Postdoctoral researchers play a crucial role in academia—they drive new directions in research, mentor students in the lab, and maintain and often help to build new equipment. Some of them also bring in more funding for research projects through individual grants. Many go on to take up faculty positions and shape the future of academia. The number of postdoctoral fellows in India is relatively low compared to US and Europe. With improved funding and the establishment of more research institutions, there has, however, been a quick increase—both in numbers and the time researchers spend as postdoctoral fellows in India—in the recent years.

With an aim to showcase postdoctoral research work and provide a platform for networking, the NCBS/inStem Postdoctoral Fellows’ Association organised the first Annual Postdoctoral Symposium on 10 October 2015. The event was held at National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS); participants included postdocs from various institutes in Bangalore and mentors from institutions across the country. Featuring scientific talks and a well-attended poster session, the symposium closed with a panel discussion, Nurturing a future for postdocs in India, where perspectives were sought from mentors and postdocs on the kind of future that can be expected for this growing cohort of researchers. “The US has an extremely unhealthy culture, especially in biology. We should not move to the same postdoctoral culture,” cautioned Mukund Thattai from NCBS. The discussion was an attempt to engage mentors and postdocs in a dialogue, verbalise common issues and pave the way to collectively address any problems.

The session opened with a question from the postdocs about the willingness of top Indian research institutions to hire postdocs primarily trained in India as faculty. Some mentors and directors insisted that there is no bias against researchers who have not been trained in labs abroad. Satyajit Mayor, Director, NCBS pointed out that locally groomed postdocs had a distinct advantage. “Indian trained postdocs have a good exposure to the system and a sense of having achieved good work in India,” he said. Others disagreed. They admitted that there is a bias, and insisted that hiring committees must seek and hire well trained candidates rather ones who merely have big name universities on their resumes. The bias in start-up funds was also brought up. “Why only returning fellowships? What about general startup funds?” asked the postdocs; a valid question, and one that has been raised before. It is believed that the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) is coming up with appropriate funding schemes that will address the issue.

Next on the agenda were mentorship and strategy. It was generally agreed that good communication and straightforward advice were key. Questions about the effectiveness of a formal structure for the postdoctoral years and management training were aired by the postdocs. Ullas Kolthur from TIFR Bombay said, “PIs and postdocs come in all flavours. We can’t make one size fits all strategies.” While that seemed to be the popular opinion, there were some ideas about how mentors could help. Sriram Ramaswamy, Director, TIFR Hyderabad suggested that PIs could make an effort to involve postdocs in grant writing and in lab responsibilities.

While the postdoc years are generally considered as training for a research career, statistics indicate that fewer than 10% of postdocs will end up as lab heads in academia. Provisions for positions within Indian funding agencies and institutions—lab manager, facility managers, grant managers—can harness and help retain postdoctoral talent. While such positions exist, or can be created within institutions when there is a need, there are not many and they are often not well paying or attractive enough. When asked about making more such positions available, Satyajit Mayor commented that, “Without such people, it is hard to imagine a scientific culture. As the value of their contributions begins to be realised, the number of positions will increase.” Sudhir Krishna, also from NCBS, suggested that creating these jobs may be made easier by collecting an institutional corpus of non-government funds. R N K Bamezai from Jawaharlal Nehru University also drew attention to the University Grants Commission’s (UGC) Faculty Recharge Scheme, which seeks to increase faculty hiring, thus attempting to address the very root of this problem.

Alternate careers in industry, science communication and policy were also broached, but mentors could offer only limited advice about fields that are outside their expertise. Suhel Quader from Nature Conservation Foundation summed up the discussion on alternate careers: “We limit ourselves by our environment, but we should be curious and interested in the world as a whole. We imagine that we are only good at this while we do, in fact, pick up lots of transferable skills during our research training.” Perhaps policies on the lines of those recently initiated in California that afford postdocs time for career exploration in their contracts may help those looking to explore careers outside academia.

The strongest take home message from the panel discussion, one that reappeared in many contexts, was when mentors urged Indian postdocs to attend national conferences and make themselves and their work more visible in the community. “Reach out. Be aggressive!” urged Jaysree Das Sarma from IISER Kolkata. Postdocs working abroad, the ones who want to return home, routinely give talks about their work on visits home. Indian postdocs would benefit hugely from making similar efforts to network and communicate their work outside their own institutions. Mentors were also unanimous in declaring that as a postdoc one has to do good work—it is not a time for spinning wheels, but for doing good science.

While the panel discussions didn’t offer solutions to particular issues, as some hoped it would, it opened the floor for deliberation. The mentors acknowledged that they want to strengthen the postdoc community and as a first step forward, concerns have to be aired and heard with an open mind. The symposium itself proved to be a springboard for networking efforts. Mentors were largely appreciative of the science that was presented in the talks and poster session. Some postdocs secured invitations to give talks at various institutions. More meetings that focus exclusively on postdoctoral research are certainly on the cards. Plans are also underway to examine the logistics and benefits of forming a nationwide postdoctoral association.

(Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are personal and subjective too)

Indian Biology has a taken a steep upward movement in recent years. One can see visible changes in the quality of output from biologists across the country. What is more satisfying is that this has become a routine now. While scientists working in the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS), Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) etc. continue to impress the world, many from other places are also performing equally well. Increase in the size of the community, access to information, better peer-to-peer interactions at national and international levels due to ease of travel and internet connectivity, increased research funding, quality review process triggered by the Wellcome Trust-DBT India Alliance, and networking enabled by IndiaBioscience and Young Investigator Meetings (YIMs) are some of the reasons we could attribute to the recent successes.

Many new initiatives were undertaken in the beginning of this century to expand our presence in Science & Technology, to improve the quality of our research in Science and Mathematics and, thereby, to push India from a Service Economy to a Knowledge Economy. Amongst them are the establishment of the Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research (IISERs). These autonomous research institutes were set up by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India by an Act of Parliament (NITSER Act 2012) with the primary goals of integrating high quality research with undergraduate teaching, improving science education in India and enhancing the number and quality of future academic as well as industrial researchers in the country. The IISER model of education is concept-based and inquiry driven, as opposed to the more traditional content-based models. There is a strong emphasis on the interdisciplinary nature of today’s science, and recognition of the importance of research experience.

As some of the first IISERs are entering their 10^th year, I took look at our successes and failures (will talk about the latter later!). With the help of my colleagues from all IISERs, I collated their research publications in biology based on the work (partly or wholly) done in IISERs. The list¹ is very impressive, to say the least. The diversity of topics range from theoretical/mathematical/computational biology to structural biology; from cell and molecular biology to field biology. They have published in top journals in their fields of research; the kind of journals wherein referees dig deeper and deeper and, thereby, help improve the quality of publications. What is remarkable about the IISERs is the excellent performance by large number of faculty, pushing the average standards higher.

The research output from the IISERs in all disciplines is commendable considering the fact that they are new, many don’t even have well-developed campuses and faculty spend considerable time in teaching and building their institutes. I talk about only biology here because this is being written for IndiaBioscience. Other disciplines too are doing as well or perhaps better in all the IISERs.

It may be premature and utterly wrong to declare biology research at IISERs a big success story scripted in shortest time possible. Yet, the signs are very promising and the public, particularly young students, senior academicians and science policy makers of the country should take note of it and help sustain the progress and make it unequivocal success in the years to come.

Here are salient features of IISERs, which I think have particularly benefited biology research.

• IISERs are relatively, at least now, smaller institutes. This enables better collegiality and thereby, better interactions amongst faculty. More importantly, it enables interactions across disciplines promoting interdisciplinarity, a necessity for modern biology.
• Parallel new initiatives in the country such as Wellcome Trust-DBT India Allaince Fellowships, IndiaBioscience, Young Investigator meetings (YIMs) etc provide a jump-start to IISER faculty.

2.In IISERs, the biology or life sciences department is just one. It is not further divided into botany, zoology, biochemistry etc. This has enabled students to appreciate underlying common principles amongst diverse and complex living systems.

3.All IISERs have given much importance to theoretical biology, ecology and evolution, field biology etc. While a mix of lab and field biology is rare worldwide, its absence has been more glaring in India.

4.In IISERs, all faculty give equal emphasis to both teaching and research. They need to satisfy the curiosity of UG/PG students, challenging them with questions on the very purpose of doing research in a given topic. Such an inquisitive atmosphere helps faculty and students to take up original and challenging projects rather than the easy ones that would lead to quick (and average to below-average) publications.

5.Considerable emphasis is also given to training in research methodology, science communication, ethics and integrity, both at undergraduate and PhD levels.

6.All IISERs have supported their faculty well. The Indian scientific community, at large, has shown enormous and unprecedented goodwill for IISER faculty. All senior and mid-career faculty have offered unconditional mentorship to young faculty at IISERs. The credit for the IISERs’ progress goes to the entire scientific community of India.

7.Flexible and unencumbered faculty recruitment process, which is one of the greatest strengths of IISERs.

8.An atmosphere of freedom. Good administrative support and the consequent smooth functioning of all support services.

9.Two key factors that lead all of the above factors: generous funding by Ministry of Human Resource Development and the autonomy conferred by the Act of Parliament.

Just a few years ago, we wondered whether we would be able to hire good faculty to the IISERs. These are new institutes, with no infrastructure, and all faculty are expected to teach undergraduates. We had to compete with established research-only organizations for good faculty. Now that is past. We have had good beginning. But, it is only the beginning. It is important that the special features and strengths of the IISERs are maintained and further nurtured. Continued generous funding until the IISERs attain the maturity and financial independence is key for their future prospects.

¹The list is here. It is incomplete. It is a deliberate decision not to count impact factors, as I personally do not consider these important. The list may have some errors in terms of where the work was done; nonetheless, it is indication of the kind of academic engagement the faculty have.

Growing pulses in India is good for our high-quality protein requirements and it is good for the soil, and we shouldn’t be importing pulses by the ton, said Anura Kurpad, the new Margadarshi Fellow of the India Alliance Program. Kurpad, a Professor of Physiology at St Johns Medical College, Bangalore, studies the digestion and absorption of nutrients from traditional food groups like pulses, millets and green leafy vegetables, which are important sources of protein, minerals and vitamins. It is still not clear if an unsanitary environment can reduce the absorption of these vital nutrients, particularly in growing children. In the coming years his research will estimate the bioavailability of nutrients in humans through intrinsic stable isotope labeling of pulses and legumes; work that he believes will also have implications for Indian agricultural policies and food strategy.

Over two days (5th and 6th November 2015) the India Alliance Annual Fellows Meeting in Hyderabad was attended mostly by fellows who are midway through their five-year fellowships, with few attendees in their penultimate year and some first year fellows. It was a packed meeting, with 70 posters and over 30 talks by awardees, Wellcome Trust Board Members and Senior Mentors from India and abroad (USA, UK, Portugal). Two representatives from the African Academy of Sciences also participated in this two-day event to understand the operations of the India Alliance as they prepare for a similar partnership with the Wellcome Trust, UK, in Africa.

