Preparing Students for Corporate Careers: Bridging the Gap
Srikantan Moorthy
Senior Vice-President and Group Head,
Education & Research Department,
Infosys Technologies Limited, Bangalore, INDIA 560 100
Email:
Abstract
In an increasingly globalized world, it is a commonplace that skills and knowledge would perforce be critical drivers of the economic and social development of every country. India, for instance, has reaped significant dividends in recent years from a large pool of English educated professionals produced by institutions whose strong roots are attributed to the investments made in education during the early years after its Independence and a ‘traditional’ cultural disposition and respect for learning. However, notwithstanding the optimism that underlies contemporary projections of India’s enduring economic growth and industrial resurgence predicated on its young workforce, a serious and urgent concern that currently confronts the economy is in the education system’s ability to produce enough numbers of professionals of sufficient quality to meet the progressively specialized needs of Indian industry. Many recent studies have highlighted the problem of employability of the large numbers of graduates turned out by the university system and indicate that no less than 60% of these are unsuitable for employment. An important reason for this is the well documented gap between the competencies developed by the University system and the expectations of the industry from fresh entrants. This article argues for exigent changes to the university education process to bridge this gap through a comprehensive revamp of learning interventions involving the structure of education - as in devising flexible and dynamic course curricula- as well as the context and content of education - as in practical application of concepts, team work and the like.
Keywords: Learning effectiveness, Educator, Electives, Application of Concepts, Team Work, Communication, Assessments
Introduction
Many surveys, for example [NASSCOM, 2005] in the case of IT industry, point to the gap between what capabilities the University or an Institution develops in a student, and the expectations industry has of a fresh employee. In recent years, the problem has acquired greater intensity with the growth of Indian industry which today operates in an increasingly international environment characterized by strong competition and market flux which in turn enforce frequent changes to the structure and function of its organization. In such a scenario, availability of requisite skills in terms of quality as well as quantity is a critical need for continued growth [Kesai, 2010]. In addition, the need for employees to effectively deal with changes in the content and context of work all through their professional lives is a contemporary necessity which can only be well served by introducing elements of learning of how to learn as an integral part of the education system [R. C. Datta et al, 2007]. How unequal the country presently is to the task is indicated by the observation that “… only about 25% of technical graduates and 10-15% of general college graduates are suitable for employment in the offshore IT and BPO industries respectively” [NASSCOM, 2005]. Rightly, a slow realization is dawning on policy makers and industry captains that human capital is likely to soon surpass financial capital as the critical economic engine of the future. Along with which is the perception that the challenge is so broad that all stake holders - education institutions, business, governments and non-governmental organizations – need to work together to propose new frameworks and solutions that will create a new talent environment in the economy [WEF, 2010]. Spurred by these imperatives, studies such as on the status of science and engineering education, utilization pattern of human resource and public attitude towards S&T attempt to focus on macro as well as micro issues intended to aid Indian education develop the capability to address the talent problem of the country [Rajesh Shukla et al, 2005]
While some large companies have been addressing the gap by putting in place their own systems for education and training for the fresh entrant, or through secular industry bodies [NASSCOM 2007], this mostly benefits those that make it to the bigger companies. To benefit every student and increase their preparedness for employability, it is important to consider implementing changes during the education process. These changes should be such that they are independent of any specific organization’s needs and independent of any specific technology or product.
Addressing the gap issues requires a keen understanding of the problem. Simply put, in my view, the gap between the capability of the students and the needs of the industry can be summarized as the inability of the fresh employee to:
- Apply concepts learnt to solve practical problems
- Work well in teams
- Communicate well in both spoken and written forms
This should not come as a surprise given the paradigm in which the education system operates. During their tenure in the University,students are conditioned to think “Me and My marks” in an environment that “Schedules Exams” to test content from a “Predefined Scope”. A typical tenure in a Corporate, however, is about “Us and our Team” with “Unscheduled Exams” and “Undefined Scope”. The gap stems from the contrast between the two paradigms.
Here are some reasons for how the gaps arise in the current paradigm in the education system:
Application of Concepts:Scoring marks is the prime motivator for most students to learn. Assessments then become a key vehicle to ensure learning. This means assessments have to be structured in a way that tests the students’ ability to apply concepts than otherwise. This unfortunately is not the case most often. A count of the number of questions that begin with “Define”, “Describe” or “Explain” in any question paper will provide a clear insight into the issue. Structuring assessments to ensure learning requires significant effort from the educator.
Team Work:The only mandated occasion to work in a team comes as part of a project work. This in most courses is during the final year. Adding to the issue is the tendency of most students to stay in comfort zones teaming with ones that they are familiar with rather than make the extra effort to build a network with peers from different backgrounds.
Communication Skills:With not much promotion for developing a sense of enquiry in students, communication tends to be viewed more as a one way presentation of the educator’s perspective. With all the information now being available on the internet, class rooms can become the crucible for debating and shared learning leading to widening of perspectives and development of communication skills.
Contrary to popular belief, bridging the gaps during the learning process does not require extending the duration of the current programs. It is not about adding more content. It is about making learning effective and useful by acknowledging the need to change and creating opportunities for students to develop what is needed to be successful.
Exceptions
The gaps presented here apply to undergraduate education in a large number of institutions in India. These gaps however do not apply to the leading educational institutions in India like the IITs, NITs and others who have contributed significantly through the creation of world-class human capital for India and the World at large.
Recommended Approach
I suggest here the following recommendations to bridge the gap.
1. Educator related:Making a change in the education system calls for a mindset change in the educator. The first requirement is to realize the need for faculty development with a focus on learning outcomes. Educating faculty on the process of education and learning is critical in bringing about this change. Exposure to global learning methodologies and practicing the same can focus the educator on outcome-based education [Felder]. This requires mindshare investment by the management of Institutionsto provide opportunities to faculty for on-going programs like IUCEE [IUCEE] or faculty development programs organized by various industries in their own domain.
Once the educator has learnt the benefits of outcome-based learning, it is important to introduce assessments in a way that student learning is assessed holistically. This requires using an acknowledged model of assessment. For example, understanding and using revised Bloom’s taxonomy [Bloom] is a good starting point. Assessing the capability to apply the learnings is a critical consideration in this taxonomy. This will require assessments to be focused on the learning objectives and not the content of the program. This can prove to be a big shift for most educators.
2. Institution related:In order to bring about a change, within the overall academic framework and without adding overall program duration, it will be useful to try an entirely new approach. The Electives component is a good avenue to attempt a new approach of applying the concepts that are relevant to on-the-job, getting students to engage in a team work early on, and encouraging them to participate in competitions that can help students develop the essential skills.
In the case of engineering education, All India Council for Technical Education [AICTE07] which is the governing body for engineering education in India provides for having professional / free electives as part of any professional program. By creating 50% of these electives in partnership with the Industry, universities can create elective(s) that are practical oriented and gives students the opportunity to apply the concepts learnt during their program.
# / Subject Components/ course items / Number of creditsMin / Max / %
1 / Basic Sciences including Mathematics / 25 / 30 / 12.5-15.0
2 / Humanities, Social and Management Studies / 25 / 30 / 12.5-15.0
3 / Engineering Sciences, Technical Arts and Computer Engg. / 30 / 35 / 15-17.5
4 / Professional Core / 45 / 55 / 22.5-27.5
5 / Professional Electives / 25 / 30 / 12.5-15.5
6 / Free Electives / 20 / 25 / 10-12.5
7 / Project / 10 / 15 / 5-7.5
8 / Seminar, Vivavoce, Training / 5 / 2.5-5.0
For example, the Infosys Campus Connect program, an Industry-Academia partnership program, has put together a mechanism to engage with partner Institutions to co-create electives [RameshRNP]. Similar work has been done other organizations too. This Campus Connect program has, in the last eighteen months, collaborated with 25+ deemed / autonomous engineering institutions in co-creating industry electives. These electives have been modeled to develop the following skills:
(i)Problem solving
(ii)Integrated learning of multiple subject areas
(iii)Application of the learnings
(iv)Team work
These electives are co-created by the Institution with inputs from Industry and converge with a project based assignment which involves team work in order to help develop team working skills.
