Ready to respond to the world?

The plea from industry during the last few weeks that that there is a huge talent gap in the country is simply the latest of such a plea, which began two decades ago. The irony of this now though is that edtech companies are enjoying brilliant sunshine (despite one glaring failure). Clearly, something is seriously amiss, especially since it is more than 10 years since the National Skill Development Council and other skill-related initiatives have been ‘around’, but the key question to ask is: What do we have to show for it?

Against this background, it was encouraging to read that NALSA, National Legal Service Authority, along with experts from the UK, France and Singapore of the International Academy of Mediators, conducted a 15-hour advanced commercial mediation training programme last week for senior mediators of Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee of Supreme Court. Core to the programme was training in dealing with multi-party commercial matters and specialized skills and soft skills for handling high-stake commercial matters (ET Page 2, 21, October 2024).

Skills gap?

The focus of any education should be on the ‘How’ rather than the ‘What’. The ‘What’ keeps changing and, in any case, students can gather it on their own with some level of effort. It is the ‘How’ that needs to be taught because it will equip students with the ability first to correctly formulate problems and second find solution. Incidentally, this can also help in gathering the ‘What’.

It is quite incomprehensible to read of a skill gap in filling 1.2 million jobs in GenAI, the latest fascination, especially when hundreds of such GenAI companies have been floated with millions of dollars invested – ET (October 23, 2024) reports of an inflow of $22.7 billion in GenAI! Does this mean that these companies don’t have the appropriate skills to carry on their business but nevertheless have succeeded in attracting such large funds? As I have written several times, skills in mathematics and statistics are mandatory for creating GenAI, which, given the current state of education in India, is not possible. Forget building GenAI, its needs training to be of service to clients. Unfortunately, education and training have become money-making enterprises in India.

Undergraduate education in India

It is commonsense wisdom that a strong foundation is the way to start but we keep ignoring it in education. Some years ago, a leading executive of a leading IT services firm lamented that most of the engineers were unemployable in the first six months. Students have a theoretical understanding of subjects which have predominantly practical applications such as all kinds of engineering and medicine including dentistry. In all fairness to students, based on my experience, the fault lies in the teaching and curriculum.

When engineering students are unable to explain the ‘How’ of some device or mechanism, something is fundamentally wrong. Clearly subjects such as these cannot be so taught unless there is investment in infrastructure and exposure to students. Imagine students of dentistry completing two extractions in four years of undergrad education! Or a law student who cannot interpret provisions of an act!

Many engineering and even dentistry undergraduate students are keen to study Masters in foreign universities because they feel they will get to work with appropriate infrastructure. Hence rather than continuously bemoan the brain drain, we should address this issue of lack of or inadequate infrastructure. When students have to obtain 10 different approvals for a Rs 5000 expense for an approved project, can you blame them for running to overseas universities?

Rigour in education

One of the obstacles to quality education in India is the unchallenging examination system with deplorable practices such as ‘ATKT’ (allowed to keep terms). Why should education be made easy is beyond any logical explanation, because sympathy cannot be a factor in examination. Yes, it must be incorporated in methods of teaching allowing for student inadequacies to help them cope up and respond better but cannot extend to such practices.

And now, The Times of India (October 23, 2024) reports that the passing marks in Science and Maths have been reduced to 20 from 35! Really! The only saving grace is that such students will not be allowed to pursue science streams.   

Several years ago, autonomy was thought of as the answer to enhancing the quality of curriculum, but anyone with even a reasonable familiarity with the education environment can see that this has not been borne out. It is not just that this not been borne out; instead, there is a noticeable decline in standards. If embraced seriously and actively, autonomy can open a new world. Else it becomes a closed world breeding complacency and intellectual lethargy, rewarding mediocrity as excellence. This is what has happened.     

It has become important to emphasise that it is not elitist to argue for quality and rigour in any education system and corresponding examinations. There has been an extremely disturbing and discouraging phenomenon in the last few years: a growing false debate debunking merit and talent, instead of striving to create enabling environments to help students to get more out of themselves.   

Curating curriculum

This just puts a premium of curriculum development (and teaching), whatever the subject. Let us caution against a uniform approach as different disciplines need different inputs from different groups of people. Subjects with practical applications ought to seek views of the relevant industry, while pure sciences should bring in several experts to capture a diversity of views and approaches. The current debates in Physics over quantum mechanics and general relativity demonstrated how challenging it is to create a curriculum.

Fortunately, there is technology to help in curating, since there is so much credible content available. It needs people with commitment and passion for education to come together. Any takers?