The Wellcome Trust/DBT India Alliance, a partnership between the Wellcome Trust UK and the Department of BioTechnology (DBT), Government of India, aims to jump-start high quality research in India through eight well-funded fellowships. These target basic biomedical researchers and clinicians at various levels of their careers, and in the six years since the establishment of the scheme, 199 fellows have been supported. The Wellcome Trust/DBT India Alliance program is only one of the bilateral international programs of the DBT initiated to raise the quality of Indian science, yet is one of its most successful partnerships. Rajesh Kapoor, Trustee of the program from DBT, who attended the Annual Fellows Meet, said of the program, “It brings a deep sense of satisfaction to note this progress, not only in terms of numbers, but the assessment of the impact the fellows bring to their institutions and the disciplines they pursue”.

Fellows at the end of their fellowships spoke about the progress of their work over five years, and also about the process of working with the India Alliance grant. “This is the most flexible funding I have received—they say ‘extend and expand’, unlike other grant programs”, said Annapoorni Rangarajan from IISc, a Senior Fellow who received the fellowship for her work on molecular pathways in cancer stem cells.

Apart from high-quality science presentations, the meeting dedicated a significant amount of time to discussing issues in Indian science. Some of these were how teaching can feed back into research, the increasing introduction of tenure-track faculty positions across institutions, mobility across institutions, the necessity for collaborative and infrastructure grants, and the need for adherence to the San Francisco accord (DORA) which explicitly excludes using journal impact factors as proxy for quality.

After the scientific sessions on the first day of the meeting, Simon Kay, Head of International Operations, Wellcome Trust, spoke to fellows about how diversity can be good for their science, and encouraged further discussion in smaller groups. Diversity in the workforce includes both visible (gender, age, ethnicity) and non-visible differences (marital status, socio-economic status etc), and specific issues relating to caste in the Indian context were also discussed. Kay suggested that while a diverse workforce is right (compliance with law, affirmative action, etc), it is also smart, as differences in individuals might promote diversity of talent and skills and consequently an increase in productivity. He went on to describe the new India Alliance Policy Statement on Equality and Diversity, which will be available on their website soon.

For those who have wandered in here without knowing what Young Investigators’ Meeting (YIM) is, here is a primer: the YIM is an annual meeting, held at a different city in India every year; it brings together researchers at different stages of their careers—postdoctoral fellows (PDFs), young investigators (YIs) and mentors—to network and exchange information regarding career development, resource management and leadership. This year, the YIM was held at Gulmarg, a picturesque snow capped hill station in Kashmir.

The first day of the YIM was a satellite meeting, exclusively for the PDFs to interact with the who’s who (Directors and Deans) of Indian institutes and universities. When we—the YIs—arrived the following evening, the PDFs were eager to talk to us regarding our experience in finding an academic job. Over the course of the next couple of days spent talking to many PDFs, it was clear that there was lot of confusion, anxiety and even resentment. This was most obvious during the closed PDF-YI session, during which it emerged that their main issue was the lack of clarity in the hiring process in India. Except from a few handful institutes, the applicants do not even get an acknowledgement for their applications; this is regrettable and needs to be changed. I list below a few ideas/suggestions that emerged from the discussions throughout the meeting regarding job application processes. Unlike the US, in India applications are received throughout the year, but every institute or university has a selection committee, which meets a defined number of times in a calendar year. Aspirants must make the effort to find out when through their contacts, and send in their application before the selection committee meeting to have a better chance of hearing an outcome. Many places in India don’t have an online application portal, so chances of receiving an acknowledgement are slim. The solution might be to contact someone (preferably a young PI) whom you know, or known to someone you know! Over the years I have learned that the Indian scientific community is small, and you will always find a connection. I must thank Sreelaja, one of the organisers of YIM 2015, for suggesting that YIs pledge that we should form a liaison and provide information regarding the application status of PDFs. This small service from YIs could be a great start to shake things from the bottom up to make changes in the hiring process in India.

The other major complaint heard at the meeting, this one from the YIs, was regarding the rejection of grant applications with little feedback from grant agencies. This was discussed during the grants session, where it came to light that the problem stems from the lack of enough grant reviewers to review applications in a timely manner. Since our Indian scientific community is comparatively small we should be taking more responsibility (read time) in reviewing our fellow scientists’ grants.

The YIM is not just about finding jobs and money to fund your lab, it’s more than that! Just a job and grant money will not equip you to run an academic program. Throughout the meeting the mentors gave talks about their journeys in science so far. The message from these talks all point towards finding your path. The YIM was a forum for extensive discussions on a variety of important topics. Mentorship was one: mentors can be helpful in giving advice on how to deal with your administration and or institution policies. In many institutes in India it is increasingly becoming a norm to find mentors when you join as independent faculty. In fact, from this year, the Wellcome-DBT India Alliance has made it mandatory to name a mentor who can help you with non-scientific problems, publication strategies and tenure related questions.

Then there is the issue of tenure. Traditionally in India, academic jobs are “safe bets” (for the individuals but not for the institute!); there are few instances of a faculty being fired. However in recent years things are changing and a few places in India have introduced the US style tenure system. There is a lot of confusion regarding the tenure system in India. The hope is that in the coming years there will be a unique tenure system solution for each academic institute. Scientific outreach and building a philanthropic base in India were also discussed at several sessions of the meeting as a way of giving back to the community.

Are you looking for opportunities to pursue a research career in Europe? Would you like to collaborate with a European lab to take your research further? EURAXESS Links India is the place to go to find the relevant information and contacts. It is the Indian chapter of EURAXESS Links, a networking and information tool for any researcher, European or non-European, who wants to pursue his/her research career in or with Europe.

