Technical and Vocational Education and Training: Examining Changing Conditions in India ^†

Abstract

Sustainable Development Goal 4 emphasizes creating lifelong learning opportunities and imparting needed practical skills through quality technical and vocational education. TVET holds great potential for economic mobility and development in India, which has a large working-age, unemployed population. Although rapid strides have been made in creating a network of formal institutions providing a wide range of skills, TVET, in India, is currently limited, and plagued with several issues, worsened by the current COVID-19 pandemic. The paper undertakes a comprehensive review of these issues, offering a comparative analysis with successful TVET systems of Germany and China, and exploring opportunities for repairing TVET in India.

1. Introduction

Education, as a holistic concept, according to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4: “Quality Education”, extends to “lifelong learning” that promises lucrative job opportunities aligned with respective interests, and skills facilitating professional and personal growth. TVET has been perceived as an essential tool for socio-economic development by the enhancement of productivity, and subsequent returns from the vast human capital resource available in a country such as India. As emphasized by the UNESCO–UNEVOC report [1], TVET offers diverse avenues for career advancement, skilled manpower that drives the economy of nations, and a sense of self-reliance. This helps lower school drop-out rates and empower the unskilled workforce that possesses untapped productive potential; this is particularly important for a country such as India, with an unemployment rate of 5.3% and youth unemployment rate of 22.3% in 2019 [2]. These have since worsened due to COVID-19, further emphasizing the need for changes in TVET. However, several issues have been persistent over time, and India has faced challenges in terms of bridging the demand–supply gap, assuring the quality training of both teachers and students, the effective integration of industrial skills in the formal education, curriculum flexibility, active stakeholder engagement, and the upgradation of relevant technology.

The COVID-19 global pandemic has largely disrupted our lifestyle and impacted the education sector and labour market, to the extent of substantially offsetting the progress achieved under SDG4 [3]. The rampant loss of jobs and shift to online teaching modes in these unprecedented times has made matters worse for countries in terms of social, economic, and environmental domains. The World Bank presses on the need to modify TVET in order to effectively mitigate the impact in these sectors, and make institutions more resilient in their approach to impart the required knowledge and skillsets to empower the working age group. The focus on practical skills and engaging students to adapt to new technologies and respond to the state of emergency could greatly contribute to nations building back better [4].

This paper aims to put forth key challenges in India’s TVET system, with respect to target 4.3 “by 2030 ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university” [5], and the changing conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A comparative analysis with Germany and China provides insight on existing gaps and recommendations to mitigate the same. Following this, suggestions for effective evaluation of the TVET system are provided to integrate factors that facilitate quality education in this regard. Lastly, we conclude with highlighting key takeaways and indicating a way forward.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Structure of TVET in India

Technical and vocational education and training (TVET), broadly defined by UNESCO [6] as “Those aspects of the educational process involving, in addition to general education, the study of technologies and related sciences, and the acquisition of practical skills, attitudes, understanding and knowledge relating to occupations in various sectors of economic and social life”. TVET is a crucial part of imparting practical skills, ensuring employability through upskilling, economic mobility, the full utilization of national resources, and achieving inclusive and sustainable development for all. TVET can take place at different levels of education or in the form of work based training, and can be acquired from formal sources, such as educational institutions, and non-formal sources, such as flexible, community level, and short term programs, as well as through informal means. This paper examines the formal structure of vocational education in India, as well as the challenges faced by it.