Our experience in developing electives has been very encouraging. Some of the practices that have helped us in this journey include:
(i)Strategic planning through Annual Plan
(ii)Structured Communication and Institution level Plan creation through Conclaves and Syllabus Definition Workshops
(iii)Developing Faculty through Faculty Enablement Programs
(iv)Content Sharing and Program Tracking through Systems (such as Campus Connect Portal)
(v)Structured feedback mechanisms through a score card used for Principals Meets
(vi)Survey of stake holders.
Open issues
Faculty enablement programs and the creation of electives are good beginnings that are getting positive feedback. There are other unstructured programs that can be tried out to build student confidence and develop their ability to work well in teams and communicate better. For instance, taking up community projects during the breaks can serve the dual purpose of helping students develop team working skills and also develop community empathy.
Similarly encouraging students to participate in regional and national level competitions for in essay writing, drama and debates can help students broaden their perspectives and sharpen their overall personalities. The additional investments for these are negligible while the payouts can be huge. Most importantly none of these require “permission” from the Government and therefore do not have to be tied to the concept of autonomy.
These approaches have not been tried in large numbers to provide any empirical evidence of their impact.
Conclusion
In order to help a student transition from Academia to Industry, it is important that both Academia and Industry make genuine efforts to continuously engage, deliberate and incorporate the changes for the benefit of students. Addressing the problem requires educationists to acknowledge the problem and initiate partnerships with Industry, and for industry to invest in building the ecosystem from a long term perspective. What will make it hard is not the investment to make it happen but the mindset to change.
References
[AICTE] National Conference on Development of Technical Education in India, 17-18 Dec, 2007, AICTE, New Delhi
[Bloom] Anderson and Krathwohl, A taxanomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxanomy of educational objectives, 2001.
[CCPortal] The Infosys Campus Connect Program,
[Felder] Richard Felder's articles, columns, and student handouts on learning and teaching styles, active and cooperative learning, and other topics related to education,
[IUCEE] The Indo-US Collaboration for Engineering Education (IUCEE) program,
[NASSCOM] NASSCOM-McKinsey Report 2005
[RameshRNP] S Ramesh Babu and R N Prasad, Empowering Students with Experiential Learning by Co-creating Industry Electives, A Chapter in the Book “XXI Century Priorities in Engineering Education” published by Editors: Prof R Natrajan and Prof M Anandkrishnan, McMillan Advanced Research Series, 2010
[Susan1993] Susan M Katz, The Entry-Level Engineer: Problems in Transition from Student to Professional, Journal of Engineering Education Vol 82, No.3, July 1993.
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES
1."Stimulating Economies through Fostering Talent Mobility,” a WEF-Boston Consultancy Group report, © WEF, March 2010,
2.R. C. Datta, Sony Pellissery and Bino Paul G. D., “Employability: Concepts, Indicators and practices,” Tata Institute of Social Sciences, India, 2010, a discussion paper.
3.Kesai A.S., “Country Paper – India,” a Ministry of Labour & Employment, Government of India paper, conference proceedings , “ILO SKILLS-AP/Japan regional technical workshop and study program on skills training in the workplace at the Overseas Vocational Training Associations”, Chiba, Japan, 1-5 Feb 2010,
4.“NASSCOM’s Education Initiatives: Sustaining India’s talent edge to fuel the next wave of IT-BPO industry growth,” NASSCOM report, 2007.
5.Rajesh Shukla et al, “India Science Report: Science Education, Human Resources and Public Attitude towards Science and Technology,” a National Council of Applied Economic Research report, © 2005, ISBN: 81-88830-07-0,