The European Commission, which manages EURAXESS, started an initiative called EURAXESS-Researchers in Motion to support mobility of researchers within Europe. Very soon they realized that there are European researchers outside Europe and it is important to somehow ensure that they keep their links with the research fraternity back home, and EURAXESS Links was born. While at the beginning it worked to connect European researchers to Europe and help them go back if they so wished, soon it began efforts to support non-European researchers who wanted to work or be connected to research in Europe.

EURAXESS Links is present in six locations globally. The Indian chapter was established in 2011. In November 2014, the first EURAXESS Links Office was inaugurated in New Delhi. Offices have since been opened in Washington D.C. and Tokyo. Membership to the EURAXESS Links India community is free. The website has news about Europe and India, Indo-European collaborations and innovation, funding opportunities, jobs and events. This information is also disseminated through a monthly newsletter, which goes out to the community, 70% of whom are in India and the rest in Europe.

“Researchers can also write to us with individual queries and we respond personally,” said Ainhitze Bizkarralegorra Bravo, Country Representative, EURAXESS Links India. She also makes presentations across India on how EURAXESS can support researchers and help them find their way in Europe. The talk covers EU Funding opportunities for individual researchers such as the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions fellowships, the European Research Council grants and collaborative projects under Horizon 2020. “In the last two years, I have made these presentations about 25 times. These can happen anywhere in India, we are open to receive invitations to go and meet researchers,” said Bizkarralegorra Bravo.

They also organize events, most of which have a strong networking component. In 2014, they organized a EURAXESS Connect event that was linked to the launch of ‘EU-India Social Sciences and Humanities Platform (EqUIP)’. This year, an upcoming event in Kolkata will share information on how scientists can advance their careers in research and innovation in Europe. The annual EURAXESS Science Slam, a fun event that challenges researchers to share their work with experts and non-experts in an entertaining yet intelligible manner, was first organized by EURAXESS Links India in 2013. The third edition of this science communication challenge will be announced in a few days time.

The success of the initiative is seen in the increase of membership in the EURAXESS Links India community, which is now about 2000 people strong. Other measures of the impact they have are the increasing number of Indian applicants to European research programs and the number of queries they receive from individual researchers. “We also see an increase in the number of visitors to our website,” said Bizkarralegorra Bravo. “We take particular care to ensure that the old visitors also keep coming back,” she added.

According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF), a postdoc is “An individual who has received a doctoral degree (or equivalent) and is engaged in a temporary and defined period of mentored advanced training to enhance the professional skills and research independence needed to pursue his or her chosen career path. From this definition the key point to be understood is that a postdoc position is not a permanent position. The postdoctoral culture has been in existence in the United States for several decades. The postdoctoral system in the USA used to be disorganized, with the relation between the principal investigator and the postdoc being sacrosanct. The National Academies have produced reports on the postdoctoral system in 1969, 1980, 2000 and 2014. The report in 1969 mentioned the need for studying the postdoctoral phenomenon. The subsequent report, in 1980, identified a few serious concerns of postdocs—lack of prestige, lack of recognized status and diminishing career opportunities.

In the year 2000 came another report, Enhancing the Postdoctoral Experience for Scientists and Engineers, which noticed that postdoctoral training had expanded very rapidly within the USA, but without adequate oversight. The report suggested several measures to improve the situation of postdocs, and was responsible for positive changes—the NIH and many universities created offices of postdoctoral affairs to enhance the experience of postdoc researchers, and the NSF added a requirement to include a mentoring plan for postdocs in any research grant that involved postdocs. Among all the outcomes, the creation of the National Postdoctoral Association (NPA) was most significant.

The NPA was formed by a group of postdocs who attended Science’s Nextwave Postdoc Network meeting in 2002. At this meeting, it was decided to create a body that would affect positive change for postdocs across the research landscape of the USA. The initial funding for the NPA came from the Sloan Foundation. The NPA today has close to 200 institutional members and around 2500 individual members. The postdocs in the USA now have a collective voice, and their issues related to salary, working conditions, career prospects, funding etc. are being heard by the NPA and presented more effectively to the concerned authorities like NIH, NSF and Scientific Advisory Committees set up by the Federal Govt. NPA actively advocates the creation of postdoc offices (PDO) in universities and also provides guidance to form postdoctoral associations (PDA). PDOs are offices comprising of at least a senior faculty and administrative staff, meant to facilitate respective organizations in postdoctoral recruitment, appointment, career development and mentoring. PDA on the other hand is the association formed by postdocs to manage their career development, mentoring, social and professional activities along with PDO. Many universities now have very active associations, run by postdocs. In addition, the NPA holds annual meetings to discuss issues related to postdoctoral training, conducts workshops on career development and acts as a liaison between postdocs and policy makers.

The changes in postdoc mentoring are not confined to academia and Govt. organizations. The changes are even felt in private organizations. Dr.Leslie Pond, Director of the successful Postdoctoral Program at the Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research (NIBR) shares in her own words how having a postdoc office is boosting the research activities. “At the Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, our postdoc program helps to support an innovative culture, while offering the postdocs an opportunity to do great science in a drug discovery environment. Our postdocs conduct their research with the guidance of a NIBR mentor, and where appropriate an academic mentor, and work on exploratory project areas that allow them to share freely their research findings with the broader scientific community. Having a dedicated postdoc office allows us to coordinate the program across sites and departments and offer community events and development workshops, among other support, for mentors and postdocs.”