Vocational education in India is organized under different programs, with secondary education and diploma courses promoted by the Ministry of Human Resource and Development, and National Trade Certificate courses organized under the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship. At this level, TVET is mainly imparted by public or privately owned industrial training institutes (ITIs). Under the two overarching ministries, TVET is organized under a number of autonomous or semi -autonomous bodies and public–private partnerships that are responsible for developing TVET policy, governance of institutions, financing TVET, and setting up incentives, teacher training, and developing framework for qualifications, norms, and quality standards. Aside from this, TVET policies also exist on a state level and through non-formal education, under various urban and rural development and employment generation schemes initiated by the government. The Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship is primarily responsible for financing TVET in India. Specialized teacher training programs for TVET have also been created, although these are limited in number, and prior specialized training in education is not a formal requirement. Qualifications for TVET are monitored under the National Qualification Framework, and quality is looked after by various bodies, such as the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), the National Development Agency (NSDA), and the Directorate General of Training (DGET) [7]. At the time of writing, India has a total of 14,605 ITIs under the National Council for Vocational Training, DGET, and the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship [8]. The National Education Policy 2020 (NEP) has the potential to introduce substantial changes in TVET provision. One major change is necessitating the integration of TVET into the programs of existing secondary and higher education institutions, thus providing a dramatic rise in provision of TVET and bringing TVET into closer contact with other areas of education. It also proposes a number of other changes to encourage TVET, such as streamlining pathways from TVET to other forms of higher education, placing emphasis on teacher training, promoting social and emotional learning and the adoption of innovative methods, and addressing low enrollment [6].

2.2. Challenges of TVET in India

Despite such a decentralized system, multiple concerns have surfaced regarding the implementation of TVET. As shown in India’s country profile, the Pandit Sunderlal Sharma Central Institute of Vocational Education (PSSCIVE) has listed several challenges [9]. The supply–demand gap is evident, considering the massive figure of approximately 12.8 million people entering the market annually and that the capacity of vocational training courses is limited to roughly 2.5 million people. According to the periodic labour force survey, only 2.74% of India’s working age population to have formal training in TVET [6]. The lack of diversity and flexibility in courses, along with the absence of guidelines to expand opportunities beyond formal authorized institutes, poses another hurdle. The fact that modifications made in the TVET system and curricula are not able to maintain the same pace as the rapidly evolving market demands renders some skills unproductive. Improper training, along with a lack of specific mandatory qualifications of TVET teachers and trainers, hampers the effective delivery of instructions and information. The poor incentive structure does not help attract more people in this profession to address the existing shortage of teachers. Additionally, engagement of employers and stakeholders, at all levels, and the introduction of recent technologies to enable improvement in skill development and associated activities, continues to lag. Apart from this, the stigma associated with enrolment courses that perceives TVET as inferior, and an alternative for students unable to cope with academics, must be overcome [10]. This may be attributed to the ineffective integration of industrial knowledge in the school curricula, which incorrectly presents this as a trade-off, when the learnings from both are complementary with one another. Arguing along the same lines as PSSCIVE, Kumar (2015) highlighted that following the multiple agencies and certifications, overlapping courses, and institutional responsibilities creates more confusion for students. He also emphasized on the need for better experiential learning and methods of gaining students’ interest, and reiterated the academic–industry linkage for increasing employment opportunities. TVET provision is also hampered by a number of existing socioeconomic inequalities, including those of gender, disability, caste, class, and rural/urban residence.

While the NEP’s ambitious plan is aimed at ameliorating some of these issues, TVET systems in India will require a number of reforms to truly achieve the goals outlined under SDG 4. The COVID-19 pandemic has further created a number of new challenges as well as exacerbating existing inequalities.

2.3. COVID-19 Challenges in INDIA

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated complete lockdowns and the shutdown of public spaces in order to arrest the spread of the virus. TVET is more vulnerable to these changes, compared to other forms of education, for several reasons. TVET heavily emphasizes practical and work-based learning, which is difficult to transition to an online model, particularly in cases where advanced machinery is used or in-person job training is required. As many as two thirds of the organizations in India also reduced available internships, and TVET institutions themselves faced economic hardship. Education continuity and student interest were thus impacted [3]. Existing inequalities, such as a sharp digital divide, lack of resources, infrastructure, and digital literacy further challenged the imparting of education online [3]. In developing countries, such as India, most TVET learners belong to disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds, and are thus even more affected than those in general education [4]. Women were also substantially impacted due to increased responsibilities at home and the loss of jobs in major women-dominated sectors [4,6].

