Employment should also become a pathway for development, not merely a reward for passing an examination.
THE QUESTION
DEV (Host):
"Prabhat Kalita Sir, how do you see the future of our educated youth?
In Assam, we have thousands of educated but unemployed young people. Many have master's degrees, PhDs and professional qualifications. Yet, because of limited infrastructure, fewer employment opportunities and a lack of platforms, they are struggling to find meaningful work.
At the same time, competition is becoming increasingly intense.
Where do you think we are going wrong? And what needs to change?"
DR. PRABHAT KALITA:
We have taught them how to compete for opportunities. We have not done enough to create opportunities for them.
"See, Dev, I think we need to look at this problem from a different perspective.
Today, particularly in India, we are largely following a traditional pass-or-fail competitive examination and recruitment system.
Now, this system has its own purpose, and I am not against it. But it also has certain limitations.
Let me explain."
THE LIMITATION OF THE TRADITIONAL SYSTEM
"Suppose an educational institution, according to its infrastructure, financial capacity and actual requirements, needs only two teachers.
Naturally, it will conduct a competitive examination and select the two best candidates.
Why?
Because the institution wants to maintain a certain standard. It has limited vacancies, limited resources and specific requirements. It cannot simply compromise its standards.
That is understandable.
But now consider this.
Suppose thirty lakh educated students are competing for opportunities across different institutions and sectors.
How many of them can be accommodated in those two positions?
Only two.
What happens to the rest?
Are all the remaining candidates incompetent? Are they incapable of contributing to society?
Certainly not.
The examination has identified the best candidates for a particular requirement. It has not necessarily measured the potential of every individual to contribute meaningfully to society.
This is where we need to question the system."
ARE WE THINKING ABOUT THE REST?
"See, the traditional recruitment system is primarily designed to identify the best minds for specific vacancies.
That is good. Every institution has the right to select the people it needs.
But are we equally concerned about the remaining educated population?
Are we developing enough infrastructure? Are we increasing institutional capacity? Are we creating new platforms, new industries, new dimensions of employment?
Are we creating opportunities where different levels of knowledge, ability and competency can find their appropriate place?
If we are a responsible generation, shouldn't we be thinking about these questions?
The problem is that we are becoming too focused on selecting a few outstanding individuals.
We are asking, 'Who is the best?'
But we are not asking an equally important question:
'How can the rest of our educated population become productive, self-reliant and meaningful contributors to society?'
I am not against competitive examinations. I am not against selecting the best minds.
But let us not claim that a system designed primarily to fill limited vacancies is, by itself, the highest good for our youth.
It is not enough."
A DIFFERENT MODEL: AMRQH®
"At AMRQH®, we are exploring a different approach.
We call it Graduated Competency-Based Employment.
Now, what does this mean?
Let me explain through a simple example.
Suppose we have developed an institution with proper infrastructure, financial capacity, clearly defined roles and different levels of employment opportunities.
We conduct an examination to assess the knowledge, abilities and competencies of candidates.
Suppose the traditional recruitment cutoff is 120 marks.
The candidates who score 120, 130, 150 or 180 may qualify for different levels of responsibility and remuneration according to their demonstrated competencies.
But what about someone who scores 110?
Does that mean we should completely discard that individual?
Not necessarily.
If our institutional structure has suitable roles for that competency level, we can still provide employment.
Similarly, someone who scores 90 may qualify for an entry-level role with a corresponding salary, perhaps ₹10,000, depending on the nature of the work and the institution's capacity.
As competency increases, the individual can progress to higher responsibilities and better remuneration.
The important point is that we are not treating employment as a single opportunity that either you get or you lose.
We are creating different levels through which people can enter, contribute, learn and grow.
Employment should also become a pathway for development, not merely a reward for passing an examination."
GIVING YOUTH A REASON TO GROW
"Now think about the psychological difference this can create.
In a conventional pass-or-fail system, a candidate who misses the cutoff may feel that everything is over.
Years of education, preparation and effort may suddenly appear meaningless.
But in a graduated competency-based system, the individual has a starting point.
He can work. He can contribute. He can improve his skills. He can acquire experience and gradually move towards higher competency levels.
There is an incentive to grow.
There is dignity in work.
There is a possibility of building one's future without waiting indefinitely for one highly competitive vacancy.
Of course, this requires properly designed institutions, financial sustainability, transparent assessment, fair remuneration and genuine opportunities for progression.
We cannot simply give people random jobs and call it development.
We must build a system that has the capacity to absorb, train and advance people."
THE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF UNEMPLOYMENT
"Dev, there is something deeper here.
Imagine a young person who has completed a PhD.
He has spent years studying, researching and developing his intellectual abilities.
But after all those years, he cannot afford to support himself or his parents.
Eventually, he is forced into some unrelated, mediocre work simply to survive.
There is nothing wrong with any honest work. No work is inferior.
But why should a society fail to create meaningful opportunities for the knowledge and abilities it has spent years developing?
When educated individuals cannot find a constructive place in society, frustration accumulates.
Unemployment, economic insecurity, social alienation and the absence of meaningful opportunities can create serious social tensions.
We must not wait until frustration turns into social unrest.
We need to create pathways before people lose hope.
And this is not merely an economic question.
It is a question of human dignity and social responsibility."
THE FORGOTTEN FUTURE OF AGRICULTURE
"And there is another dimension we are overlooking.
We are pushing almost every young person towards a particular definition of success.
Everyone wants a prestigious examination, a government position, an impressive designation or a fashionable career.
But tell me, who is going to produce our food?
Who is going to work on soil health, agricultural science, microorganisms, sustainable farming and food security?
We need farmers. We need agricultural researchers. We need people who understand the living ecosystem beneath our feet.
In the pursuit of an imagined future, many young people are disconnecting themselves from the very foundations of our survival.
We have somehow created a social hierarchy in which certain professions are celebrated while others are neglected.
But a society cannot survive on designations alone.
It needs people who produce, research, build, cultivate and create.
We must restore dignity to every meaningful contribution."
A GENERATION'S RESPONSIBILITY
"After my retirement, I opened this centre with a particular intention.
I wanted to create a platform for educated young people—those with PhDs, master's degrees and different academic qualifications—so that they could work, research, develop and grow.
I wanted to show them that their education need not end with waiting for a government vacancy.
There are other possibilities.
We can build institutions. We can create research platforms. We can develop new areas of work. We can bring different competencies together.
But somebody has to take the initiative.
Somebody has to create the infrastructure.
Somebody has to give the next generation a direction.
And I believe this is where our responsibility begins.
We cannot simply keep announcing schemes and programmes and expect young people to somehow find their way.
We have to create real platforms where they can participate and build their future."
THE FINAL MESSAGE
"Dev, I want to say something.
A generation cannot call itself progressive merely because it has produced a few brilliant individuals.
A generation becomes progressive when it creates conditions in which the next generation can flourish.
We have received knowledge, institutions and opportunities from those who came before us.
What are we leaving behind?
Are we leaving behind only examinations, competition and a race for limited positions?
Or are we creating something where more people can discover their abilities, contribute and grow?
If we do not have the heart to think about the future of our young people, what is the meaning of all our education and development?
We must sow seeds today for generations that we may never meet.
I think, in many ways, we as a generation have failed to guide our youth adequately.
We have taught them how to compete for opportunities. We have not done enough to create opportunities for them.
And that is something we must change."
CLOSING
DEV:
"That is a very different way of looking at employment, Sir.
Perhaps the real question is not simply how many students pass an examination, but how many lives our institutions can help develop.
Thank you, Prabhat Kalita Sir, for sharing this perspective.
And thank you to everyone watching.
Let us rethink education, employment and the future of our youth."
DR. PRABHAT KALITA:
"Thank you, Dev.
Let us not merely compete for a better future.
Let us create one."
Comments
Post a Comment