The current career scenario for postdocs in the USA is not very hopeful, with diminishing job openings in academia, the traditional destination for postdocs. There is therefore a pressing need to expose and prepare postdocs for the spectrum of careers available outside mainstream academia. The NPA has identified several core competencies that are necessary for postdocs to make the switch successfully, and plays a major role in disseminating information about various career opportunities for postdocs. It has several resources and a career tool kit to help postdocs in pursuing their career of choice.

Philip Clifford, Associate Dean for Research at University of Illinois, Chicago, an ardent supporter of postdocs, stresses on the need for comprehensive training. In an email communication, he says, “With a burgeoning population of highly trained scientists poised to enter the job market, the competition is intense for recent PhDs in the sciences. Regardless of career path, scientists need to have breadth and depth in their knowledge base along with appropriate technical skills. But these alone are not sufficient. Scientists also need expertise in communication, leadership and management, professionalism, and the responsible conduct of research (see http://www.nationalpostdoc.org/competencies).

Developing skills in these additional areas requires deliberate effort and time away from the bench. Leading universities across the US are recognizing the value of providing workshops, symposia, and courses on these topics for their graduate students and postdoctoral fellows.” Several such professional development programs are frequently organized by the postdoc offices and associations, in line with the guidelines from NPA on the competencies. While I served as the Chair of the Penn State Postdoc Association I took the initiative to introduce community outreach programs and research advocacy initiatives for postdocs at Penn State University. Volunteering for activities organized by the postdoc office and postdoc associations helped me in improving my own communication, leadership and management skills.

India is currently witnessing a surge in research activities, with the formation of newer institutions like IISERs and NIPERs. The facilities have been upgraded in many leading institutions to match international standards. The number of postdocs is also increasing, keeping up with the progress in research, backed by the good funding scenario. However, currently there is no proper record of the number of postdocs in India. The postdoctoral culture is still in a growth phase. With no formal association for postdocs, we might end up in a similar situation faced by the USA a couple of decades ago. As academic jobs get filled up, postdocs might have to look for other careers. There are some concerns that need to be addressed to make sure that Indian universities and research institutions are well prepared to guide postdocs. Are postdocs making the most of their mentoring relationships? Is there a proper system to monitor the quality of training received by postdocs? How do postdocs deal with stress or other issues? Indian universities and institutes with a sizable number of postdocs will need a separate postdoc office to manage postdocs. Similarly there is a need for postdoc associations to complement the postdoc offices. All these postdoc offices and associations, well connected centrally by a national postdoc association, will provide a one-stop place for postdocs to seek guidance and resources for planning their career. Establishing these systems now, when Indian academia is on the upswing, will ensure well-planned and mature growth of the postdoctoral community.

Prasad Krishnan is a postdoc scholar at Penn State University, University Park, USA and is an independent career advisor. He was the Chair of Penn State Postdoc Society-University Park during 2012-14 and is actively involved with the National Postdoctoral Association in USA. He can be contacted at PKrish2011@gmail.com

It was 8:00 one Tuesday morning. Barely an hour before she was due to teach a class, Vinita Gowda, an Assistant Professor of Evolutionary Botany at the Indian Institute for Science Education and Research (IISER), Bhopal, found out that her nanny wasn’t going to come in to work. This wasn’t a small advanced graduate class—it was an undergraduate course attended by more than a hundred students. It would be difficult to notify them in time and impossible to reschedule the class. There was no one else Gowda could call in to care for her one year old daughter—she has no family in town and her husband, also an Assistant Professor, works at the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore.

Gowda and her husband are part of the increasing tribe of academic spouses. As more women pursue careers in research and spend a large part of their 20s in graduate school, it is not surprising that they find spouses among fellow scholars. And soon after, the couples find themselves battling a few extra constraints and complications while competing in an already crowded academic job market—both would ideally like to find jobs in the same city, if not the same Institute/University, but neither would want to compromise on research quality or work environment. They also grapple with questions that few have clear answers to—should they bring up the fact that their spouse is also looking for a job? Will that affect the selection process? Do Universities/Institutes have policies (written or unwritten) against hiring couples? IndiaBioscience spoke to six couples in different Institutes across India about their experiences while applying, and also for some tips and pointers to young couples who will soon be looking for faculty positions in Institutes across the country.

Most of the scientists interviewed had gone abroad, either for graduate school or a postdoctoral stint. Some couples like Arati Ramesh and Sunil Laxman, recent recruits at the National Centre for Biological Science (NCBS) and inStem, Bangalore, respectively, were simply looking to good science, whether in India or the US. Others like Kundan Sengupta and Richa Rikhy, currently Assistant Professors at IISER, Pune were clear about returning even before their postdocs. “We never decided to stay,” they said. They kept in touch with their PhD mentors, gave talks and actively networked every time they came home. They still count themselves lucky to have secured jobs in the same Department.

Others like Gowda and her husband Ambedkar Dukkipati contend with the challenges of being in different cities. “Poor connectivity is the biggest issue,” said Gowda. While taking care of a baby alone is no piece of cake, often, she said, it is actually harder on the other parent, who is not around to celebrate the many milestones. In addition, there is a measure of social stigma that women who choose this route may have to contend with: many judge them for staying away from family on account of work. However, said Gowda, the facilities offered by IISER, Bhopal were great and her work has been rewarding. “It’s not the ideal situation, but it has been good so far,” she summed up.