3. Comparative Analysis

In order to explore opportunities for India to improve its TVET system, a comparative analysis between Germany, China, and India was performed and is described in this section. While the “dual system” of Germany has proven to be one of the best TVET systems globally [11], China’s model had a significant influence on improving the employment and prosperity of a country with a population as large as India’s. Germany’s education focuses on classroom teaching in specialized trade schools, along with job–work experience from industries and qualified trainers. Statistics reveal that there are roughly 300 officially recognized training programs, and that roughly 68% of fresh graduates immediately become employed at the firms they were trained in. As many as 500,000 new job positions are offered every year across all business firm and government fields [12]. Hence, the youth unemployment rate is negligible (ibid). China has three stages of vocational education: junior secondary, senior secondary, and postsecondary. Roughly 56.569 million students had graduated or completed their term of study by 2016 [13]. As stated by the Ministry of Education (2016), 25.10% of secondary school graduates, barring the ones from technical schools, continued their higher education, which was 5.08% more than was reported in the previous year [13]. This has further increased the employment rate. We explored how the exemplar cases in these two countries could inspire TVET in India, and offer solutions based on existing evidence of practices that can be contextualized in this country. This was performed on the basis of eight interlinked parameters that could help escalate the country’s performance, as discussed below.

3.1. Stakeholder Involvement

India’s TVET demonstrates a lack of flexibility in designing updated curriculums and coordination between agencies, despite recognizing the need for cross-sectoral collaboration for optimal utilization of expertise, resources, and knowledge [14,15]. In comparison, interlinkages between the government, research centers, vocational institutions, and industries, as well as the integration of stakeholders from the national to company level, have been vital to the German TVET system, helping achieve a balance between academic objectives and industrial skills [16]. OECD further recommended a coordination committee to improve efficiency and consider the mutual interests of stakeholders. China’s TVET system similarly invites companies to aid in planning and setting standards for candidates [17].

3.2. Teacher Training

Strengthening the knowledge of TVET teachers is crucial for equipping students with necessary resources to increase labour market efficiency [18]. India’s TVET lacks such training, affecting the delivery of TVET [9,14]. China made two month-long practical training sessions mandatory for teachers, to ensure updated knowledge [17]. Germany, as stated in the Apprenticeship Toolbox (2019) [19], requires teachers to have a degree in a specific field of interest, as well as qualify a state examination. In addition, teachers must attend specialized vocational education training. Trainers must undergo 1–2 years of training, and trainers in companies must also meet the occupational aptitude required for their industry. Trainers are offered suitable assistance and training kits.

3.3. Active Student Engagement

Multiple studies have proved that the engagement of students holds high value in determining their education and occupational outcomes; this is particularly required in the nascent stages to boost effective learning and even high self-efficacy [20]. The Yunnan Province of China improved upon the TVET system by making the modules student-centric with a revision in the curriculum to include Information and Communication Technology (ICT), in order to encourage participation and interaction over passive listening [17,21]. Competency Based Training (CBT) was encouraged to impart core skills that would be beneficial to students in the long term and help in their personal and professional growth [17]. Specialized trade schools in Germany employ supervisors, under whom the students spend almost 60% of their time gaining hands-on experience, while theoretical courses are developed according to their choice of occupation [12]. Given India’s challenges in this regard, and the low participation rates, students do not feel encouraged to attend vocational schools, and even report inadequate learning, which may be a result of the associated disinterest in the program.

3.4. Industry–School Collaboration

The quality of the TVET system in India has always been questioned, due to poor employment percentage despite completion of training programs. Major criticism has been levelled at the fact that the training offered does not correspond to actual labour market needs. Healthy cooperation between enterprises and vocational institutions in China involves engaging experts in the development and evaluation of programs. The companies and MSMEs acknowledge the contribution that TVET trainees and faculty can offer for their Research and Development, and, thus, show great interest in the mutually beneficial venture. Germany’s TVET system consists of a curriculum in which students spend 1–2 days in a vocational school and the rest of the week learning skill-based lessons from a firm [12].

