The Real World is Outside The Classroom2

Wednesday, 27 April 2011 | Filed under

In Malaysia, young people spend an average of 11 years in formal education. These years are the most formative time in their mental, emotional and psychological growth.

Many then move on to some form of higher education where they spend between two to four years to get a diploma or degree.  But after some 12-15 years in the education system, many of these young people graduate ... and find themselves unemployable.

They find themselves lost in a ‘real world’ that is hungry for creative and innovative ideas.

They cannot function in a ‘real world’ because they lack the communication skills and English language fluency that is a basic requirement for global competition.

Numbed by years of conforming and acquiescence drilled into them in school, their identity and personalities are often lacklustre in the ‘real world’, making them unemployable as companies seek out the best and the brightest to expand their businesses globally.

As the world view expands, the ‘school view’ needs re-examining.

The Three Economies that are shaping our world

In my mind, the future is divided into 3 groups of economies:

• Innovation Economy (Wealthy countries)
• Innovating Economy (Middle-Income countries)
• Not innovating at all (Poor countries)

The task before us is not about the process, but the transformation of the system itself. The best innovation models are a tripartite of university-industry-government.

Whilst Malaysia is promoted as an Innovating Economy, the Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011 by the World Economic Forum identifies Malaysia as an Efficiency-driven economy based on the GDP per capita of US$3,000-US$9,000.

The Report identifies an Innovation-driven economy as one with a per capita GDP of greater than US$17,000.

Malaysia’s current GDP is US$6,897, with the emphasis on producing more advanced products and services highly efficiently.

In that report, it is pointed out that Malaysia’s position has been on a declining trend for three consecutive years from 21st position in 2008-2009, to 24th position in 2009-2010 and now to 26th position in 2010-2011.

Higher Education and Training was highlighted as one of the key areas affecting the country’s performance and ranking, with the report making no bones about the fact that the QUALITY of higher education needs to be improved.

To move to an innovation economy, companies need to compete by producing new value-added and different goods, using the most sophisticated production processes.

Eco-system for innovation

No one can fault the Government for its effort to create the structural eco-system for innovation. Many initiatives have been put in place to encourage innovation in both the public and private sector, but we are still falling short.

The question is not new - and neither is the obvious answer.

We lack the mental eco-system for innovation. Innovation is the exception rather than the rule. Having the latest software or tools or processes will not change the equation if we don’t have the people with the mind power who can come up with new and innovative products and services.

The bastion of this innovation mind power is education, and waiting for the government to embed in into the system is a losing battle.

The public sector - by virtue of its role to regulate - does not operate on an innovation model. It is tradition-bound and often stifling to those who want to do things differently.

If it does not fit into a neat box, they don’t know how to categorise it.

If the product or service does not fit pre-determined rules (often times no one even knows who or how the rules were set), then it is rejected.

If you create a product or service that no one has created before or which transforms an existing industry, you will be frustrated by the lack of enthusiasm or support by public officials.

Need for a mindshift to innovation

A key mindshift needs to happen with all stakeholders - parents, educators, community and the regulators.

Innovation must be part of our culture. Teaching it as a ‘subject’ defeats the essence of what it is.

We must each be part of creating that innovation culture. We must each understand and accept that things are changing faster than any curriculum or syllabus can keep up with.

There should not be any line - imaginary or otherwise - between the academic world and the real world.

There should not longer be people who are known as Career Academics. That should not be acceptable to parents, students or even governments.

If they are sitting in three-hour lectures, how is that the real world? For a wired generation with a short attention span and for whom the Web is a far more interesting ‘teacher’.

Schools and universities must embrace industry into their teaching to stay relevant. Industry shouldn’t be something “out there”, it should be “in here”.

Sustainability - a term used in the environmental context - is a word I believe is important in the education debate.
It is about not just what we need now, but what we need in the future.

The history of how most education systems were designed and the societies they were meant to serve are history.

I have always believed there is no such person as an ‘academic’.

There is only a teacher.

There is no such thing as an ‘academic institution’. There is only a ‘knowledge institution.’

We are in a period of profound change. Things are changing faster than we can change curriculums or syllabuses.

And the overarching mandate for education must be to prepare young people for the real world.