<p>There was a time when obtaining a university degree was considered an achievement. Today, it is almost becoming an alibi. A young person studies for three years, acquires a certificate of uncertain value and then explains that he cannot possibly take up work that does not befit a graduate. India has expanded higher education on an extraordinary scale. Universities and colleges have sprung up across the country, including in towns where few formal employment opportunities exist. Enrolment has risen dramatically and, consequently, millions of young Indians now emerge each year expecting salaried employment. Unfortunately, many possess neither the technical knowledge nor the softer skills that companies require. </p><p>Companies, meanwhile, insist that they cannot find people. Hotels need trained staff, hospitals need technicians and factories need machine operators. Employers complain about a shortage of skills. Graduates complain about a shortage of jobs. Clearly, something is amiss. The difficulty is that India has confused education with employability. Families still regard a degree, almost any degree, as preferable to vocational training. A poorly taught Bachelor of Arts appears more respectable than a serious apprenticeship in precision manufacturing. The former may lead to years spent preparing for government examinations. The latter could lead to a job. This mismatch is already dangerous. Young people account for roughly 72% of India’s unemployed, while placement from many skills institutions remains poor. Technology will make the problem more acute. Artificial intelligence will replace some of the routine office work to which graduates aspire, even as India continues to suffer shortages in occupations requiring practical competence. The solution is not another government scheme offering certificates. India needs a national apprenticeship mission jointly managed by government and business. </p><p>It must begin with demand. Industry associations should identify, district by district, the occupations in which shortages actually exist. Employers must help design the course, offer instructors and guarantee a minimum number of apprenticeship positions. No course should be funded simply because a training provider can persuade 500 young people to enrol. More importantly, trainers must be paid for results. A small portion of their fee could be released when a candidate completes an independently assessed course. The remainder should be paid only when the individual is placed in a proper job. </p><p>India has already tested parts of this approach. Project AMBER, run under the skills ministry with private participation, has trained nearly 24,000 young people. About 65% found work within three months. Its payment formula specifically included placement and job retention. The model should be improved, audited and expanded rather than replaced by another grandly named programme. Colleges must also be forced to disclose outcomes. Every institution should publish how many students completed its courses and how many found employment. Parents might then discover that the college charging them several lacs produces excellent graduation photographs but few livelihoods. </p><p> Weak colleges should be encouraged to convert themselves into applied training institutions. Skills training should offer a different route to advancement, not a permanent badge of academic failure. None of this will produce immediate results. Changing institutions, social attitudes and teaching capacity will take seven or eight years. That is precisely why the effort must begin now and be pursued on a war footing. India’s demographic dividend is frequently celebrated. Dividends, however, are paid only when the underlying investment performs. A generation carrying worthless degrees and mounting resentment will be something altogether different. </p>
<p>There was a time when obtaining a university degree was considered an achievement. Today, it is almost becoming an alibi. A young person studies for three years, acquires a certificate of uncertain value and then explains that he cannot possibly take up work that does not befit a graduate. India has expanded higher education on an extraordinary scale. Universities and colleges have sprung up across the country, including in towns where few formal employment opportunities exist. Enrolment has risen dramatically and, consequently, millions of young Indians now emerge each year expecting salaried employment. Unfortunately, many possess neither the technical knowledge nor the softer skills that companies require. </p><p>Companies, meanwhile, insist that they cannot find people. Hotels need trained staff, hospitals need technicians and factories need machine operators. Employers complain about a shortage of skills. Graduates complain about a shortage of jobs. Clearly, something is amiss. The difficulty is that India has confused education with employability. Families still regard a degree, almost any degree, as preferable to vocational training. A poorly taught Bachelor of Arts appears more respectable than a serious apprenticeship in precision manufacturing. The former may lead to years spent preparing for government examinations. The latter could lead to a job. This mismatch is already dangerous. Young people account for roughly 72% of India’s unemployed, while placement from many skills institutions remains poor. Technology will make the problem more acute. Artificial intelligence will replace some of the routine office work to which graduates aspire, even as India continues to suffer shortages in occupations requiring practical competence. The solution is not another government scheme offering certificates. India needs a national apprenticeship mission jointly managed by government and business. </p><p>It must begin with demand. Industry associations should identify, district by district, the occupations in which shortages actually exist. Employers must help design the course, offer instructors and guarantee a minimum number of apprenticeship positions. No course should be funded simply because a training provider can persuade 500 young people to enrol. More importantly, trainers must be paid for results. A small portion of their fee could be released when a candidate completes an independently assessed course. The remainder should be paid only when the individual is placed in a proper job. </p><p>India has already tested parts of this approach. Project AMBER, run under the skills ministry with private participation, has trained nearly 24,000 young people. About 65% found work within three months. Its payment formula specifically included placement and job retention. The model should be improved, audited and expanded rather than replaced by another grandly named programme. Colleges must also be forced to disclose outcomes. Every institution should publish how many students completed its courses and how many found employment. Parents might then discover that the college charging them several lacs produces excellent graduation photographs but few livelihoods. </p><p> Weak colleges should be encouraged to convert themselves into applied training institutions. Skills training should offer a different route to advancement, not a permanent badge of academic failure. None of this will produce immediate results. Changing institutions, social attitudes and teaching capacity will take seven or eight years. That is precisely why the effort must begin now and be pursued on a war footing. India’s demographic dividend is frequently celebrated. Dividends, however, are paid only when the underlying investment performs. A generation carrying worthless degrees and mounting resentment will be something altogether different. </p>
