• 16 August 2012
  • News
  • By

Bioscience intake drops

The market for Indian biotech education sector witnesses 11.3 percent drop

The Indian biotechnology education sector registered a negative growth of 11.3 percent and this market is estimated at 1,020 crore in 2011-12 as against 1,150 crore in 2010-11. The drop is mainly attributed to the reduction in the number of students opting for biotechnology courses. Several colleges and institutes were forced to close their biotechnology programs due to lack of student interest. The education market mainly comprises of fees collected from the students.

Shutterstock45204604image The biotechnology industry witnessed a CAGR of 29.5 percent during 2002-07, that led to a big rush of institutes--public as well as private--offering courses on biotechnology. The demand for human resources from the industry, however, did not pick up as much as it was being projected and this resulted in a reduction in the number of candidates wanting to undertake biotech courses.

This is the 8th BioSpectrum Top 20 Biotech (BT) Schools Survey 2012, in which a total of 48 institutes (15 public and 33 private), offering BTech, MSc, MTech, and PhD courses in biotechnology from 15 states participated in the survey. Some of the prominent public universities and institutes such as Anna University (Chennai), Himachal Pradesh University (Shimla), Jamia Millia Islamia University (Delhi), Madurai Kamaraj University (Madurai), MS Baroda University (Vadodara), University of Jammu (Jammu), University of Kashmir (Srinagar), and University of Pune (Pune) could not participate in this survey due on going admission processes and other pre-occupied activities with the department heads.

According to the 2012 Survey, 4525 students enrolled their names in these 48 institutes for the biotechnology courses ranging from undergraduate to doctoral studies during the academic year 2011-12. There were a total of 12,100 students pursing biotech programs in 2011-12 and 85 percent of these students were in private BT schools. The total full-time faculty strength in these 48 institutes stood at 1130 and an overwhelming 73 percent of these staff are PhD holders. The 33 private sector BT schools in the survey had a total staff strength of 615 members, while the 15 public BT schools had around 515 teaching staff.

According to the 8th BioSpectrum Top 20 Biotech Schools Survey 2012, the private institutions, offering engineering seats (BTech) to students at government fixed quota, charge an average fixed fee of 1.25-1.6 lakh per course, while the amount under the management quota is around 3.5-4 lakh per course per student, excluding one time donation and capitation amount.

A student applying for seat in a public institute on an average spends 55,500 towards a two-year post-graduate course (MSc) as tuition fee. A similar program at the private institute would cost about 163,805. The fee for the Msc program in 2010 was around 52,720 compared to the 2009 figure of 49,200. Students opting to study biotechnology at private institutes pay as high as six-and-a-half times the fees the public institutes charge. Faculty and publications

The faculty at the surveyed institutes published a large number of papers in international journals than in national journals. During 2008-12, these institutes published a total of 1,140 papers (870 by private institutes and remaining by public institutes) in national journals and 3,280 in international journals (1625 by private institutes and remaining by public institutes) as against 644 in national journals and 1404 in international journals during 2003-08 and 425 papers in national and 726 in international journals in 2000-03 time period. During 2008-12, the faculty at these institutes published 725 chapters in national journals and 634 in international journals.

Besides publishing papers, these institutes received 65 patent grants while they filed for 175 patents with the Indian regulatory body and received 30 international patent grants as against 65 filed during 2008-12 period. These institutes have increased the number of patent filing from 72 filed during 2003-08 period with Indian agency to 175 during 2008-12. The number of patent filed with international agencies also grew from 40 during 2003-08 to 65 in 2008-12.

Industry Interaction
Realizing the need to have a good interaction between academia and industry, the institutes in the survey have demonstrated a stronger rapport with industry during the last few years. These 48 institutes have developed 83 products during 2009-12. These institutes have received government and industry sponsored projects worth 262 crore during 2009-12 (24 crore from industry and rest from government agencies). During 2008-09, these institutes received a grant of 4 crore from the industry and 66 crore from the government agencies.

The total expenditure on books, journals, infrastructure, and consumables during 2009-12 was 195 crore, an apparent increase from 90 crore spent during 2007-09. The spending on books alone was about 8 crore during 2009-12 period. The spending on lab equipment went up from 55 crore to 125 crore during the same period.

During 2011, a total of 5910 students passed the final examinations (BTech, MSc, Mtech, and PhD) with flying colours, in which almost 37 percent of these students went for higher education. Of the above total figure, 2730 students were post-graduates from various universities and 35 percent of these too opted for higher studies. Similarly, 3010 students completed their engineering courses, of which 37 percent preferred to pursue higher education.

Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) continues to remain a much-sought-after institute among students who are keen on joining the courses in biotechnology. JNU received over 2,500 applications for an intake of eight PhD seats and 12,000 applications for the post-graduation course. University of Hyderabad and Indian Institute of Technology Bombay are also in the top preferred institutes list for those who want to pursue PhD as their career. These two institutions received close to 2200 applications for an intake of 18 and 34 seats respectively. Amongst the private schools, Jaypee University of Information Technology received 1550 applications for the post-graduate programs, KIIT University had 1137 applications and over 2800 applied for the Vellore Institute of Technology University programs.