Three out of six couples that spoke to us were from IISER, Pune. The establishment of the IISERs about 8 years ago saw a sharp increase in hiring. “The beaker is getting a bit leaner now,” said Collins Assisi, also an Assistant Professor at IISER, Pune. Assisi and his wife Suhita Nadkarni (IISER, Pune) began their job search at the Young Investigators’ Meeting. “We got to meet Institute Directors and prospective colleagues, and got a lot of clarity about the various grants available to researchers,” said Nadkarni.

When asked how they approached the job search, most of them said they applied in multiple places, especially in cities like Bangalore and Pune, which have many Institutes. Many of the interviewees also emphasised the importance of applying for grants early, to make a stronger case during interviews. Advising patience, Suhita Nadkarni said, “It is better to wait it out than rush into accepting offers that are not completely satisfactory to both. Severe compromises are not sustainable.” Aurnab Ghose, IISER Pune, added “If you are in the same stage of your career, applying at the same time may increases your chances of being hired together in some places.”

Jonaki Sen and Amitabha Bandyopadhyay, a couple who share a joint lab space at IIT, Kanpur, cautioned, “Sometimes one spouse is hired and the other is promised a job later. Move only after both have offers, since it is not easy to change jobs in Indian academia.” They also recommend their joint lab model to prospective hires, when appropriate. While they both have different, independent projects, they share resources and a common lab space. “It helps us do more research for the same grant money,” they said. They had proposed the joint lab while applying, an idea that found ready acceptance at IIT, Kanpur.

“Did you bring up the fact that your spouse is also applying?” we asked the others. Ghose and his wife, Mayurika Lahiri, were among those who did, in every place that either of them was called for an interview. “Some Institutes responded very positively and even called the other spouse for an interview. We were careful to state that we were simply putting all our cards on the table, with no intentions of leveraging our position,” they said. At the other end of the spectrum were Ramesh and Laxman, who applied independently. “We both had long postdoctoral stints, and worked hard towards having good individual CVs. Some places hire couples, some have a policy not to. But there is a nebulous in between where it is not clear whether there is a policy or not,” said Laxman.

This came up repeatedly in our interviews. The interviewees were largely unsure whether there is a policy about hiring spouses in different Institutes. When asked, directors from several Institutes confirmed that there is no such written rule, but acknowledged that some places discourage couple hiring, especially within the same Department, since they believe it decreases the diversity of opinion, among other reasons. “Many of these objections can be countered with some thought,” commented Assisi.

What is in it for the Institutes? Should they accommodate spouses? “There are advantages in hiring couples,” said Ghose, voicing a popular opinion. It helps retain good researchers, and spouses have a better sense of the constraints on the job and end up buffering each other, added Assisi. “If each spouse is good enough to be hired, Institutes should not discriminate just because they are married,” said Mukherjee. Gowda, however, was not as emphatic. She gave the question some serious thought before she said, “It is a tricky question. I think they should, but there are issues that require some foresight and deliberation. There should be no compromise in the quality of hires on account of spousal accommodation.”

When asked what policy changes would have most impact, there was a clamour for transparency on existing policies, to begin with. “Being open to hire couples is just a mindset. Institutes are waking up to the need to address the issue. Better flexibility and open policies have made some of the newer places more attractive,” said Sengupta. Gowda points out that Institutes haven’t yet warmed up to hiring multiple people with the same specialization, even if their research doesn’t exactly overlap. This translates to fewer available positions, even in places where space or funding is not a constraint.

Creating a network of Institutes is also high on the wishlist. “Recruiters should talk to their neighbouring Institutes if they can’t accommodate both spouses,” said Ghose. IISER, Pune has already done so in a couple of instances, he added. “Having a couple in two different Institutes in the same city comes with many advantages. You can capitalize on the different positives from different places and also work together to increase interactions and share facilities at the Institute level,” said Rikhy.

A comprehensive report titled “Dual-Career academic couples: What Universities need to know” was published by the Michelle R. Clayman Institute for Gender Research, Stanford University in 2008. The report summary states, “In a recent survey of Canadian science deans, couple hiring emerged as one of the thorniest issues confronting their faculties. Administrators in this study concur. One department chair commented that no other aspect of his job arouses as much controversy as dual-career hiring.” Couples in academia are a rising trend, one that academic institutions simply cannot ignore. The Stanford report analyses the experiences of academic couples in the US in great depth and also makes recommendations for improving the way universities work with dual-career candidates. Universities/Institutes in India could adopt many of their recommendations too. At the very least, institutions must recognize that there is an urgent need for open dialogue about couple hiring and transparency with regard to policies.

Elizabeth Hadly, Professor at Stanford University, and one half of an academic couple herself, said that even in the US, couple hiring is not as common as it should be, though some Universities fare better than others in this regard. In her opinion, “In India, where there is so much growth, new places should use this as an opportunity to get good people, and grow doubly quickly. This has an added advantage—they will also start off on the right foot in terms of gender diversity.”

Science, today, is an integral part of our lives. While we recognise that medical and technological advances that have improved the quality of our everyday lives (vaccines and vehicles respectively, for example), we are less aware that these developments arose out of research in the basic sciences.

In spite of its indispensible presence in our lives, few people choose to pursue science, including in India. The progress of a country, however, is often welded to its progress in scientific research and advances. Recognizing this, the Department of Science and Technology (DST) has started a few programs to encourage academic engagement with the sciences.

One such program, Innovation in Science Pursuit for Inspired Research (INSPIRE), aims to spread the awareness and the joy of science to students across India. The program targets youth at three different levels—at the school level through scholarships for science projects (6^th-9^th standards) and science camps (11^th standard); at the undergraduate level through scholarship programs; and at higher levels encouraging youth to seek academic careers in science. While the INSPIRE initiatives have been successful, the science camps have been the flagship activity of the program in terms of impact. I spoke with program coordinators and organizers of several camps to gain insight into the program and its implications.

