Once his neighbours came across Mulla Nasruddin scattering some powder around the village perimeter. “What are you doing, Mulla Nasruddin?” they asked. “I am keeping away the tigers,” the Mulla replied. But there are no tigers here!” the others exclaimed. “Yes, it’s very effective, isn’t it?” the Mulla said.
If there is one phrase that has suffered from overexposure in recent debates on the future of India, it is ‘demographic dividend’. What was seen as a Malthusian nightmare less than 2 decades ago has now acquired an altogether shining glow. The fact that 40% of India’s population is below the age of 30 is touted by many as one of the key drivers that will help India storm her way to economic super-power status in the next 10 years.
There are also strong counter voices, now increasingly voluble. They point to the fact that the education system in this country is broken. Less than 20% of the children from the economically disadvantaged sections successfully get through high school, dropout rates are as high as 40% in several states and even those who struggle through to a school pass possess very poor communication, knowledge and analytical skills. There is a massive employability gap with less than 2 in 10 being found fit for employment, especially in technical fields. And this despite an economy that seemingly displays a voracious appetite for skilled and not-so-skilled jobs.
Where then will the youth go? Will the dividend not then prove a tinder-box as young people – especially from poorer backgrounds – become increasingly disillusioned with the system that does not give them a real chance in life? Even when they see so much conspicuous consumption around them?
I believe both voices have some salience. The present moment in our demographic history is one which is pregnant with immense potential in our young that can be unlocked, but equally with the abyss of social fracture that could result otherwise. The need for a bridge that will take us over the impending chasm into a better India for all of us over the next decades has never been more urgent.
In the minds of the mandarins in our corridors of power, in industry and amongst many policy planners and NGOs, the emerging consensus is that this is best done through the mechanism of vocational education or skill development.
The arguments for a robust vocational education system are many and compelling; this is something that has withstood the test of time in the developed world and has proved to be a powerful engine of progress in these countries for many decades. But the devil as always lies in the details.
There is so much talk, discussion, debate; so many seminars, workshops and conclaves on the subject by governments, the World Bank, think tanks, NGOs, etc., that we are all a bit like Mulla Nasruddin. Powder is being scattered everywhere, a lot of sound and fury, but with little or no thought to specific outcomes or issues that bedevil the implementation of even simple vocational skill programmes on the ground.
Let us consider the nature of the problem.
When are we to provide vocational training? Most people would agree that the target audience should be youth in the age group of 15-25 years. Currently, the population in this age group is around 250 million. This is a staggering number by any standards. How does one even begin to look at imparting vocational skills to a small part, let alone the whole, of such a multitudinous universe?
First, where are the instructors? If there is serious shortage of skilled teachers even of the vanilla type for math and science, finding the welders, machinists, carpenters, electricians, beauticians, gardeners, English language trainers, computer skills instructors and multiple others to handle good vocational skill instruction is a task that boggles the mind. There has been an enormous amount of work in developing content – especially in the electronic format. The Modular Employable Skills (MES) programme has done much work in this area as have multiple others including the National Skills Development Corporation; but in the context of the problem, it presents a Mulla Nasruddin type of diversion, a sort of substitute solution to the main challenge.
Compared to conventional subjects, vocational training is all about learning by doing. The course content as designed and printed on paper can certainly serve as a guide, but can never substitute for hands-on training. In other words you cannot become a carpenter or electrician or beautician by mugging the stuff; you actually have to do it and do it―again and again. This requires physical facilities: training equipment, work benches and the like, of course, a competent trainer.
In India, aided and government schools do not possess even basic labs to teach science. Book content is a poor substitute for practical science as we can see from the very poor quality of science students that are graduating each year from schools. This is even more the case for vocational training (imagine a carpentry graduate who has learnt wood planing or shaping through a book) and presents a real infrastructure challenge, and that constitutes the core of the second problem.
The third difficulty stems from the numbers. Indian classes especially in poorer schools are very large; each section typically has upwards of 50-60 students and most grades have 3 to 5 sections. This is a reality that can confound most vocational training initiatives which require smaller, modular classes where students can work on the equipment and actually learn by doing projects.
Finally, there is the complex amalgam of factors relating to poverty, home environment, social pressures and so on to which teenage children are especially susceptible. The child that drops out of the schooling system due to any of the above can rarely be brought back into training. In plain economics, they are already in the unorganized job sector and leaving it for vocational training constitutes a significant opportunity cost for them and their families. In other words, even free training has a cost that many are unable or unwilling to bear.
What then are we to do if we are to make an impact on a set of problems of this magnitude? Winston Churchill once wrote, “I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.” In our context perhaps we ought to say, ‘Never let schooling interfere with skilling.’
1. The first place to start is clearly the school where we can formally allow a parallel stream of vocation education in the 9th and 10th standards. Students who are weak academically but have other strong abilities ought to be given a choice and counseled on this path, which will have academic elements, especially English and Math, but in a simpler form.
2. Each school will set up 1 or 2 dedicated spaces for workshops of the simplest kind. If this is not possible in the school premises due to space constraints, it can be done in a rented premise close to the school. The equipment will be basic and can cover the essentials of main trades for both girls and boys.
3. Next, a local network with industry, restaurants, retail establishments, and technical institutions/colleges in the area needs to be established so that an element of practical shop-floor training can be brought into the curriculum and other resources leveraged.
4. Finally, a trade certificate could be issued by the state or the school once the student has successfully completed the vocational training requirements. This may not hold the same status of an SSLC but will be far better than letting the child drop out with nothing to show for his or her future.
The above model will use as faculty people who will be drawn from the extensive pool of unorganized labour in this country. In the construction industry for example, we have many carpenters, plumbers etc., who are skilled and experienced, but not educated in the conventional sense. If these people are brought in as faculty and seconded to a vocational training faculty from the school who handles the formalization of the instruction, there could be a complete win-win for both the student and the trainer.
The above prescriptions obviously sound simpler than they will be in practice. There could also be many other possible solutions. But it is clear that we need to think laterally and with an eye to the ground. India is at a cusp and the situation demands a response that is as fast and effective as we can make it. Our children’s future demands nothing less.
The author is a research & innovation entrepreneur and was Chairman of CII Karnataka during 2010-11.
India's already TOO LATE!, thanks to poverty of thinking+political sloganeering+lack of action. Solution? = ["Its the Trainers stupid" + compelling structured lessons/training of the type that make Trainers consistent].
ReplyDelete