Show Para
Passage V
A study commissioned by UN-Habitat's Global Urban Youth Research Network provided a startling piece of data. In less than 6 years from now, India would be the world’s youngest country, with the median individual below 30 years of age. But more disturbingly it also highlighted disparities in the extent to which young people have been able to acquire formal skills - the largest share was found in Kerala, followed by Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat. The new government has recognised this imbalance, made provision for upgrading skills across multiple disciplines and allocated resources in geographically sensitive locations; from five technical research centres in nanotechnology to a Hastakala Academy for the handicrafts sector; from five new IITs and five new IIMs to new institutes for farming and agrotechnology in Asom and Jharkhand.
This resonates with what the National Skill Development Corporation and its partners are trying to achieve. What is somewhat less clear is how far the government is open to private partnership in this ambitious game plan? In a few specialised areas like nanotechnology, the budget speaks of public private partnership. But skill development on the massive scale envisaged by the new government cannot be attempted, let alone achieved, if we don’t get out of the ‘silo syndrome’- resist the temptation to corral broad policy like private participation in a few test tube verticals, perceived as high tech or experimental. It is no accident that the nation’s largest pool of technical talent today, is cantered around places like Bangalore, a state that pioneered privatisation of engineering education.
The record of Indian educational or vocational institutions in most global rankings is, however, worrisome; the world’s youngest nation in 2020 may remain an index of quantity rather than quality. The existing institutions with a few exceptions are very much a part of the problem and not always the solution. There is a need to empower and enrich existing institutions- both public and private- instead of merely increasing their number. Standardisation, scalability and critical monitoring of industry requirements versus the turnout of such institutions must take precedence over rolling out institutions indiscriminately.
We need to be equally mindful that in order to leapfrog into the league of economically progressive economies, we need to shed the Ideological baggage that sees all private participation as a bane. This is even more critical while addressing the gaping holes In Infrastructure and an enabling ecosystem that a national thrust in skill development and employability demands. The budgets message here is somewhat mixed while the overarching objectives in the skilling sector are well articulated , some of the indirect tax proposals seem to mitigate against the swift realisation of these objectives the withdrawal of service tax exemptions on renting immovable property to an educational Institutions(he restriction on exemptions with regard to services received by those to changes in the Excise Duty on the manufacture of writing and printing paper for textbooks, will add to the financial burden of skill providers.
A little tweaking of these proposals will easily mitigate the Impact and ensure that a framework involving all stakeholders In skill building becomes more evident. For the first time in decades, students, teachers, trainers and skill providers can see a clear, unclouded vision of what India needs to do to lift itself up by its own bootstraps and stride into the fiercely competitive global arena of opportunity. It Is time to pick up the tools and get on with the job.
A study commissioned by UN-Habitat's Global Urban Youth Research Network provided a startling piece of data. In less than 6 years from now, India would be the world’s youngest country, with the median individual below 30 years of age. But more disturbingly it also highlighted disparities in the extent to which young people have been able to acquire formal skills - the largest share was found in Kerala, followed by Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat. The new government has recognised this imbalance, made provision for upgrading skills across multiple disciplines and allocated resources in geographically sensitive locations; from five technical research centres in nanotechnology to a Hastakala Academy for the handicrafts sector; from five new IITs and five new IIMs to new institutes for farming and agrotechnology in Asom and Jharkhand.
This resonates with what the National Skill Development Corporation and its partners are trying to achieve. What is somewhat less clear is how far the government is open to private partnership in this ambitious game plan? In a few specialised areas like nanotechnology, the budget speaks of public private partnership. But skill development on the massive scale envisaged by the new government cannot be attempted, let alone achieved, if we don’t get out of the ‘silo syndrome’- resist the temptation to corral broad policy like private participation in a few test tube verticals, perceived as high tech or experimental. It is no accident that the nation’s largest pool of technical talent today, is cantered around places like Bangalore, a state that pioneered privatisation of engineering education.
The record of Indian educational or vocational institutions in most global rankings is, however, worrisome; the world’s youngest nation in 2020 may remain an index of quantity rather than quality. The existing institutions with a few exceptions are very much a part of the problem and not always the solution. There is a need to empower and enrich existing institutions- both public and private- instead of merely increasing their number. Standardisation, scalability and critical monitoring of industry requirements versus the turnout of such institutions must take precedence over rolling out institutions indiscriminately.
We need to be equally mindful that in order to leapfrog into the league of economically progressive economies, we need to shed the Ideological baggage that sees all private participation as a bane. This is even more critical while addressing the gaping holes In Infrastructure and an enabling ecosystem that a national thrust in skill development and employability demands. The budgets message here is somewhat mixed while the overarching objectives in the skilling sector are well articulated , some of the indirect tax proposals seem to mitigate against the swift realisation of these objectives the withdrawal of service tax exemptions on renting immovable property to an educational Institutions(he restriction on exemptions with regard to services received by those to changes in the Excise Duty on the manufacture of writing and printing paper for textbooks, will add to the financial burden of skill providers.
A little tweaking of these proposals will easily mitigate the Impact and ensure that a framework involving all stakeholders In skill building becomes more evident. For the first time in decades, students, teachers, trainers and skill providers can see a clear, unclouded vision of what India needs to do to lift itself up by its own bootstraps and stride into the fiercely competitive global arena of opportunity. It Is time to pick up the tools and get on with the job.
Go to Question: