Chalk Talk: A Roundtable Discussion II on Curriculum of the Future

What should STEM students learn today to be ready for the next five or ten years? AI is changing how we work and learn. Industry wants graduates who can work in teams and across different fields, and students’ aspirations are shifting as well. Should the curriculum follow every new trend, or focus on what has always mattered? Prof. Chandra Shekhar Upadhayay brought together six young IIT Kanpur faculty members: Profs. Aditya H. Kelkar, Rajat Mittal, Dootika Vats, Ushasi Roy, Ark Verma, and Suman Saurabh—to discuss these issues. Prof. Kelkar begins with a simple analogy: no one teaches a toddler to run before they learn to walk. The curriculum works much the same way—get the fundamentals right, and students learn to navigate technologies that do not even exist today. Prof. Verma agrees and emphasises that the curriculum should have a long-term vision. Prof. Vats shares the students’ viewpoint, and Prof. Mittal mentions a CERTEX survey that found most students were satisfied with placements and personal growth, but not with their curiosity. This shows that foundational courses should encourage both curiosity and discipline. The conversation then shifts from what students know to the kinds of graduates they become. Prof. Saurabh points out that even top individual performers may struggle with group work, but projects, teamwork, and peer learning can help. Prof. Vats remembers asking students to create software using any resources, including AI, and present it in a Shark Tank-style pitch. Surprisingly, some of the most creative ideas did not come from the students who were best at math. This leads to a bigger question: if IIT Kanpur is training the next generation of technology leaders, is technical skill alone enough? Now, topics like the humanities, sustainability, ethics, empathy, and hands-on learning are part of the conversation. Prof. Verma points out that empathy and judgement are becoming more important in a world shaped by AI. Prof. Saurabh adds that technology decisions should also consider their effects on future generations. Then comes the question: where does AI belong in the curriculum? Prof. Mittal believes it should appear early—not merely as a technical subject, but to teach students how and when to use it, when not to use it, and its implications for fairness, jobs, society, and energy consumption. Prof. Vats notes an irony: using AI well requires traditional skills such as clear communication and logical thinking. Prof. Roy adds domain knowledge—without understanding the subject, how can one recognise a convincing but incorrect AI answer? Prof. Kelkar asks whether, simply because AI can provide an answer, we should always ask it. Prof. Verma offers a familiar analogy: we once remembered phone numbers before outsourcing that task to our phones. Are we now at risk of outsourcing something far more important—our thinking? The discussion moves to interdisciplinarity. Prof. Roy describes students designing something as ordinary as an umbrella—surveying users, calculating costs, selecting materials, engineering, manufacturing, and finally selling it. Mechanics, materials, finance, design, and human behaviour become part of a single problem. So why should learning stay limited to departments? Prof. Mittal suggests courses taught by faculty from different departments. Prof. Kelkar imagines labs where students tackle open-ended problems, and even instructors might not know the answers. Prof. Vats supports using more electives to help students explore different fields. Prof. Saurabh adds the management perspective. A technology may be brilliant, but does anyone need it? Will people pay for it? Can it be financed and sustained? For future entrepreneurs and leaders, understanding markets, finance and people can be as important as understanding technology. In the end, the panel envisioned the future curriculum—strong foundations without excessive academic burden; thoughtful integration of AI; interdisciplinary and experiential learning; revamped laboratories; greater scope for internships, projects, and creative pursuits; and flexibility to accommodate different learning paces. Ultimately, the goal is not simply to produce better engineers, scientists or technologists, but capable professionals who are also empathetic, ethical and responsible human beings. Panellists' bios: https://iitk-my.sharepoint.com/:b:/g/... Feedback in civilised language is welcome. Inappropriate comments may be removed. Disclaimer: This video is intended for educational purposes only. The views expressed are for instructional purposes and should not be taken out of context. While care has been taken to ensure accuracy, the creators are not responsible for errors, omissions or outcomes resulting from the use of this material. Third-party materials, if any, are used under fair use for educational purposes.