In motivating students towards scientific research, intrinsic motivation is better than a reward. Thus we must find strategies that interest the student in significant and rich thinking.

Motivation can be 1. Intrinsic 2. Extrinsic

Intrinsic motivation comes from i) Genetic factors

ii). Through encouragement by having school, college, state and national level competitions on theory and practicals. Also, encouraging such students to have free access to institutions of higher learning for interaction (as done by IUCAA in Pune), Some efforts are made but not adequate.

iii) Reduce the gestation period to get settled in life for good researchers by offering better tenured positions if their research work is commendable. NET tries to offer some fellowship even before they start research. Instead, measure their performance on the basis of published work in highly reputed journals.

iv) Have science museums, fairs and mobile labs by municipalities and district administrations. Most of the municipalities never think of such facilities.

v) Stop giving teacher fellowship and making Ph.D work as another degree..

Extrinsic Motivation: i) Offer careers not only in teaching but also in pure research with rewards better than the market conditions.

ii) Provide more channelised opportunities for consultancy to not only to industries but also to colleges/schools/pharma labs etc.,

iii) Allow entrepreneurship of good researchers.

Show some famous failure videos in you tube or motivation speeches the person automatically motivated toward what he likes.

@Sadagopan...

How genetic factors can influence "scientific research"???

Success stories could be helpful.

Historical development of a theory or a specific application that impacted our lives and knowledge significantly, and the role of a scientist in this development is usually interesting to students. Some details of the efforts spent, failures and successes in the way, including the suffering of the scientists in the development process coupled with the final successful achievement is important in this sense.

New invention and the pleasure of research need to be propagated in the higher education. Good researchers should be given proper funding and security without discrimination. Future of the good researchers need to be bright which will motivate the young mass to join and engage in research. Now a days most of the good students are in doubt about their future in research life and hence choose to join direct job without engaging in the uncertainty. Of course this is my personal view based on the Indian situation.

There are many researchers who have a scientific lineage inherited from parents, grand parents and close relatives. If a list is drawn it would be interesting to find that genetic factors have a large role to play.

@Sadagopan...

If a list is drawn, the most likely result will be proof of "Pandita putraha parama suntaha"..

In nature vs nurture, its always Nurture which plays decisive role.

I hope students will express more views in the subject.

I guess that we should modify our teaching and training methods. The students should in the process feel that learning is an enjoyable experience. The should also feel that they are becoming "better" at influencing their environment and solving their problems and the problems of the community. They also should be taught that they are responsible for upgrading the level of their lives and alleviating the human suffering through scientific pursuit.

I think that an interest in natural sciences usually comes from within. Good researchers are usually driven by their own personal motive, a kind of internal calling, which is difficult (if not impossible) to appear as a result of s.o. else’s suggestion. My experience with students shows that good students (let's say, those that always come to lectures and have excellent results on exams) rarely become good (creative and dedicated to science) researchers. I think that curiosity about the true nature of the Universe we are living in is usually the real motivation for doing science in most cases. Of course, the fact that science could serve for good in our society is also important, but I think it is not enough to motivate someone for research in natural sciences. Earning money and good salaries are also not motives to become a scientist - scientists are usually not well paid for their work if compared to other professions. Also, I think that doing science only for money is not a good practice. As Einstein said, "imagination is more important than knowledge" (Einstein was not a good student at all, but became a brilliant scientist, and his is not the only one like that). Also, maybe the society needs not simply many scientists, but just enough good scientists that are real Masters in what they are doing. Even in the darkest ages in our history there were such people fascinated by Nature that performed research even when it was strictly forbidden to do it. We know that there were times that the Inquisition ruled all over in the Middle Ages in Europe, and when saying that the planet Earth is round and rotating around the Sun meant certain death by burning on the stake. Even then, there were people that were doing research, hidden from the world in underground labs. The internal forces that made such people doing research in those times, I think are probably similar to the forces that motivate good researchers nowadays and surely will motivate others in the future.