92% or A+

A revolutionary change to the Indian education system has taken place with the elimination of the class Xth board exams for the central education system. It is being considered as a partial fulfillment by the HRD ministry under the first 100 day agenda set by the new government installed in India after its thumping victory earlier this year. The first question which arises in everyone’s mind is- how will students be evaluated ? and the answer is just 6 letters- A+,A,B,C,D or E. Yes, the life of a student now will be dictated not by percentage but by grades; grades which will be a representation of a student’s demeanor, knowledge and co-curricular activities- in short his/her overall development.

Over the years many attempts have been made to revamp the current education system, from compulsory primary education, to free education for the economically backward segment of the society to restructuring the education curriculum. As commendable as these efforts might be, somewhere down the lane they encountered speed breakers and road blocks which stalled the effort. It will be looked at anxiously next year, when this new effort by the government is implemented across India.

As a norm of physics, every action has a reaction and as much as the government tries to market this reform positively it will have its initial (hopefully) negative implications. Looking at the positives of this reform, it was intended to – ‘de-traumatize’ the current education system and reduce the pressure and stress on students. The thought of an examination bring shrills down the spines of many students and add to this the word BOARD, and imagine the state of the students. I am sure many of us can relate to this having been there a decade ago. Replacing the timely examinations with continuous evaluations of students during the course of the academic year is a step in the right direction. Students will be judged on their overall performance in course, sports and classroom interactions. This gives an opportunity for those reticent first bencher's to learn to express themselves and put aside their introvert characters. This measure also gives way for the athlete to gain credentials by excelling in an area he/her is comfortable with. A creatively gifted individual who previously had the opportunity to expressive his talents only during the stipulated 45 min of class period, can now utilize this creativity throughout the course of the academic year to gain extra credits. Overall, it does not matter anymore if you know complex chemical reactions or understand quantum physics or know all the countries capital, but more about how do you express and utilize the knowledge you pose to understand. Under the continuous evaluation criteria, students will be able to apply their learning’s thought practical assessments, which I personally believe is a better way of learning that sitting on a hard wooden bench for 6 hours listening to a monotonic lecture. This process of evaluation also allows the flexibility of setting up a progressive curriculum where every stage of evaluation is inter-connected. That is to say, a curriculum is split into 4 phases where the teaching of phase 1 will be required to understand and apply the concepts of phase 2 and an understanding of phase 1 and 2 is required to progressive into phase 3 and 4. With this process, a comprehensive evaluation at the end of the academic year is eliminated reducing the burden on students. At every phase of the evaluation a student will have a better understanding of his/her strong points, resulting in a comprehension of their interests and passion. Who knows, we might see a reluctant engineer become a journalist, a confused doctor become an actor etc. For every contemporary student the end result of an examination is getting a high percentage, whether it is by studying long hours before the exam, memorising every word in the text book or even spending time writing those illegal resources on transparent papers, or post-its etc. But now with the word examination eliminated till the 10th grade, students will spend more understanding concepts rather than mugging them and practicing rather than writing their 'secretive notes'. I have come across many, and at time also guilty of memorizing the contents of a book and outputting it on the answer sheet without an iota of reasoning to what was being written. As they used to call it in school- garbage in garbage out! Over all I see this reform bringing about many positive changes in the education system which not only involves the school board but also teachers, students and parents.

On the flip side, this reform measure has its dark patches which need to be addressed before active implementation. One big issue which I see is the disparity in grade allocation for respective score percentages. Under this new system the interval between minimum and maximum for a grade is considered irrational. A student scoring 90% and 99% are under the same grade bracket of A+. I believe that this disparity must be reduced to a small range introducing intermediate grades. In this day and age, every student knows the value of 1% and is ready to put that extra effort to earn that percentage, but with this grading system, the 1% is now changes to 10% which is inversely proportional to the effort and competitive spirit of a student. This concern also has a conjunctive relation to the admissions process where a decimal difference can make or break a student’s chances of admission into a reputed institution. Where will the institutions draw a line now? If there are 50 seats in an institution and the admission criteria is set to grades higher than A, what will the institution do if they get 150 A+ applicants? Where is the infrastructure for these 150 applicants? Digging deeper, if the institutions decide to take up an elimination process by conducting an examination, what’s the purpose of having the grading system? Something for the ministry and institutions to think about! Moving on to other concerns, consider a student who opts out of the 10th board but due to unforeseen circumstances has to relocate and to his misfortune the best institute in the region accepts only scores secured during a board exams for admission. Where will the student go now? The very fact that this reform has not been communized between different educational boards will hamper the flexibility we enjoyed of changing schools after our 10th grade. One factor which I fear the most is personal vendetta and favoritism between a teacher and a student or to put is subtly, discrepancy in evaluation. Internal assessment gives way for personal vendetta and favoritism towards a student to be settled during evaluation. The disparity of what a teachers thinks is worth a high grade may change between teachers from a neighboring class or even a neighboring school. A school in a small town might not have all the facilities to evaluate the performance of a student as par as a school in a big city. Where did reasoning for communizing the education system go now?

