Frequently, while proposing solutions for India’s vast skilling gap, we tend to miss the forest for the trees. Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY)- India’s largest skilling initiative is often chastised inter-alia for its deficient placements, compromised training lengths, and insufficient industry exposure. With the deficiencies exposed, it’s not uncommon for proposed remedies to read like magic bullets worded antithetically to the problems viz. better placement opportunities, extended training lengths, enhanced industry experience etc. However, “magic bullets” rarely work in the field of development; for the problem traces its roots to a dichotomous education model which rewards a talented few but ignores the less gifted, resulting in poor foundational skills for the majority. To solve this conundrum, we must target the problem’s origins instead of the symptoms by first understanding India’s ambivalent education model, learning from global best practices, and then deftly implementing those that work.  

One Education Model, Two Realities 

A highly skilled professional represents the culminating stage of the proverbial education assembly line, with early, secondary, and higher education resembling workstations successively building upon the foundations of their predecessor. Particularly, early education is critical to develop cognitive abilities to think, learn, unlearn, and adapt. In a well-integrated system, these transferable skills subsequently assist in acquiring career-specific proficiencies in later stages. However, by design, the Indian education system works more towards sorting and selecting an exceptional few for the grind of high-standard competitive examinations while letting the neglected majority seep through the cracks. 

Before an attempt at integrating vocational education and training (VET) with formal education through the National Education Policy (NEP)-2020, traditionally, education in India has been characterised by hard separation between the two. See some illustrative facts below: 

The school-led vocational education was made available from grades 11 and 12 where students passed out with “vocational subjects”. This existed as a distinct arrangement with the academically inclined encouraged to pursue the more conventional options of physical sciences and humanities. 

Another route towards vocational and technical training was made available to early-stage dropouts through schemes like PMKVY which largely offer short-duration programmes ranging from a week to a few months. 

While the first route primarily focussed on textbook learning, the second, albeit more practical option, self-selected candidates with weak foundational skills. The result- a decoupling of classroom and practical education.  The above translated into a stigmatised ecosystem where vocational and technical training came to be understood as the domain of those unable to cope with mainstream education’s rigours. This resulted in poor perception, compromised quality, diminished impact, and ensuing reluctance to engage in skills-based training. A workforce with only 4.7% formally trained individuals is a testament to this reluctance. The situation necessitates corrective actions by looking at countries seemingly doing things right. Germany, with more than 75% skilled workforce, offers a compelling case study.   

The German template: Integrated long-duration learning model 

The German model is distinct in recognising that quality skilling initiatives don’t operate in a vacuum but must be input with candidates possessing strong cognitive foundations. Its Dual Vocational Education and Training (VET) framework is characterised by the following: 

Students interested in VET can commence training after the 9th grade by enrolling in long-duration courses that last between 2 to 3.5 years. More than 50% of the students choose such courses for their higher education. 

Under these courses, students sign stipend-backed apprenticeship contracts with companies operating in vocations of their interest. 80% of their time is spent at the worksite with the remaining 20% dedicated to theoretical learning in a vocational school. Financing of the scheme also reflects a similar split. While the cost of in-school education is borne by the Government, the rest is shouldered by the companies in a symbiotic arrangement. 

The above system offers some obvious advantages over the Indian one: 

According to the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), Germany was overall ranked at 25 for its school learning outcomes when compared to the other 81 participating countries. Through early-stage integration of schooling and VET, the German model allows it to utilise students’ strong cognitive foundations to impart sophisticated work-associated skills.  

 A unified schooling and VET framework means potential students are not faced with a hard choice between the two. 

The above two combined with corporate-backed, long-duration, hands-on training significantly improves employment prospects for the candidates. 

The German experience contains two important learnings. First, while better industry linkages and increased training durations may be desirable, optimal absorption of such learning requires strong foundational skills developed in early-life stages. Second, a unified general and vocational education system can bring better outcomes and greater acceptance towards skills based learning. 

Addressing India’s skilling challenges 

The discussion above is indicative that skilling initiatives like PMKVY can only be as good as the inputs (i.e. candidates) that register. While improvements in the programme might be possible through extended training lengths and greater industry integration, these need to be backed up with, a) improvements in learning outcomes in early-stage education and b) early exposure to VET via an integrated system of general education and vocational training.  

The finer nuances aside, the National Education Policy (NEP)-2020 recognising the need for better cognitive foundations and early integration of vocational and general education proposes some corrective measures: 

 Achieving universal foundational literacy and numeracy in primary schools by 2025 by systematically increasing public investment in education (federal+state governments) to 6% of GDP. 

 Exposing at least 50% students to vocational training through school and higher education.  

Necessitating schools to collaborate with Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs), polytechnics, and local businesses to link education with skill training. 

Since education is a concurrent subject in the Indian constitution, fructification of the proposed interventions will require a coordinated effort from the federal and state governments. The effects of these interventions remain to be seen by all concerned.