Why this matters
KriVid(YA)'s pedagogy isn't adapted from a generic STEM-outreach template — it's designed by practicing scientists who have themselves gone through the process of forming a hypothesis, testing it, and revising their thinking when the evidence didn't match their expectations. That lived experience of scientific reasoning is what shapes how we construct a cognitive conflict for a 12-year-old: we know, firsthand, what it feels like to be wrong in an informative way.
Dr Purva Bhatter
Dr. Purva holds a postdoctoral position in Biology from IIT Madras and has authored over ten papers published in international peer-reviewed journals. Her research background in the life sciences directly informs KriVid(YA)'s experimental design — every activity is built with the same rigor around observation, hypothesis, and evidence that defines her own scientific practice, translated into a form a school student can engage with hands-on.
Amritha Rangarajan
Amritha holds a postgraduate degree in Chemistry from Stella Maris College, Chennai, and worked as a research fellow at JNCASR, Bangalore, before completing her B.Ed and moving into full-time teaching. She has taught physical sciences across multiple schools, bringing a practicing educator's understanding of classroom realities — pacing, assessment, and how a curriculum actually lands with a room full of students — to complement the research lens.
Link between research and pedagogy
This combination matters for how the programs are built. A research scientist's training is in designing experiments that isolate a specific variable and produce an interpretable result; an educator's training is in translating that into something deliverable at scale, session by session, to a classroom of children. KriVid(YA)'s cognitive-conflict method sits exactly at that intersection — each experiment is engineered with the precision of an actual scientific protocol, then sequenced and paced with a working educator's understanding of how children actually learn.