As much as we draw pros and cons on this reform, the silver lining lies on the fact that a step in the right direction was perceived and implemented. Parents, students and teachers are crying out loud for a change in the system, but I rather look at a revamp of the system. Today’s young India is competitive, dynamics and hungry for success which is recognised and appreciated all around the world. Now wonder President Obama compares the intellect of Indian students with those from his own back yard, while talking of a educational revamp in America. Any future reform intended should be perceived, with these qualities continuing to remain as an integral part of our education.

Disoriented

A day will come when every social network will have the options: straight, bi-sexual, gay or lesbian! Or even the options male, female or transgender! In view of the current progressive global revolution for the LGBT's, many counties around the world are easing their law against same sex relationships. Recently 3 major states in United States legalised gay marriages, in India the Delhi high court decriminalised homosexuality. Many gay activist considered this as a move in the right direction. It is really a right move? Is this what some hand full of people in world were waiting for to throw the skeletons out of their closets?

These verdicts showed two sides of a coin in the global community. One who came out in the streets in jubilation and the other who came out in the streets pushing these skeletons back into the closet. Lets trying getting into their shoes and view each aspect from their side of the coin.

Lets talk about the jubilant group who finally can say it out loud that they are gay and gay. For years we have heard stories about LGBT's and their secret clan. The secretive gay clubs, the close door affairs etc were treated as taboo for many years. Once considered as a underground society has now risen to the surface and are walking 'hand in hand'. A society comprising of people like any one of us with a distinct difference of sexual preference. People who share similar emotions, experience similar pain, talk, walk, eat like any one of us, but still over the years have been considered as outcasts. Why the difference? just because they express their affection differently, just because a guy will look at a guy differently, a girl rubs the back of other girls. All species on the face of this earth have their own unique way to express their affection. We have fought many a times discrimination's against color, nations, caste and language, but somewhere, we not only overlooked but also continued the silent discrimination against LGBT's. Today in many countries they have been given the right to speak up, voice their opinion, start a family, and also participate in governing elections. We walk down the busy streets of New York, Chicago, London, Paris, Bangalore, Mumbai, Hong Kong, Tokyo and Sydney but are never able to distinguish people based on their sexual orientation. These people are not different in any ways from us, but we still treat them as outcasts, look at them in disgust and poke fun of them. We have voiced our concern when housing societies discriminate based on caste and religion, but continue to refuse leasing or selling houses to people of varied sexual preferences. Where did the voice against discrimination go now ? Religious and ethnic groups cry foul when they are depicted differently in feature films but these very people laugh till their stomach hurt on gays being depicted comically. Where did the sense of sensitivity go ? Governments and political parties carry out demonstrations and exhibit their physical strength to express their views on protectionism towards local citizens, but stay muted when a local is axed from his/her job purely based on sexual preference? Where did the objective of protectionism towards your own people fade away now ? Would we act the same if one of our own- a friend, a brother or a sister confessed of their orientation? Would we outcast them, would be make fun of them? For decades these people have lived silently in love and pain among us hoping that one day they to can walk arm in arm with their loved one without the fear of being a social outcast.

For many it it still very hard to understand the logic of being attracted to the same sex and this cognitive challenge has formed the second face of the coin. From the time homosexuality came to the forefront, many religious clans have considered it against the will of God. Their argument stand that, God made a man and a women for a particular reason, so going against Gods creation was considered a taboo and a sin. Today many Christian, Islamic, Hindu and other religious bodies in the world are fighting against this unnatural turn of events. Many are even calling this a plague effecting the balance of nature. On a religious point of view, God speaks of progression in living beings by the uniting a male and a female. This basic principle is destroyed among LGBT's who cannot carry forward their progression defying both science and religion by natural means. Socially, the relationship between a man and a women has always been considered as an accepted norm and an inherent part of life. Biologically a X and Y chromosome can pair with each other or with itself but when these chromosomes take the human form this simple concept does not jive with science or nature. So, what do these STRAIGHT people have a problem with, apart from causing imbalance in the course of nature? Can we be ever comfortable in the presence of a LGBT? Can be allow out children to school or college knowing that his teacher or instructor is a gay or lesbian, without the fear of them being an influence on the child? Can we be comfortable working with a colleague who confesses to be a homosexual and expresses his friendship physically with a pat on the back or a hug? Will we be comfortable when a gay or lesbian friend asks you for dinner or lunch purely with a platonic intention? Over all it creates a very awkward atmosphere for both sections of society where one tries to accept and the other tries to respect one's sentiments.

As we all try walk this tender line, balancing natures principle and modern practicality, I tried to flip the coin and analyze in my own way what all the ruckus is from both sides. At the end its how you and I perceive the debate between being straight and accepting homosexuality and being homosexual and living under the shadow of heterosexuals. We all live under one huge umbrella held by our creator and irrespective of our religion, caste, ethnicity, language and sexuality, we have to continue to live together to make this place called earth work.

"Reality" Bite : Part-2

The affinity to reality shows was overshadowing the mundane daily soaps. This pandemic as I put it started from the prime time hit Kaun Banega Crorepathi an adaptation of the famous American shows Who Wants To Be a Millionaire. India found a new reason to be glued to the television Monday through Thursday, watching people being asked questions for thousands of dollars (lakhs of rupees) by none other than Amitab Bachchan. This initiated a deluge of game shows based on similar format.

Over the years, Indian television was flooded with channels and reality shows. Shows like MTV Roadies, Iss Jungle Se Mujhe Bachao (I am a celebrity.. get me out) where people and celebrities are asked to perform outrageous tasks for money and were challenged mentally and physically for monetary rewards catapulted the ratings. Shows like Indian Idol, Sa re ga ma, India’s Got Talent etc opened new doors for people like you and me to show our talent. Shows like Big Brother (originally also called Big Brother) and Khatharo Ke Khiladi ( Fear Factor) have given forgotten cinema and television personalities to come back on the small screen and stake a claim for revival.

Recently one more adaptation of a famous American reality shows called The Moment of Truth was introduced to the ever eager Indian audience called Sacch Ka Samana, where celebrities and the aam admi ( common people) come on the show and face a lie detector test. A scary thought for many but to my surprise this show has already spurred so many controversies. The most interesting one which provoked me to write this blog was a cry from the house of the parliament, which is being assembled for the Budget session and debate.... yes budget, but somewhere somehow our dear politicians wanted to debate on the acceptability of such a show on Indian television. Their allegations stand as mentioned: Anti-Indian, instigate infidelity and foul behavior, has sexual content, against Indian culture and unethical!!! Now, beat this, the government has accepted to debate on this topic and has slapped a show cause notice on the television channel broadcasting the show.

Are our politicians going to decide what we are and we are not supposed to watch? Where were these representatives when they aired shows like Big Brother and Khatharo Ke Khiladi where people are asked to eat insects and kill animals as part of their task, where contestants men and women were made to live under the same roof for months while the nations watches their every move. Where were the sentiments of ethics and culture when celebrities in Big Brother were physically bonding (if you know what I mean) and physically abusing others participants. What about the foul languages and derogatory statements made in such shows? Aren’t such acts against our culture and instigating foul behavior among the viewers? No one in the parliament said anything when one of their own, a popular Mahasrashtrian politician participated in one of these shows? They do not cry foul when a married man takes part in a televised swayamwara of t a controversial item girl? Isn’t that promoting infidelity? Why such hypocrisy when it comes to this new show?


Where did these politicians go when various english and regional channels were screening feature films containing sexual content, infidelity etc. Where did they go when fashion networks were broadcasting provocative shows with skinny pale skin models walking the ramp with minimal clothes? Where did these politicians go when American soap operas, which are based on deceit, infidelity and sex, were telecasted in the afternoon for the entertainment of home makers? Wasn’t that exposing the Indian nari (women) to anti-Indian culture? They speak about having regulated viewing and time table for certain shows based on their censor rating. I wasn’t aware that our notion of anti-culture and anti-Indian changes based on the hour of the day. Why now that our representatives want to bite into our pie?

I believe in this day and age you, me and all the parents are responsible enough to be aware of the contents in a television show. We are well prepared to face the realities of life and own responsibilities to our actions. I would rather have my parents tell me what to watch and what not to rather than the Babu’s in Delhi. What is wrong in people coming on television to tell the truth? What is wrong if they want to make some money in the bargain of may be being publicly humiliated? It was their personal choice to stand up in front of billions of people and wash their dirty linen.