8th BioSpectrum Top 20 Biotech Schools Survey 2012-Methodology

The BioSpectrum Top 20 Biotech Schools study includes institutions offering BTech, Masters and PhD courses (Excludes BSc courses). This study was conducted during May-July 2012. The ranking is based on measurable and quantifiable data. The research team did not seek perceptions and opinions of stakeholders such as students or industry to rank the institutes.

Step-I: Identification of Parameters for Ranking of the Institutes
Like the previous year's studies, the parameters suitable for ranking of the institutes were identified in consultation with experts from the industry, education and R&D. Over 10 experts were consulted. Faculty, industry interface, infrastructure and placements emerged as the most important parameters.
Step-II: Ranking on the basis of the Parameters
Structured questionnaire was used to take opinion on relative importance of the four parameters prior to the study. Their opinion was sought for deciding on weights to be assigned to each parameter.
The following means emerged based on data received from experts: Faculty, infrastructure, and industry interaction had emerged as the three most important parameters ahead of placement.
Step-III: Data collection, analysis and ranking of the institutes
BioSpectrum team sent a pre-tested structured questionnaire to directors, principals, and deans of biotech institutes. BioSpectrum scrutinized and validated the responses given by the institutes for accuracy, consistency and sufficiency of the data, data entry, analysis of the data and ranking of the institutes.
The research team spent considerable amount of time accurately analyzing the filled in data for each institute. For each institute, a score was arrived at for each parameter. For a particular parameter, the score was a composition of each of the subparameters.
Faculty score of an institute would be composed of faculty per student, qualification of faculty members, research articles published, contribution of the faculty to national and international journals, patents filed and granted.
Infrastructure score would be similarly composed of capital expenditure on lab equipment and consumables, expenditure on books and journals, and availability of dedicated and shared PCs per student. Similar scores were arrived at for industry interaction and placement using sub-parameters.
Appropriate and largely consistent weights were used for sub-parameters wherever necessary. Sub-parameter scores were indexed with hundred points being granted to the institute with highest score for a particular sub-parameter. Indexed scores were then added up for each institute to arrive at the total score for a particular parameter. Scores were than averaged on hundred.
Each of the parameters (faculty, infrastructure, industry interaction, and placements) was further weighed as per weights provided by experts to arrive at the total score of an institute.
The institutes were then ranked as per this score on an overall basis. The ranking was done separately for the public and private institutes.
Ranking Parameters
Faculty: Faculty per student; faculty qualification; faculty experience; publications by the faculty in national and international journals at different points of time; and patents filed/granted both national and international at different points of time.
Infrastructure:Expenditure on library; expenditure on lab equipment and consumables at different points of time; and labs per student. Industry Interaction: Products developed by the institute in production; projects sponsored to an institute from industry and government sources; and royalty inflow at different times.
Placements: Visits of companies for campus recruitment; job offers during campus placement; number of students placed against needed; number of job offers against needed; and salary offered during the campus placement.
Weights: Infrastructure-28; Faculty-30; Industry interaction-32; and Placement-10
 Top 20 BT Public School 
Rank Name of the Institute City State Faculty Score II Score Placement Score Overall Score
1 Jawaharlal Nehru University New Delhi Delhi 44.00 64.00 49.51 47.9
2 Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology Thiruvananthapuram Kerala 51.38 13.15 0.00 41.33
3 Institute of Chemical Technology Mumbai Maharashtra 38.47 72.51 21.20 40.89
4 Indian Institute of Technology Mumbai Maharashtra 21.92 48.70 38.99 28.33
5 University of Hyderabad Hyderabad Andhra Pradesh 16.36 38.40 41.22 27.00
6 Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University New Delhi Delhi 20.90 10.03 23.26 23.61
7 Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Coimbatore Tamil Nadu 20.77 10.99 70.53 19.90
8 National Dairy Research Institute Karnal Haryana 15.91 14.49 0.00 19.53
9 Tezpur University Sonitpur Assam 17.46 15.05 61.48 19.48
10 Jamia Hamdard [Hamdard University] New Delhi Delhi 40.90 9.53 18.60 19.03
11 Banaras Hindu University Varanasi Uttar Pradesh 29.26 5.51 18.68 14.64
12 Shivaji University Kolhapur Maharashtra 15.04 16.66 10.38 11.44
13 Kumaun University Bhimtal Uttarakhand 12.42 0.50 9.30 6.13
14 Burdwan University Burdwan West Bengal 9.67 0.24 6.98 4.45
15 Govt Post Graduate College of Bilaspur Bilaspur Himachal Pradesh 3.16 0.00 0.00 1.09

