When Would We Stop Talking and Start Doing?

                                                  When Would We Stop Talking and Start Doing?

Demographic Dividend was the topic among the talking heads in the early noughties (as I remember it) and has since been the same. That payout is at the risk of becoming a lapsed cheque. Within the last month or so, I read an analysis item in my daily newspaper bemoaning why it has been so. Nothing new.

But, the old still has some lessons to teach us. This is an effort to tease them out.”We are preparing students for jobs that are that are rapidly disappearing or evolving.” OK, are we to prepare them for the current requirements of the job market? If that were so, how does a parent know that the current set of highly absorbent fields would stay the same in four years hence?

Now, data science, Artificial Intelligence (AI) are the “in” fields. As a parent, I am entitled to get an answer posed to college administrators, “Can you give me assurance that four years from now, my ward would be able to get a job in the field that she had chosen, which is in great demand now?” 

Is there any college administrator who would dare to respond? In a movie, a doctor says to a patient’s relative that no doctor can give any type of guarantee that his relative would come out alive from the operation theatre. It is the same with the college administrator!

Emerging technologies are being led by AI, is the voice from the echo chamber. AI is so destructive it is reshaping how we think and work. My simple question: did you see AI when it was below the horizon? I suppose not. Then, how do you know that a new technology that does not have a name yet and which is currently below the horizon would not be the fashion four years from now when my ward graduates? You are betting on AI, but do not put your lifesavings on that horse that might break a leg in mid-stride.

“A plethora of new jobs related to AI development are being created even as we speak.” The writers meant, “as we are writing”, and, “as you are reading”! Just a low-level dig, but not below the belt.

“This technological shift via AI is already changing the world…”. That is a scary thought. Our brains would become dormant and we could be back to climbing trees to escape from the AI monster! Do the writers think that such creative destruction has no end date? So did those who created steam engines. Just a reminder.

Let us talk about demographic dividend, already more than two decades old. How long would it hold out? So, the writers want you to get onto the AI wagon to escape the storm of demographic deficit that they espy in the horizon. They do care, don’t they?

Who is causing this mismatch – not preparing students for the future. Of course, the educational institutions. I am not going to argue this point though there is much to argue about. But, what do the writers not claim? They do not claim that the “industries” (mainly software, banking, and finance – leveraged buyout anyone?) should also pitch in. No, not a word on this from the pulpit.

The reality gap, the writers say is the“…worrying gap between academic institutions and industry requirements.” This is a self-own, brightly lit. Has industry done anything in this regard, even lift a finger? No. Therefore, the sole purpose of an educational institution is to prepare a student for the software, banking, and finance industries.  

“Over the past decade, data show that 40%-50% of engineering graduates from Indian universities have not been placed in jobs.” While parents demanding an immediate RoI could be taken up elsewhere, here let me ask, is there anything else that could be achieved through education. Here, the contrast between how the piece started with Rabindranath Tagore and what the writers focus on further is glaring.

“Don’t limit a child to your own learning, for she was born in another time.” The political correctness (“she” where the original quote says, “he”) grates here. For Tagore, in his time, the focus was not employment, but here it is. This is about a quote being used in a most inappropriate setting. Tagore was most probably talking about all round development, which, of course, would include employment.

The writers take a wrecking ball to how syllabuses are changed, the procedure being uncoordinated with industry demands that is so fluid, besides being archaic. The only solution to this, in my humble opinion, is to let industry prepare the syllabus, not in a three year cycle, but every semester, speeded up by a factor of six! Such courses in a dynamic syllabus could be taught only by industry experts. And, no Ph.Ds!

The Delphic Oracle, as delivered by the writers is the following: “What India needs is a cohesive strategy that aligns education and skill demand with industry demands (my emphasis).” Let the industry roll in its wealth, underwritten by high school and college education.

Yes, we should stop talking and start deciding what should be talked about and how. The statistics of demography, let everyone recognize, spans, going beyond all large cities, be they Tier I, II, or III, all the towns and villages; indeed rural population in India is 63.13% and not a word was written on how to tap that resource. Without that, the demographic dividend is a mirage and the country will be beyond the hot sands of the desert that creates the mirage and it soon would be the dark chilly night.

Raghuram Ekambaram