Visvesvaraya Technological University (VTU) in Karnataka is set to introduce a Research Promotion Scheme aimed at encouraging faculty members to engage in product-oriented research. This announcement was made by Vice-Chancellor S. Vidyashankar during the inauguration of the International Conference on Communication, Computer, and Information Technology (IC3IT-2025) held at the Mysuru Royal Institute of Technology.

Vidyashankar emphasized that while India produces a significant number of engineers, much of the research conducted tends to focus solely on publishing academic papers rather than translating findings into practical products that can benefit society, particularly marginalized communities. He highlighted the need for researchers to consider the societal impact of their work and pointed out that many advancements in communication technology have not reached remote areas where basic internet access remains a challenge.

The conference featured 180 technical papers presented throughout the day, with accepted submissions set to be published in the IEEE Xplore Digital Library, enhancing visibility for authors and their institutions. The event aimed to foster collaboration among academia, research, and industry while providing a platform for sharing innovative ideas and discussing advancements in communication and information technology.

Original article

The article about the Research Promotion Scheme at Visvesvaraya Technological University (VTU) provides limited actionable information for a normal person. It primarily discusses an initiative aimed at faculty members and researchers, without offering specific steps or resources that individuals can utilize in their daily lives. Therefore, there is no immediate action for the average reader to take.

In terms of educational depth, the article touches on important themes such as the need for product-oriented research and societal impact but does not delve deeply into how these concepts work or why they are significant. It lacks detailed explanations or data that would enhance understanding beyond basic facts.

Regarding personal relevance, while the topic of research and its societal implications is significant, it may not directly affect most readers' lives. The connection to everyday concerns like health, finances, or safety is minimal; thus, it does not strongly resonate with personal experiences.

The article does not serve a public service function as it does not provide warnings, safety advice, or practical tools that could benefit the public. It primarily relays information about an academic conference and a new scheme without offering concrete help.

When assessing practicality of advice, there are no clear tips or steps provided that individuals can realistically follow. The content remains vague regarding how one might engage with this new initiative or benefit from it personally.

In terms of long-term impact, while promoting product-oriented research could have positive effects on society in general over time, the article itself does not provide actionable ideas that would lead to lasting benefits for readers.

Emotionally or psychologically, the article does little to uplift or empower readers. It presents a factual account without fostering hope or motivation among its audience regarding their own roles in technology and research.

Finally, there are no indications of clickbait language; however, the piece could have been more engaging by including examples of successful product-oriented research initiatives or ways individuals could get involved in similar efforts.

To improve its utility for readers seeking more information on this topic, the article could have included links to relevant resources such as academic journals focusing on applied research or organizations supporting technology access in underserved areas. Additionally, suggesting ways to engage with local universities for community projects might provide practical pathways for interested individuals.

The initiative by Visvesvaraya Technological University (VTU) to promote product-oriented research among faculty members raises significant concerns regarding its implications for local families, kinship bonds, and community survival. While the intention to translate academic findings into practical products is commendable, it risks diverting attention from the foundational responsibilities that bind families and communities together.

First and foremost, there is a critical need to assess how this focus on research output impacts the nurturing of children and care for elders within families. If faculty members are incentivized primarily by external recognition or funding opportunities tied to product development, their commitment to local kinship duties may diminish. The essential roles of parents and extended family in raising children could be undermined as individuals prioritize personal or institutional advancement over familial obligations. This shift can create a rift in the natural support systems that are vital for child-rearing and elder care.

Furthermore, the emphasis on societal impact must not merely be an abstract concept but should translate into tangible actions that strengthen community ties. If researchers fail to engage with their immediate environments—particularly marginalized communities—their work may inadvertently perpetuate social divides rather than bridge them. This lack of connection can erode trust within neighborhoods as families feel neglected by those who should be advocates for their needs.

Moreover, there is a risk that such initiatives could impose economic dependencies on distant institutions rather than fostering self-reliance within local communities. When families become reliant on external entities for resources or validation, they may lose sight of their stewardship responsibilities toward both land and kin. The ancestral duty to care for one’s environment—ensuring sustainability for future generations—is jeopardized when local knowledge and practices are overshadowed by academic pursuits disconnected from community realities.

The potential consequences of these trends are dire: unchecked acceptance of this approach could lead to weakened family structures where individual ambitions overshadow collective responsibilities. Children yet unborn may grow up in environments lacking strong familial bonds or community support systems essential for their development. Trust among neighbors would erode as people prioritize personal gain over communal well-being, leading to increased isolation rather than collaboration.

In conclusion, if these ideas spread without careful consideration of their impact on familial duties and local accountability, we risk creating a society where procreative continuity is threatened, vulnerable populations remain unprotected, and stewardship of our shared land deteriorates. It is imperative that any research promotion schemes integrate principles that reinforce personal responsibility towards family duties while fostering genuine connections with the community—ensuring survival through active engagement in nurturing both people and place.

The text uses the phrase "much of the research conducted tends to focus solely on publishing academic papers rather than translating findings into practical products." This wording suggests that researchers are failing in their duties by prioritizing publications over practical applications. It implies a negative judgment about the quality of research, which may not be entirely fair or accurate. This bias could lead readers to think that academic work is less valuable, overshadowing the importance of theoretical research.

When Vice-Chancellor S. Vidyashankar states, "many advancements in communication technology have not reached remote areas where basic internet access remains a challenge," it creates an image of neglect towards marginalized communities. This framing can evoke feelings of sympathy and urgency but does not provide specific examples or evidence for this claim. The lack of detail may mislead readers into believing that there is widespread failure without acknowledging potential efforts made to address these issues.

The text mentions "encouraging faculty members to engage in product-oriented research" as part of the new Research Promotion Scheme. The term "product-oriented" carries a strong connotation that implies practical usefulness and societal benefit, which can push readers to view this approach as inherently superior. This choice of words might downplay other forms of valuable research that do not directly lead to products but still contribute significantly to knowledge and understanding.

Vidyashankar's emphasis on societal impact suggests a moral high ground regarding how research should be conducted, implying that those who do not follow this path are somehow lacking in social responsibility. The phrase "consider the societal impact" frames researchers who focus solely on academic outputs as disconnected from real-world issues. This could create an unfair dichotomy between two types of researchers without acknowledging the complexities involved in academic work.

The statement about 180 technical papers being presented at the conference emphasizes quantity over quality with no context about their significance or impact. By highlighting only the number, it may lead readers to believe that more papers equal better outcomes for society or academia without providing evidence for this correlation. This could mislead audiences into thinking that sheer volume is an indicator of success rather than meaningful contributions.

The text mentions accepted submissions being published in the IEEE Xplore Digital Library, enhancing visibility for authors and their institutions. While this sounds positive, it subtly promotes a system where publication is equated with value and success without addressing potential biases within publication processes themselves. It can create an impression that visibility automatically leads to credibility, which might not always hold true across different fields or contexts.

Vidyashankar's comments imply a criticism towards current research practices by stating there is a need for change without offering solutions or acknowledging existing efforts toward product-oriented outcomes within academia. Phrasing like "highlighted the need" suggests urgency but lacks nuance regarding ongoing discussions within educational institutions about balancing theoretical and applied research approaches. This framing may oversimplify complex debates surrounding academic priorities and responsibilities.

Finally, when discussing marginalized communities' access to technology, it uses emotionally charged language like “basic internet access remains a challenge.” Such wording evokes sympathy but does not specify what has been done or what barriers exist beyond mere access issues. By focusing on emotional appeal rather than providing concrete data or examples, it risks creating misconceptions about both technological progress and community needs while potentially oversimplifying systemic problems faced by these groups.

The text conveys a range of emotions that shape its message and influence the reader's perception. One prominent emotion is concern, expressed through Vice-Chancellor S. Vidyashankar’s emphasis on the gap between academic research and its practical applications for society, particularly marginalized communities. This concern is evident when he points out that many advancements in communication technology have not reached remote areas lacking basic internet access. The strength of this emotion is moderate to strong, as it highlights a significant issue affecting societal progress. It serves to evoke sympathy from readers who may feel compelled to consider the implications of research that does not address real-world problems.

Another emotion present in the text is pride, which can be inferred from Vidyashankar’s acknowledgment of India producing a large number of engineers. This pride, while subtle, reinforces a sense of national achievement in education and innovation. However, it contrasts with the underlying concern about how this potential is utilized, suggesting that there is room for improvement in directing efforts toward impactful research.

Excitement also permeates the announcement regarding the Research Promotion Scheme aimed at encouraging product-oriented research among faculty members. This excitement reflects an optimistic outlook on future possibilities for innovation and collaboration within academia and industry. The mention of 180 technical papers presented at the conference adds to this emotional tone by showcasing active engagement in knowledge sharing and advancement within communication technology.

These emotions guide readers’ reactions by creating a sense of urgency around addressing societal needs while also fostering hope for positive change through collaborative efforts between academia and industry. The blend of concern with excitement encourages readers to reflect on their roles in supporting meaningful research initiatives.

The writer employs emotional language strategically throughout the text to enhance persuasion. Phrases such as “significant number” and “societal impact” are chosen carefully to evoke feelings rather than merely convey facts; they highlight both achievements and shortcomings without sounding overly critical or neutral. Additionally, emphasizing terms like “marginalized communities” draws attention to those who are often overlooked, prompting empathy from readers who may wish to advocate for these groups.

By repeating themes related to societal benefit versus academic isolation—such as focusing on practical products rather than just publications—the writer reinforces key ideas emotionally charged with urgency and responsibility towards community welfare. Overall, these tools increase emotional impact by steering attention toward pressing issues while inspiring action among faculty members and stakeholders involved in research promotion initiatives at VTU.