Public BT Schools Private BT Schools
  • Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi, regained its No. 1 position. Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology (RGCB) from Thiruvananthapuram was ranked No. 2; and Institute of Chemical Technology (ICT), Mumbai was at No. 3 position
  • Jaypee University of Information Technology (JUIT), Solan regained its No. 1 position in private sector and was followed by Shoolini University of Biotechnology and Management Sciences (SUBMS), Solan at No. 2 and SASTRA University, Thanjavur at No. 3
  • Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU) was No. 1 on the placement parameter, followed by Tezpur University and JNU
  • SUBMS topped the list under placement category. Vellore Institute of Technology University (VITU) and SASTRA were No. 2 and No. 3 respectively
  • ICT scored the highest in Industry-Interaction parameter and it was followed by JNU and Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IIT-B).
  • JUIT was table leader on infrastructure score and was followed by SASTRA and Manipal Life Science Centre
  • RGCB topped the rankings list on the faculty parameter followed by JNU and Jamia Hamdard [Hamdard University], New Delhi
  • Under Industry Interaction category, JUIT topped the list . SUBMS and KIIT University stood second and third respectively.
  • RGCB was No. 1 in the infrastructure category. It was closely followed by Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and National Dairy Research Institute in the second and third positions, respectively
  • The faculty score leader was Manipal Life Science Centre. It was followed by K S Rangasamy College of Technology, Namakkal and TERI University, New Delhi

 Top 20 BT Private School 
Rank Name of the Institute City State Faculty Score II Score Infra Score Placement Score Overall Score
1 Jaypee University of Information Technology Solan Himachal Pradesh 29.02 60.78 84.92 28.35 54.77
2 Shoolini University of Biotechnology and Management Sciences Solan Himachal Pradesh 35.87 57.27 32.10 76.7 45.75
3 SASTRA University Thanjavur Tamil Nadu 28.92 15.50 80.28 43.79 40.50
4 Manipal Life Science Centre Manipal Karnataka 61.11 31.16 43.16 0.21 40.41
5 Vellore Institute of Technology University Vellore Tamil Nadu 22.50 18.98 42.58 49.48 29.7
6 K S Rangasamy College of Technology Namakkal Tamil Nadu 42.99 39.19 4.95 22.21 29.04
7 KIIT University Bhubaneshwar Odisha 13.17 47.29 20.46 12.22 26.04
8 The Oxford College of Science Bangalore Karnataka 29.81 10.21 26.73 28.12 22.51
9 Jaypee Institute of Information Technology Noida Uttar Pradesh 37.12 3.62 26.26 26.37 22.29
10 Shree Manibhai Virani and Smt Navalben Virani Science College Rajkot Gujarat 16.23 20.83 12.52 27.27 17.77
11 Bannari Amman Institute of Technology Sathyamangalam Tamil Nadu 13.83 25.57 8.00 12.83 15.85
12 Gokaraju Rangaraju Institute of Engineering and Technology Hyderabad Andhra Pradesh 22.45 21.64 4.38 9.60 15.84
13 Maharani Lakshmi Ammanni College for Women Bangalore Karnataka 36.17 2.61 10.24 8.81 15.43
14 TERI University New Delhi Delhi 41.44 4.60 1.59 0.00 14.35
15 Kristu Jayanti College Bangalore Karnataka 30.32 0.13 7.11 9.14 12.04
16 Rashtreeya Vidyalaya College of Engineering Bangalore Karnataka 18.78 1.36 7.75 29.55 11.20
17 Jaipur National University Jaipur Rajasthan 17.09 6.42 10.15 10.68 11.09
18 Khallikote Autonomous College Berhampur Odisha 22.33 0.00 13.02 0.22 10.37
19 SRM University Kattankulathur Tamil Nadu 17.08 0.72 11.64 16.96 10.31
20 PES Institute of Technology Bangalore Karnataka 22.03 0.00 8.12 14.05 10.29
21 Padmashree Institute of Management and Sciences Bangalore Karnataka 18.29 4.03 8.58 7.40 9.92
22 Banasthali University Banasthali Rajasthan 17.46 6.92 4.02 0.87 8.66
23 Dr D Y Patil Biotechnology and Bioinformatics Institute Pune Maharashtra 8.64 2.22 12.79 14.97 8.38
24 Indian Academy Degree College Bangalore Karnataka 11.47 0.45 11.13 10.46 7.75
25 Arunai Engineering College Thiruvannamalai Tamil Nadu 13.14 1.44 7.44 12.02 7.69
26 T John College Bangalore Karnataka 10.49 0.02 12.09 6.81 7.22
27 Oxbridge College of Science and Commerce Bangalore Karnataka 13.83 0.02 4.63 13.04 6.75
28 Chandigarh College of Technology Landran Punjab 9.51 0.00 5.41 7.92 5.16
29 REVA Institute of Science and Management Bangalore Karnataka 8.47 0.04 4.29 10.18 4.77
30 Dayananda Sagar Institutions Bangalore Karnataka 7.30 3.55 2.68 3.02 4.38
31 Loyola College (Autonomous) Chennai Tamil Nadu 9.20 0.00 3.74 2.19 4.03
32 Vydehi Institute of Biotech Sciences Bangalore Karnataka 9.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.73
33 Hindusthan College of Arts and Science Coimbatore Tamil Nadu 2.96 0.04 0.5 6.49 1.69

Leave a Reply Sign in

Notify me of follow-up comments via e-mail address

Post Comment

Survey Box

National Health Policy

Is National Health Policy 2017 helpful for patients?

Send this article by email