In recent years, Pulchowk students routinely have won many regional robotics competitions, beating out competitors from other South Asian and South East Asian countries. No other studies/programs at Pulchowk appears to have such a regionally "winning" streak, though Pulchowk remains a fine engineering institution. Still, the way they teach, say, civil engineering in India or Bangladesh can't be all that different from the way they teach at Pulchowk. So, back to this series of success stories in robotics at Pulchowk. What accounts for this CONTINUOUS excellence in robotics at Pulchowk, especially given a lack of resources? a) Is it because of the caliber of students who go into robotics (as in, do the most talented students at Pulchowk somehow gravitate to doing robotics?) b) Is it because of the quality of coaching in robotics that these students receive? c) Is it because the robotics program is better funded than other programs at Pulchowk? d) Are there other variables such as : could it be that other countries do NOT take robotics seriously; hence Pulchowk has all the advantages to be the winner, much in the same way, say, that North Koreans are world champions in synchronized placard-waving? I don't know. I am asking all these questions from all angles just to get a better UNDERSTANDING of what DRIVES Pulchowk's excellence in robotics. If you were were to RANK the above (and other variables) in terms of its degree of importance to the success in robotics, how would Pulchowk grads rank it? I'd be interested . . . Other than that, I am just broadly curious that -- all else being equal -- why some Nepali institutions tend to do very well in something, while others appear to stagnate. The question is: Why? oohi ashu