How come a few research groups are more successful than others, in producing good students and faculty ? [for students]

Things are not as random and uncorrelated as students like to think. “Nothing comes from nothing, nothing ever could…”. Remeber the famous song?

This blog is addressed to students, as now is the interview season. Also, students are getting ready to go abroad. Sometimes students have little choice, but they should try to create choices, even at the expense of losing one year. It is not a waste. Believe me… nothing worse than getting stuck in a nonperforming, mediocre group.

The answer to the question posed in the blog is very simple : Not all faculty are interested in science. It is just a 9-5 job and the number of such faculty has increased, for many reasons. Teacher should first be a mentor, guide the naive student, teach him/her. There should be group meetings, more than once a week where papers by others should be read and discussed. Such a research activity is utmost important for future growth. Unfortunately, some faculty do not do or encourage these. The groups that pursue and persit with these, succeed.

It is not a correct assessment often made by the new incoming students that all faculty groups in a prestigious places like IISc or some IITs are the same. Students tend to think ” I can join any one and be okay. “ This is one of the worst mistakes students can and do make (out of hurry or desperation) every year, leading to disastrous consequences. Just because a scientist/professor is a faculty in a noted place does not assure a quaity and fruitfil degree. In fact, often the opposite is true. Even in better places, not more than 50% of the faculty arw good and can guide a student in a fruitful research. It is sad but true.

That is, faculty quality, ability, interest, passion come in a wide distribution. This is NOT Gaussian or Lorenzian distribution! NOT AT ALL. ACTUALLY, THERE IS A SMALL TAIL TOWARDS HIGHER QUALITIES, AND THERE IS A LARGE BROAD PEAK IN THE MID REGION OF QUALITIES. Unfortuantely, the population at low qualities is also pretty high! HOWEVER UNPLEASANT, STUDENTS SHOULD NOTE THAT MOST OF THE FACULTIES DO NOT REMAIN INTERESTED. IT IS AN EASY LIFE FOR THEM.

I have written repeatedly that it is essential for a student to investigate early, select a subject of research and then a guide with care, after doing a lot of research on these, themselves. DO ASK SENIORS IN THE GROUP/LAB…...THEY DO NOT GIVE WRONG INFORMATION. I am really apalled by the “lottery” that students play with their lives. I understand that a good number of students are not motivated, and do PhD is a “time pass”. But there are still quite a few, and a large number in a vast country like ours, who ate dedicated, motivated and meritorious. I have seen many such good ones perush completely by joining wrong groups, pursuing research in subjects that have no future.

What makes a faculty adviser NOT so good? We often use these strong negative terms for in different contexts but they are equally applicable to faculty as well., and you can land up in a bad group. The sad thing is that students are typically naive (even stupid) and do not understand this well into their PhD programme but then there is often no way to correct the mistake.

Many of the faculty members are happy to take students because in India it does not cost them any money or anything (unlike in the USA). However, sad and strange it might sound, but many faculty members remain busy with their life. They might appear formidable in India, but you will find them invisible in international conferences. Note that citation is a poor measure.

Another aspect that makes it hard for students is that many not-so-good faculty members are good at catching quality students. I have seen this repeatedly. And outstanding faculty seldom makes effort to reach out to students.

Once my good friend and colleague, Professor Paul Barbara (of Univ Texas@Austin, Texas) told me over a mug of beer (when many emotional issues are discussed) that he no longer got the best students because he just did not have time to chase them. For example, he did not have time to go out for beer with them, or entertain them. Students at young age like excitement and interesting life, so often joing those faculty who appeared to be willing to spend time with them.

However, the story changes after you join the group.

Buit let me get back to the central theme of the blog. What makes some groups produce one after another great students, like Prof. Graham Fleming, Professor Stuart Rice. And earlier days, in Physics, Joseph Mayer. Professor Sommerfield was famous for mentoring. On the other hand, I have seen or worked with Nobel Laureates who are not good mentors.

The first quality is that the chosen adviser must be a good scientist himself or herself. Second quanlity: he or she must be honest, hard working ad willing to spend time and explain things to students. There is also the issue of training. Students require careful training in the first 2-3 years in particular. Each area has certai core papers. In my case Bob Zwanzig pointed out many of those to me, which although late, was useful. Third, students must be trained to work hard. Fourth, honesty. Results must be checked for reproduceability and accuracy.

I myself did not get any mentoring during my PhD days, but was left alone and I went on taking a huge number of courses in Physics and mathematics that helped enormously in my later years.

There is another important point ” “Apples do not fall far from the tree”. I have seen students from outstanding groups go on to become excellent mentors. There are exceptions but the rule usually holds.

Returning again to the main theme. Not just quality and hard work, passion also plays a role.

It is diifcult to be passionate in modern days where there is so much uncertainity, where students have to worry about futture continuously.

But still, having a positive attitude or outlook, desire to do well in research and teaching goes a long way. Students must be helped along the way. Here in India students often do not have much ideas when they start.

But a good adviser is a person worth his/her weight in gold, or, even more, at least to the students and postdocs. The problem in our society is that they do not get the recognition they deserve, which confuses students.

Good luck!!

Biman Bagchi

17-06-2026, Bengaluru.

========================