3.5. Incentive Structure for Teachers

Quality of trainers is a key resource for successful TVET, and trainers must be encouraged and fairly compensated to deliver the best education. However, TVET instructors sometimes encounter many hurdles in receiving training due to lack of assistance and benefits, as well as job schedules. There is, therefore, a need for financial assistance to promote teacher training; China has incentivized instructors to obtain certifications for both academic and practical skill in the required areas [22]. Germany has not awarded direct financial assistance, but does provide subsidies to businesses that meet specific criteria or train vulnerable populations. India, similarly, requires incentive structures to ensure better trained and quality instructors [23].

3.6. Technology Use

ICT can help improve education quality by fostering critical thinking, problem solving, and creativity through project based learning [24]. Communication technologies, open online courses, game based learning, etc., are gradually making their way into the Indian TVET system, but have yet to be effectively implemented on a large scale [25]. In China, to fulfill the demands of the trained, “ICT-capable” labour force required by industries, TVET schools are progressively incorporating technology into their training. As a consequence of aligning with industry needs, graduates from vocational institutions find work, including self-employment, quickly after graduation [17]. The Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) in Germany encourages needs-based dual vocational training that is tailored to the demands of an increasingly digital and networked economy. The digital equipment at inter-company educational institutions (ÜBS) is particularly fitted to the techniques through the special program ÜBS-Digitization [26].

3.7. Updated Curricula

India suffers from outdated curricula and designs that are not aligned with current market conditions. In Germany, regulatory mechanisms keep TVET information systems relevant via interactions between institutions, agents, and processes that create new qualifications and regularly update curricula [27]. China believes in the strategy of internationalization to develop modern educational material by inviting faculty from other countries and exposing students to exchange programs [28]. Innovation and upgradation is ensured by the autonomy awarded to TVET institutes to develop specific syllabi that must meet occupational standards, provided by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, and the education standards set by the Ministry of Education [17].

3.8. Decentralised System

Germany boasts a well-developed TVET system that follows “an intricate web of checks and balances at all levels” [16]. Partnership between public and private institutes for strategizing and funding is also a strong point. While the federal government takes responsibility for on-the-job training and funding for the latest curriculum development, vocational training in schools is supervised by the state government [25]. These link up with competent bodies, including industry employers, teachers, and trade unions, to run different kinds of TVET institutes [25]. China has established advisory committees at sectoral level to facilitate productive collaboration between schools and industries [21]. Local human resource institutes and social security bureaus share the responsibility of managing training institutes [29]. This is not reflected in India, where, despite the multiplicity of bodies involved in a decentralized structure, effective execution of stated responsibilities is still a challenge [14].

4. Response to COVID-19

Various initiatives have been adopted to respond to challenges related to COVID-19. Germany has sought to secure apprentice compensation, schedule learning in compliance to safety laws, and assist firms that provide apprenticeship positions [30]. In the last 10 years, China’s vocational schools have made considerable progress in building IT infrastructure; during the pandemic, institutions with a stronger basis for digital campus building successfully adopted the online mode of teaching, preventing any further lag to the TVET system in the country [31]. COVID-19 also meant innovation in the Indian system. In the immediate case, emphasis was placed on continuing education online through several means. Initiatives included low technology television-based education under Swayam Prabha, online platforms, such as e-Skill India, that provide largely free online courses, and private initiatives such as the Nettur Technical Training Foundation, which promotes the use of virtual labs [6,32]. However, there is a dire need to increase digital infrastructure, train teachers, and reformulate TVET courses in the long term. Studies based on surveys of students emphasize teacher proficiency, appropriately structured classes, virtual practical components, and classroom interactivity as being critical in maintaining student interest [33], which must be accommodated into a new structure, along with institutionalizing interim innovations. TVET programs contributed greatly during the pandemic, serving as spaces for the production of needed goods, such as masks and PPE. They also hold great potential in the future to re-skill populations, especially those who suffered economic losses, such as migrant labor, towards emerging fields such as technology and health allied fields [6].

5. Evaluation for TVET

TVET evaluation can follow an outcome-based or process-based approach. The outcome-based approach focuses on the resultant employment after formal training, and includes measurable factors such as the number of teachers and trainers employed, ongoing projects, and degrees awarded. To account for the qualitative aspect of knowledge and skills imparted, the process-based approach incorporates the feedback of students and teachers, qualifications of trainers, and translation of theoretical knowledge into practical projects by assessing on-ground impact. The role of employers as social partners, the individual contribution of all stakeholders, and relevant social nuances such as equitable opportunities and awareness amongst and participation of all genders, need to be ensured. SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely) indicators may be developed to study the intricacies of the underlying processes for higher efficacy [34,35,36]. Additionally, terms of “evaluation”, “innovation”, and “quality” need to be concretely defined as a basis for provisions and potential amendments in the system accordingly. As reflected by the UNESCO–UNEVOC repository (2021) [7], the German National Qualifications Framework aims to promote lifelong learning by assessing learning outcomes and evaluating competencies in professional (knowledge and skill) and personal (social competence and autonomy) domain. Internal and external quality assurance has been in place since 2004 for all TVET providers, with the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology responsible for setting criteria for the same. The well-renowned Finnish TVET model was revised to meet the requirements of skills in the evolving industrial sector by increasing edtech and incorporating personalized updated learning pathways [7,37]. High quality is assured by government monitoring and external evaluations carried out by Finland’s National Education Evaluation Centre in order to regularly check the effectiveness of quality education.

6. Limitations

This paper is restricted to suggesting measures to improve the TVET structure in India, using model examples from Germany and China. The point of view of students in TVET, especially during the global health emergency of COVID-19, does not seem to be adequately captured in the available literature. As a crucial indicator for determining the success of TVET programs, this needs to be afforded due importance. Further research in this regard should therefore be carried out.

7. Conclusions

As suggested by the literature, India has reported numerous obstacles in the TVET system, which have worsened due to the global pandemic. The major challenges include passive participation of students, the resultant gap between theoretical and practical education, a lack of infrastructure for centers, poor coordination amongst agencies and between stakeholders, outdated syllabi, and minimal use of recent technologies. The absence of a legally binding framework to set regulations and ensure effective execution of the same further accelerates the problem.

As a result of the health emergency, state and nationwide lockdowns resulted in the digitization of the entire education system and restrictions in on-ground training. A significant number of vocational trainees were unable to access sessions, owing to the digital divide and geographic constraints, and were further discouraged. The exposed gaps pertaining to the use of technology by teachers and issues faced by the students, including difficulties in coping with the online learning mode and limited physical interactions, exacerbated these concerns, especially in the long term view.

Possible improvements in performance were assessed along eight parameters: stakeholder involvement, active student engagement, industry-school education, incentive structure, technology use, and a decentralized system. Germany’s “dual” model and China’s “modern” system were found to be robust, and were well equipped to tackle the impact of the pandemic on the TVET sector, while India lacked proper development in these aspects, resulting in barriers to continual education. The significant progress made by these two countries to strengthen TVET offers possibilities for India to adopt similar holistic changes to its system, to ensure quality education and low unemployment rates.

Given the rural–urban divide and gender specific barriers, social equity in this sector is evidently lacking, and suitable policy measures need to account for this, while ensuring a righteous basis of provision of opportunities. That is to say, figures depicting equal representation of males and females, or narrowing geographic gaps, must not be at the cost of the quality of education or experiential learning delivered to them.

Further, methods to incorporate a process-based approach to evaluation must be improved upon. This would broadly consist of the eight parameters, as discussed above, following SMART indicators for effective results. A greater focus would therefore need to be placed on individual and collective learning beneficial for overall development, than on final results that subdue the very essence of quality education in sustainable practice. Thus, in order to mitigate existing challenges, the models of Germany and China may prove beneficial if adopted in India, helping to refine its TVET structure and become more resilient to the changing new world scenario.