The 'INSPIRE camp', as it is popularly known, is a 5-day boot camp for students (of 11^th standard) in scientific research. There are over 250 such camps held annually all over India, in many different districts and remote locations, ranging from Ujjain to Gorakhpur, Dharwad (Karnataka) and Jammu to name a few. "As the students come from a number of districts, they tend to travel as far as about 200 km for the camp. A regular year receives nearly 350 applications," said Nagaraja Hegde, the coordinator at Karnataka University in Dharwad. Of these, around 150 students are selected based on their performance in the 10^th examinations.

At the camps, which are coordinated by scientists and held at research institutes, students interact with and attend lectures by noted scientists from different fields, referred to in INSPIRE lingo as Mentors. Mentors range from heads of institutions and universities to educators and scientists from different fields. Institutes like the Inter-University Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics (IUCAA), Agarkar institute, Regional center for Biotechnology (RCB), the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Oceanology Research Institute in Goa and the Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research (IISERs) host regular camps.

Students also spend time doing hands-on activities, which vary based on the host institute. The activities can be simple—like walks around a local herbarium or garden to identify and classify vegetation, or blood typing with antibodies. The coordinator for the program at IISER, Pune, Sheela Donde said, "The students are quite happy doing things with their hands and learning, rather than sitting through lectures".

Sometimes students do enquiry-based experiments like analyzing the potability of water, where they plate a diluted sample of water on agar plates to test for bacterial contamination. Mrutyunjay Suar of KIIT, Bhubaneshwar said, "We concentrate on experiential learning to ignite their fires".

One of the regular mentors at the Pune camp is Arvind Gupta, an inspiring educator who refers to himself as the 'Toy Maker'. He has pioneered the idea of making toys or models out of simple materials, each illustrating a scientific concept. This piques the children's curiosity, which can, in turn, spark creativity. His sessions, Donde said, are always much appreciated.

In addition, students have ample time to interact with mentors on a one-to-one basis. This is when they are encouraged to talk, discuss and question. "The students are so enthusiastic that it energizes us", said Hegde. They ask questions in big auditoriums as well as in small discussion groups and imbibe the knowledge. As the days go by, LS Shashidhara of IISER, Pune pointed out, the experience instills a sense of confidence in the students.

The program is, however, not without its issues. The selection of just the top 1% students who score high in the 10^th board exams leaves behind those who may have an aptitude for science but do not score high on national or state tests. Arvind Gupta urged, "I strongly feel that these camps should not be confined to a select group of students. The base should be widened and science through activities should be integrated into the curriculum".

While the coordinators did agree that this might not be the best method for selection, the huge number of applications forces them to choose, and test scores seem fair and best. Another problem, common in states like Rajasthan and those in the Northeast, is enrolling girl students. Continuity seems to be an issue as well. It is essential to provide the students, and more importantly the participating schools, with some sort of mentorship and support that continues on after the camp. DST is reportedly taking steps to ensure this by reaching out online and maintaining contact with the students who attend the camps.

A step in the right direction to address these issues seems to be the yearly meeting among coordinators of the camps. They come together, share their successes, failures and discuss the issues faced. It is a support group that works together towards figuring out unique solutions to better the INSPIRE camp experience for all.

Though simple in concept, the INSPIRE camp program works on many levels. Researchers, who are used to scientific jargon even while teaching graduate students, welcome the challenge of simplifying scientific concepts. Students gain tremendous exposure from visiting research institutes. They also have the opportunity to interact with other students from different districts and build networks, which they apparently often do.

Another rewarding session is the interaction with parents. The program holds a session for parents where researchers talk to them about many career options within the sciences, opening their eyes to futures beyond medicine and engineering.

Over the five years of this program, has it inspired students to take up and study science? I was told that is precisely what DST is trying to do currently. It is conducting a study to assess the success of the program. But is this truly the measure of success of such a program? "It is not about attracting students to basic sciences but rather to research in science and technology" clarified LS Shashidhara.

The program, whatever its cons, and regardless of the eventual career choices of the participants, increases awareness about the sciences, and hopefully instills a curiosity to know more and be cognizant of scientific advances. In the present age, as science percolates through every aspect of one's existence, a more scientifically aware society will be a more informed one.

Further reading:

1. http://www.vigyanprasar.gov.in/index.asp
2. http://www.arvindguptatoys.com/
3. https://www.ted.com/talks/arvind_gupta_turning_trash_into_toys_for_learning
4. http://www.ias.ac.in/resonance/
5. http://www.kscst.iisc.ernet.in/spp.html
6. http://www.mavipamumbai.org/

"It's an interconnected world. An outbreak in one place is a threat everywhere". With new infections emerging every few years, among which many jump across species, our interconnected world is a hub for diseases to take hold and spread at an alarming rate. The recent Ebola outbreak is an illustration of what an infectious disease can do even before we realise we have a global epidemic to deal with.

The above statement was made by James LeDuc, who was co-chairing a two and a half day workshop on "Challenges of Emerging Infections and Global Health Safety" at the Indian National Science Academy (INSA) premises, New Delhi, between 18^th and 20^th November, 2014. Indira Nath, Emeritus Professor, National Institute of Pathology, was the other co-chair of the workshop, a joint effort between INSA and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The main aim of the workshop was to address "challenges posed by infectious diseases within India and the United States and across national borders".

