Of late, Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) is receiving its deserved attention. And rightly so.
A skilled workforce is the engine of a nation's economy. So it is for Malaysia. There are two things the government is planning to do to make TVET attractive to schoolgoers.
One is its proposal to pay TVET workers a premium salary. The other is to have a single qualifying body for TVET.
There is a third thing the government must do. It must hardwire science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) into Malaysia's TVET ambition. Here is why.
Start with premium salary. No matter what the quantum is, the purpose is to make TVET a study of choice. Paying anything less than a premium salary will repel, not attract, students.
Though not known as TVET in the 1970s, vocational education and training has languished under the unbearable weight of the stigma that it is meant for those who fail at conventional education.
Many nations around the world are waking up to the reality that a technically skilled workforce is a critical engine of a nation's growth.
The United Kingdom, whose TVET history dates as far back as the 12th century, has given the field of study a 21st century twist. "Building Back Better", the UK calls its rejuvenation. Makes sense.
Japan is another TVET-adoring nation. We must replicate the examples of the two to the extent the Malaysian context permits.
A central qualifying body, our second point, is a must. We suggest a public regulatory body as the awarding entity. This is to maintain an international standard in TVET education.
Perhaps with experience gained over time, this can be passed to independent organisations as is being done in the UK.
But even there, they are governed by public regulatory bodies. We understand our past better. Remember the times, not too long ago, when private education institutions mushroomed, some of which were notorious for fleecing local and foreign students? A few of these didn't even require attendance at courses.
They were just fake factories of diplomas and degrees. TVET must not suffer such a fate. If never again is our government's goal, then a single qualifying body governed by a public regulatory entity is a necessity.
Finally, the hardwiring of STEM into TVET. A confusion needs to be cleared first. What makes a STEM workforce? As academics have pointed out, it is not just made up of science and engineering graduates, but also all those who apply STEM skills in their jobs. They needn't be graduates.
Academics may quarrel about this — after all, they are one quarrelling lot — but the importance of a broader definition of a STEM workforce that takes it beyond graduates is widely recognised.
As one academic pointed out recently, technicians are deservedly part of the STEM workforce as they form a significant part of innovation hubs.
Outside such hubs, technical skills make or break industries. This needs to be acknowledged. One objection to integrating STEM into TVET is the fear of diluting both. It doesn't.
On the contrary, integration enhances both. This is the experience of many countries that have hardwired STEM into TVET.
Today, these countries reap the benefits of having seized the opportunities that such an integration has brought. Malaysia must do the same. Experience trumps academic arguments.
