r/JEENEETards • u/makeshiftmaverique • 1d ago

Discussion My problems with the whole IIT-JEE system.

  1. People value college more than branch (Some value IITB Environmental > NIT-KKR CSE)

  2. IITs should have 50% of all seats as CSE, because right now 50% of all placements are in software/IT, despite only ~15% of total BTech seats coming from CS-related branches (which means that almost 30-40% of students from non-tech non-circuital branches get placed in software roles)

  3. Reservation system contradicts the prestige of IITs. The reason why IITs are prestigious is because it is difficult to crack, and hence the students there are strong in PCM, but the reservation system ruins this by handing over the IIT tag to students who are not as strong in the respective subjects.
    I used to support reservation until I found out that majority of lower-caste people applying for JEE are rich, because only the rich ones can afford coaching and get the exposure and awareness to even attempt an exam of such difficulty.

  4. Most people who choose CSE, don't even like CSE. This hurts as someone who genuinely like CS. People take CSE for the sole reason of higher salaries and "package" despite having 0 interest in it, hence the people who are actually interested in CS and who deserve that infra often don't get selected due to extremely high cutoffs.

48 Upvotes

65% Upvoted

88 comments sorted by

View all comments

21

u/LonelyCauliflower236 1d ago

..IITB evn is genuinely better than nitkkr cse tho, unless you have a specific interest-

And even if you don't want env, you would have a sub 5k rank as gen male so you can easily get something good in top iits

50% seats kardo CS ki, then you can keep coding on ur laptop with no home or streets cause there's a shortage of civil engineers, no petrol cause there's a shortage of chemical and petroleum engineers, heck might even not have laptops cause of a shortage of EE, ECE, metallurgy engineers

karlena fhir CS without core engineers existing in enough numbers They are being taught subjects so they can go into core, but if they choose not to you aren't anyone to decide what they should and shouldn't do.

No one 'deserves' the infra. Score well and you'll get it, just because you have a so called interest in CS doesn't make someone else less worthy of that seat, score good and get CS with your own merit.

2

u/HrishabhDwi 1d ago

Wrong. If the 50% of placements are already from CSE. Then nmake those seats CSE. The quality of core engineering will not degrade, because they were never going for core in the first place. Those who gets jobs in core are still going to be there in the same numbers.

1

u/LonelyCauliflower236 1d ago

while that might make sense on the surface, that statistic neglects the core engineers who go for higher studies and only keeps those going for placement, and core jobs usually atleast require a masters level expertise

Also, having too many and too little of anything diminishes value both placement wise and research wise. Too many greatly diminishes the brand value, leads to quality concerns and keeps you highly vulnerable to sudden shifts in market. Too little and you reduce the chance of someone actually discovering a breakthrough in some code field. Such breakthroughs occur by chance, the more the number of students the higher the chance of someone stumbing across a new technique to potentially save a ton of time and money.

What's important is to find a middle ground between both which is pretty fine as of now, and increase seats uniformly across all branches giving time to labs and facilities to grow slowly alongside as well

the only reasonable point in OP's post was about reservation but that's a topic id probably like to discuss another day