Are we so scared to tell the truth, when one of the founding pillars of our nations is Sathya Mai Vijay. A nation which boosts of following Gandhi's principles is governed by politicians who are afraid to face the truth. I wonder if any politician will dare to sit on the hot seat and be under the lie detector and prove that we are not a nation of cowards and liars. We are not a nation with skeletons in the closest. We are not a nation who are afraid of facing the reality and own responsibilities for our mistakes.

"Reality" Bite : Part-1

Post Ramayan and Hum Log era, Indian television has undergone transformations in leaps and bounces. In the early nineties, having channels DD1 and DD2 were considered a luxury. I remember my childhood days when every Saturday and Sunday I sat in front of the television to watch He-Man, Mahabharat, the afternoon regional movie and the evening Bollywood movie. The shrill sound from the rainbow colored screen on DD1 and the Hindustani music telecasted as a mark of respect for two days after the death of an eminent political leader were considered synonymous with Indian television. As I see it today, television was considered innocent. Limited and watchable programming lured us to the television screen every week slowly becoming a part of our mundane life.

The late nineties experienced the introduction of satellite television, opening the flood gates for more than a dozen channels. From an univision programming of news, soap operas, epic series and movies we moved to specific viewership format, where each category of programming had its own channel. With time the epic series and regional movies on weekends were taken over by daily soaps; the Kahani Ghar Ghar Ki and the Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi. The innocence was being lost by shows depicting family feuds, vendetta, murder, horror, infidelity and excessive emotions. What's surprising is that the TRP's were at their highest during this period. Gone were the days of Nukkad, a simple and joyful tale dealing with the struggles of the youth to make a living in a harsh social and economically challenging environment. We related to characters of Kadar Bhai, Dhukia, Khopadi, Ganpath Hawaldar and many more, who played real life character, who had real life problem and expressed real life emotions.

The dawn of the 21st century again brought about a big transformation to television in India. It bought in the MTV culture, which captivated the youth of the nation and exposed it to the vast pool of music, fashion and celebrities. India as a whole was undergoing a revolutionary transformation in every field, from science, sports, commerce to fashion. People were slowly getting exposed to western culture through television and print media. Television show anchors underwent a lingual switch from Hindi to English. Daily soaps had moved from crowded society locations to villas. Actors and actresses were traveling in Mercedes and BMW’s with their cycles, bus passes and rickshaws stored in some far away abandoned warehouse. The traditional Indian attire was replaced with D&G, Armani and other famous Indian fashion houses. On a whole the colors of Indians television had shifted from black and white to high definition!

This high definition society was flaunting its new avatar (identity) to the world. International programs and news made us more aware of our surrounding. Kids spoke fluent English thanks to cartoon network, a young techi was accustomed to the British and American accent thanks to Friends and Yes Minister and a home maker decorated her shack into a palace thanks to teleshopping networks and home keeping programs. These are just few of the examples how the transformation of television in India changed the face of the country. All these changes were welcomed with open arms with few cries of hypocrisy. Until……………..

"What's In The Name"

62 years after Independence we are still fixated to one parivar, the Gandhi parivar. India's obsession to this family has grown in recent year under the rule of the congress at the center and most states throughout India. The Gandhi parivar after independence has given many famous personalities from Jawaharlal Nehru to Sonia Gandhi. Admissibly these personalities have shaped India's future and are considered iconic figures of the Indian political system. But does this give their political party and family the right to consider themselves as the first family of India or to be even more caustic, the monarch of India's politics?

The obsession to name renowned institutions, roads, airports and structural landmarks on famous personalities has been abused by many political parties. Statues have been erected and roads have been renamed by every new government to symbolize their significance and dominance. A situation has come where such acts of dedications are no more a privilege but a symbol of pride.

Recently in Mumbai, the Bandra-Whorli seal link was inaugurated after being conceptualized in 1962 and tendered in 2000. Under the congress government in the state, the bridge was named .. guess what ? .... Rajiv Gandhi Sethu !! One more dedication to the late Rajiv Gandhi. Just a year back the ruling party in Andhra Pradesh had named the new international airport ... again .... Rajiv Gandhi International Airport. After some research , I found out that there are two airports under that same name. Added to this there are technical institutions, universities, a cancer research center under his name. Such similar examples can be found under the name of Jawahlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi .

We cannot blame only one political party for abusing such a tribute. Recently, the queen of dalith has erected 7 statues of herself including a new 18 ft statue around 100ft pillars. The Marata-Hindu party in Maharashtra have also misused the name game for their benefits by changing development program names which reflect their contributions. Overnight change in roads names to their icons, the mighty Marata ruler Shivaji and the renowned freedom fighter Veer Savarkar shows examples of the importance given to name games to express ones prevalence and significance in the eyes of the citizens.

Today this very caucus cries foul for naming the Bandra-Whorli sea link after the late prime minister. What is their alternative ?.... Veer Savarkar sethu !! Can we ever look at the big picture ? Why cannot we just name it Bandra-Whorli Sea Link, Sea Necklace or Mumbai Bridge (suggested by a friend). We dont see famous monuments like the Golden Gate Bridge or the London Bridge named Clinton bridge or Princess Diana Bridge! If a dedications has to be made for this bridge in Mumbai, why not in the name of someone who relates and is acceptable to the nation.. why not to the mortars of Mumbai terror attack ? Why not the iconic Sachin Tendulkar who himself hails from Mumbai ? Why do we have to politicise everything ?

This structural monument is a dedication to the technological advancement of India in infrastructure development and politicizing such a monument will lose the essence of its purpose and importance. As Shakespeare had once said : " what's in a name?- Where Juliet tell Romeo that a name is an artificial and meaningless convention" This one line encapsulates the struggle and tragedy of the famous play which reflects the similar struggle to overcome India's fixation and political prejudice towards names.

British Raj (1947) - License Raj (1990) - Quota Raj (????)

Over the years India has been successful in overcoming different raj’s , from the British to the license raj. But one which has damped India’s effort towards understanding the real meaning of equality is Quota Raj. A word which has been misused and misinterpreted over the years by all- people who derived it and deserved it. I am not here to argue on the system as a whole but what provoked me to put my views across was the misuse of this very word which has handicapped us today. Recently the Maharashtra government came out with a abominable law to reserve 90% of seats in junior colleges (11th & 12th Std) for its state run board and the remaining 10% for the common central boards.

We have already tampered with the government job sector and higher education system, plaguing them with various quotas and now we have set out to tamper with the lives of young boys and girls. The juvenile innocence are being fed with the concept of quota when they should be enlightened about the vast opportunities ahead of them.

The Indian education system is currently balancing three to four educational boards trying to avoid conflict among them. But this new rule has brought to attention the need to communize these education boards, such that we create a level playing ground. There exists a variation within states boards as we move from north to south and east to west adding to the confusion. Different evaluation systems, different question papers and at time different curriculum have made this system debatable. The marked difference I have seen across all the boards is the language options in a curriculum, with Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Orissa etc.. paying emphasis on regional language. I personally do not disapprove of this because it is important to know one’s own native language if given the opportunity (I personally do not know how to read or write my native language due to the different education boards I studied during my schooling). Apart from this I believe we teach identical concepts of mathematics, science, history, geography, english etc. Why have a difference in curriculum across the boards, of when and what to teach, on a concept which does not change from region to region. Why can’t we have a common curriculum spelling the same words, with native language as the only dividing line ?

It is very debatable to pronounce which board is superior. I have experienced the differences personally and through friends at school and college. Few boards pay emphasis on science and math’s as a whole while others also pay emphasis on specialized topics like economics and civics. Within a specific subject for example, mathematics, I have seen difference in emphasis being laid on applied, commercial and general mathematics. Shouldn't students have knowledge of all these subdivisions without being biased against the other? To further illustrate the difference, social studies in few boards have history, geography economics and civics as sections of a single book but others have them as separate subjects of examinations, paying equal emphasis. Should we all not be educated equally on all topics under the umbrella?

The examination system also shows distinctions across boards, with disparity in question paper patterns and evaluated scores. Consider this; When you might be hard-pressed in preparing for your board exams with twelve papers, your neighbors will be on the verge of completing his/her exams with only six! Why the difference ? When you neighbor knocks on your door to distribute sweets on achieving a high 90% on the exam, you will be anxiously waiting for your results knowing that the average score that can be attained in your board is around the mid 80’s ! Why the difference? When you get up early and log on the Internet, hoping to see your name in the admission list on the schools web page, you are taken aback to see your name in the waiting list when your scores were in the top bracket for your board but lacked the meat to compete with others. Why the difference ?

