used for acceptance. Social skills and other activities are important to the success of an individual, and they should be measured as such when considering who to accept.

The academic institution is in the business of teaching. Its job is not to try and predict who will end up being the highest earner. It is arguably to pick students who have demonstrated that they want to and are able to study. Social skills and other activities are almost completely irrelevant, unless they relate to the chosen field of study.

> You could write a similar story about pro athletes probably,

That's my question too. When it comes to studying, "toil" is a four-letter word for American people. Oh, you study too hard. Oh you have a lost childhood. Oh solving math problems is not FaIr to other kids, for it shadows the true talent.

But when it comes to sports? Oh man, the tone totally changes. "Toil" is da word! Mileage matters! If you train hard, you get better results! Have you seen LA of 4am in the morning? Do you know the kid next door trains 5 hours every day, and breaks his bones at least 3 times and still does not give up? Mommy wants you to know the story of whoever practicing free throws a thousand times a day. Daddy will use all the retirement savings to hire a coach of this bullshit sport that you would never make it to the top of, but hey don't be like that Asian family who spend all their money hiring science tutors even though their kids will have a decent chance of becoming a good engineer.

What a nation of hypocrisy

I think part of the difference here is that it’s easier to accept something like sports as a true passion where as grinding and studying to be able to answer arbitrary test questions isn’t. I think that’s why people look at a kid spending all day studying music, art, chess, and honestly even math, science or programming as kids being kids with passions. Yes they both involve work but cramming for tests to try and get into a good school probably seems much more like capital W work as opposed to the sort required for a true passion.

The comparison to pro athletes is apt, although a key difference here is that it isn't taboo to tell an otherwise good amateur athlete that they probably won't make it to the big leagues. So you don't have millions of kids every year sacrificing their lives in pursuit of pro sports.

Try telling an Indian parent to drop their kid out of school in grade 9 to join a cricket camp full time. But doing it for IIT is totally acceptable.

A lot of amateur athletes wind up forced out due to injury or other things outside their control (parent divorces, stuff like that) too.

It's not even being "at the top". Ultimately the difference in education in high-quality institutions just isn't really that big. And while it's true that it is a useful signal that you're sufficiently dedicated to study something deeply for a few years, the correlation between actual success or utility outside of that just doesn't seem to make it worth much.

> It's not even being "at the top"

It seems to me that the kids pursuing it think it will take them to the top. I don't think anyone works that hard and sacrifices everything for a shot at being mediocre.

Kids do not usually have a well-formed idea of what exactly actually takes you places and what is merely tradition and formalities.