India is planning a massive explosion of its laboratory facilities over the next few years, said VM Katoch Secretary, Department of Health Research (GOI) and Director General, India Council of Medical Research (ICMR), in his short talk. "The aim is to have 160 new labs by March 2015. 48 have already been established. We also plan ten federal labs for infectious disease. At ICMR, we want to move from an institution-centric approach to a public health-centric approach", he said.

What makes it all the more important to strengthen laboratory and associated infrastructure in India is that India is the only country with BSL-4 (Bio Safety Level 4, the highest level of bio-containment) laboratories in South Asia. BSL laboratories are meant to house and isolate potentially dangerous biological agents like disease causing microorganisms. This makes it imperative for India to ensure the highest standards of biosafety in its labs, not just for the country itself, but for the region as a whole. As Aparna Singh Shah from the World Health Organisation Southeast Asia Region office said, "Laboratory facilities vary a lot between countries and the awareness about biosafety is very limited. The region however houses 25% of the world's population and a staggering 30% of the diseases." She drew attention to two important resources: the WHO guidelines on laboratory safety, called "Enhancement of Laboratory Biosafety", put forth during the 58th World Health Assembly in 2005, and a document on Emerging Infectious diseases and laboratory safety in the Asia Pacific region.

Plans for biosafety regulations in India

When the two participating countries exchanged notes about the various biosafety protocols in each country, it emerged was that while there are various safety guidelines available in India, there is no strict rule enforcing these guidelines. "Even though we have plenty of exhaustive guidelines, how many people are aware of them, how many are following them—that is the main concern", said Vasantha Muthuswamy, who was with the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and is a worldwide authority on ethics in research.

However, this may soon be rectified. Muthuswamy said that there is a Bill prepared for the Indian government, based on the biosafety guidelines available for ICMR. The bill, titled "The Biomedical Research on Human Participants (Ethical, Legal, Social Issues) Bill", is being proposed by ICMR to the Government of India. The Bill will have provisions for a body, which would be in charge of biosafety regulation, and would also train personnel in the field. She also said that capacity building for everyone–researchers, ethics committee members, sponsors, policy makers and medical professionals, is the need of the hour. Bioethics education and biosafety training and dissemination, along with legislation, would ensure that regulations are better followed in India.

Six breakaway brainstorm sessions tackled a variety of topics. Of special interest, especially given India's plans of expanding its network of BSL labs, is the need for strategies that make this expensive endeavour more economically feasible. It takes a lot of money to run BSL labs: an estimated 4 million USD are currently spent just on overheads. Various suggestions to reduce cost came in: collaborations between facilities so that fewer high level BSL labs are needed, maybe at the regional level. At the building level, the suggestion was to focus on proper training rather than "over designing", and the usage of indigenous technology from Indian small and medium entrepreneurs rather than importing expensive equipment.

The workshop also had a session on how cutting edge technologies can be employed in the diagnosis and rapid screening of diseases. Mohan Rao, Director of CCMB Hyderabad spoke of novel, inexpensive tools for diagnosis and treatment of diseases. An efficient, antifungal nanoparticle operates on an elegant principle: the biocompatible particle acts as a substrate for proteolytic enzymes produced by fungi. Once the fungi degrade the proteins, the anti-fungal is released. This makes for an extremely site specific drug delivery mechanism. As part of a multi-institution team, Rao has developed a platform for identifying pathogens causing eye infections from their DNA. This sensitive, highly specific technique uses a small chip as a platform, and can identify 15 pathogens in a span of five hours, using just one reaction. The product won "Product of the Year" award from the magazine Biospectrum.

Moving forward, INSA and NAS have "agreed to partner together to conduct a regional workshop in 2015 focusing on building the capacity of laboratories and affiliated researchers to tackle the region's most difficult public health challenges safely and securely", says the final statement released at the end of the meeting. The next workshop will provide an opportunity to convene life science, biological safety and disease surveillance experts from academia, industry, and government to come up with a set of guidelines, development of manpower like laboratory training, leadership development, transport of samples and responsible research practices.

A special note on Ebola

Thomas Ksiazek from the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) spoke of his personal experiences from Sierra Leone, where he was monitoring the Ebola outbreak. He felt strongly that as much as the virus, hospitals are responsible for early transmission and eventual outbreaks of Ebola. Traditional healers, an important part of the first line of care in Africa, can also play a role in disease transmission, he said. He spoke of his "Ebola Playbook": find all cases, isolate them, find who all the patient comes into contact with, protect the staff, make burials safe. "Poor logistics like insufficient transport, ambulance vehicles, burial vehicles, infection control agents like chemicals and payment to workers all worsened the situation", he said. In the disease epicentres of Sierra Leone, there is now a downward dip in the number of cases simply because people have "wised up" and realised the measures they have to adopt to combat spread of infection.

Ksiazek's hands-on account formed the perfect backdrop for Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital's Ratnakar Sahoo to talk on India's plans in dealing with a potential Ebola outbreak. The high number of Indians in Africa, and the chances of them travelling back home carrying the disease, is also high. "There are about 45,000 Indian nationals in Africa, many of whom travel home frequently. In rural India, hygiene standards are quite low—both factors lead to an increased danger of Ebola in India", he said. After many inter departmental meetings, India has hit upon an action plan to deal with Ebola. International airports have been given thermal scanners. Anyone with high body temperature is screened, and those travelling from Ebola areas are classified as High Risk. Personnel from all over the country have been trained at Delhi for Ebola management; they will in turn hold training programmes in different areas of the country. Isolation wards have been identified in government hospitals. The National Institute of Virology, Pune, has been certified for running Ebola tests; ten other labs from across the country have the necessary training to process samples.