In the past few years complex methods such as indexing scores (which still evades the understanding of common people and lacks transparency) across different boards have helped solve the problem to an extent when it comes to admissions, but overall the system still continues to balance itself to attain stability.

With close to 10% of students in Maharashtra studying outside the state board , why did the government have to introduce such a discriminating law? A motive to encourage students to join state-board adopted institutions? A motive to further divide the cracked system? Such populist laws have been put forth from various governments but not a single successful attempt has been made to unify the system. In an attempt to give equal opportunity to all students they seem to have somewhere lost or overlooked to plot of the game.

We have plagued the young minds of India with the ancient caste system and now we are trying to infuse in them a discriminatory notion based on the type of education system they hail from!

$$$ v/s Brains

A week back an interesting debate was sparked between me and a good friend on intelligence and money. The debate started with a single statement - " A degree in management (MBA) is all about money making but PhD is seeking intelligence." As surprised as I was on such a refutable comparison, it made me challenge my thoughts on how I can defend a profession I intend to pursue in the coming years. We bombed thoughts and views across like it was a battle field and the victorious will have the satisfaction of justifying once call on pursuing a particular career path.

Generationalizing from a family of well educated individuals with a PhD next to their name, I had to be careful not to undermine the achievements they have attained in their field, during the process of defending my reasons and views of how an MBA degree equally reflects your capabilities by challenging you intellectually in par of a post doctorate degree.

So, is pursuing a MBA only about money making and not about intelligence ? Is having a PhD one of the best ways to project your intellectual proclivity? Does, being qualified as a doctorate have an upper hand as apposed to having a business degree? Some might argue this comparison has no base because both can at times go hand in hand, for example- a PhD in Business management ! But what I am trying to point out here is a comparison of how intellectually challenging these two qualifications are.

Today an entrance into a leading B-School is matter of pride for many young students and professionals. The process of admissions have gotten tougher with time due to the increase in competition and talent around the globe. Globalization within campuses have increased the awareness among non-economic background aspirants. Collaborations with international universities have given students the opportunity to adventure away from their current profession. The staggering pay checks,reputation and power in Wall St. has enticed the world to take this profession seriously. Alumnus from reputed institutions from around the world took center stage either in global businesses for eg. Mukesh Ambani, Donald Trump, Ratan Tata, Anand Mahindra etc.. and in statesmanship for eg. P. Chidambaram, Michael Bloomberg, George Yeo etc...These people have shaped the the world in their own ways with intelligence, knowledge and innovation. None of the above have a doctorate degree but rank among the most influential people in the world. They have run successful business which have shaped the market for the world from the automotive sector to petroleum to real estate to running countries/cities finance and governing body successfully. We find their names and brands in every walk of life with many being role models and icon to aspiring businessmen. Does it mean they are in only in for the money and have no stimulating intellect? Doesn't it sound weird that they achieved so much and had little intellectual proclivity as compared to a doctorate who dedicates his/her life to research and intellectual supremacy (as the notion goes).

Does, having a MBA degree alone qualify you for influx of $$ in your bank account? With every passing year, business school have been mushrooming in every corner , but those who make it to the top are those who have worked for it and have the intelligence to apply, what I love calling a glorified personality development course. It matter from where and who edifies you that course. An admission into a Ivy league B-School requires a strong resume, a strong score, creativity and sound intellect. The combination of these traits and the tag of a prestigious school helps you propel further.

On the other hand, a doctorate might have worked for five to six years to attain his degree but during the course of this work there are many who lose track of reality and real world situations. There have been discoveries and researchs carried out which cannot be applied to real world and can only be added to text books as references. Can we claim such a doctorate intelligent, who has the knowledge and skills of research but cannot produce findings which is acceptable and practical in everyday life. There have been many great doctorates in the field of science and even business who have formulated strategies and techniques which have proven to be very useful to a MBA student, who then take that learning and knowledge, and applies it to the real world with a hint of self contributed intellect.

The contributions from renowned erudite scholars like John Forbes Nash, Jr whose work on Game Theory to the most recent Dr. Paul Krugman's "Analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity" have helped business admin students understand and apply various strategies to run a successful and lucrative business, not only satisfying personal gains but also meeting the growing demands of the world. It is these MBA degree holders who have made these findings practical in the real world and tested their viability which intern has led to further studies and innovations both in the field of research and business.

At the end a doctorate degree or a business management degree, one will need intellect, creativity and presence of mind to make it to the top . A degree alone cannot say if you or me are intellectually or monetarily inclined.