There is a lot of emphasis on skill training for young people in the country, to the extent that many lay the major blame of unemployment on lack of adequate skills, often erroneously. Policy emphasis is also on skill training programmes including apprenticeships and internships. Irrespective of the understanding of the role of skills in the current employment problem in the country, there would be a consensus on the importance of basic school education, literacy and arithmetic skills for all, as the pre-requisite. Any agenda for skill training must also build on what the status of these basic skills are. A recent report of the NSS – Comprehensive Annual Modular Survey, 2022-2023 – presents some interesting data.
The youth in India are a literate population with 96% of those in the age group of 15-29 years being “able to read and write short simple statements in their everyday life with understanding and also able to perform simple arithmetic calculations” (97.4% male and 94.4% female). The corresponding figure all those above 15 years of age is only 81.2%, (87.9% male and 74.2% female). Therefore, there has been a considerable improvement in basic literacy as well as an impressive narrowing of the gender gap. Only 2% of those in the age group of 6 to 18 years have never been enrolled in formal education. While we continue to focus attention on improving the quality of education, the success of the Right to Education Act, 2009, and other initiatives in brining children to school must be recognised.
One worrying aspect in the report is that it finds that only 90% of children in the age group of 6 to 10 years are currently enrolled in school and 10% are out of school. This is not a small number considering that universal school enrolment has been a goal in India right from the beginning and it has now been 15 years since the passage of the Right to Education Act (which makes education free and compulsory for all children in the age group of 6 to 14). There is no merit in getting into semantics of whether these children are “never enrolled” or “dropouts” – the point is that they are currently not in school and that is a violation of their right to education.
In terms of school completion as well, some gaps remain. The mean years of schooling for the age group 15 and above is 8.4, higher than 7.5 for those 25 and above (including time spent in preschool education). Amongst those aged above 25 years only 38.6% (46.2% male and 31.0% female) have secondary education (pass class X or higher). On the other hand, among all graduates in the age group of 21-35 years, 37.8% graduated in science and technology (42% male and 32.5% female).
A high proportion – about half the youth in the age group of 15-24 years were in some form of formal/informal training in the 12 months preceding the survey (50.8% male and 47.1% female). However, almost a quarter (23.3%) of youth are not in education, employment or training (NEET) and the gender gap here is very high – 38.2% female and 9.9% male. Issues related to mobility and transport facilities, safety and other restrictions are much more for women in this age group. Further, the care and domestic work burdens are also high with many of them being married. According to NFHS-5 data (as provided in the Youth in India, 2022 report of the Government of India), 61.4% women are married by age 21 and 83% by age 25.
Also read: Accountability Vacuum: In India, Inequality Reigns, Jobs Vanish, and Citizens Are on Their Own
Interestingly the mobile, internet and basic ICT skills are quite high among young men and women. 96.4% of those in the age group of 15 – 29 years can use mobiles, including smartphones and 94.2% used a mobile phone with an active sim card in the last three months (96.4% male and 91.8% female). 84.2% are able to use the internet (89.2% male and 78.8% female) and 77.7% “reported execution of skill of sending messages (e.g., e-mail, messaging service, SMS) with attached files (e.g. documents, pictures, and video)” (83.8% male and 71.1% female). A smaller but significant proportion ‘reported execution of skill of copy and paste tools to duplicate or move data, information, documents, etc.’ – 70.2% of those in the age group of 15 – 29 (76.8% male and 63% female) – about two-thirds are able to search for information on the internet and half can send or receive emails.
There are gender gaps in many of these indicators, and also a variation between rural and urban areas. There are also issues of poor learning outcomes shown by ASER and other surveys. The youth seem to be struggling with gaining skills which they think are suitable for the market, such as English-speaking and more digital literacy. They have very little access to libraries or resource centres and even the education they have managed to attain is in spite of huge shortages of teachers, classrooms and textbooks.
The data discussed so far show that young people are trying to make the best of the opportunities is available for them in the face of all odds. Many of these young people are first generation literates whose parents made immense sacrifices to keep them in school and attain higher education. Field experiences across the country are replete with examples of poor parents working hard depriving themselves of even basic comforts to ensure that their children, both girls and boys, study and complete their education. One often hears parents saying that all they want is for their children not to become like them. It is unfortunate that despite all their efforts, what these parents are now faced with is indebtedness and adult children struggling with unemployment.
If India is not able to take advantage of its demographic dividend it is because the state and society have failed to create the enabling conditions for them to be gainfully employed and contribute productively to the economy. Rather than treating youth as a lost case, we must recognise their strengths and build upon them. It is for policy and politics to figure out how we can use this resource better and do justice to the country as well as it’s youth.
Dipa Sinha is a development economist.
