Ever wondered what ‘data’ actually means to you? This has become one of the most discussed terms in recent times. Be it private data, or data regarding achievements of the government, or data regarding unemployment.
Today, data though, sought mostly in its intangible form, has become the most valuable resource in the market. An individual’s data is a resource which is fuelling the business of several firms. Leaking of data is another issue which social media can be found raving about often.
However, one prime question which continues to haunt me, is how have we evolved into becoming so data-centric?
Being data driven is the new craze in the policy making sphere. At least that is what they claim to rely on for ‘informed policy making’ decisions. But what is crucial is, how have we arrived at determining the node of intervention based on these digits? How can these digits be more powerful than the existence of a physical population?
Now, even if we don’t delve into deep complexities, any particular population group has its own intersections, has its own needs. How can a number homogenise their needs?
Even if I keep these questions aside, one link to this, which I cannot ignore is our beautiful education system. Yes, the same one which has literally choked individuals to sharpen their skills of recitation. The same system which has implanted the idea that science graduates are the ones who are needed, and has established that arts graduates belong to the bottom of the pyramid.
I can trace the science versus arts debates to my childhood, where I recall parents forcing children to perform good in school, and always dreamt of their child either to be a doctor, engineer or if an arts graduate, then an IAS officer. The thrust for pursuing engineering had created such a demand, that to produce furnished engineering products, several production units aka engineering colleges came up in thousands.
But with these, came the supply of products which were deemed of not suitable quality by the purchasers in the employment market. I personally don’t know what makes an engineer more capable than an arts graduate.
I do not have a knowledge of the domain, and maybe my bias of being an arts graduate has pulled a thick veil in front of my eyes. Nonetheless, with the basic education I have received, I could develop some understanding, based on which I could decode reports which have cited that the quality of technical education in India is poor.
This is not the fault of the engineering graduates. Perhaps the institutions are to blame? Who knows? I would refrain from commenting blindly over this, but I do know that the market is not absorbing the workforce which was designated to serve some purpose there.
Coming forth is another question – what have been the consequences of this?
Encroachment, I would say. The encroachment of a discipline over other. When these science graduates are not able to find employment in the area they are trained for, they look for alternatives. They look for higher education, or look for acquiring jobs which do not specifically need the skills that they carry in their kitty. Perfectly human nature, I would say.
But what happens when they do so? Many a times or well, most of the times they end up in streams which were meant for those who had chosen arts. But the difficulty of switching disciplines is faced even by the lauded science graduates.
Yes, I have seen them suffering trying to make sense out of what some of them would consider utter nonsense. Again, not their mistake. They have entangled themselves in a field which is not meant for them.
Science is considered to be objective, it is definite. Whereas, arts is descriptive, it is abstract.
What happens when you find it difficult to fathom the abstract? You start looking forward to objectivity in it. You start trying to simplify it. You would want it to be an equation which you can solve, and which can yield some value which you can utilise. Now my friend, here, here is the key to the argument that I have been building on.
This phenomenon, which I have put forward in an oversimplified form is not the end of it. I wish it could stay bereft of the global forces, but the need to advance technologically and the sheer will of coping up with the idea of development has pushed us all towards adjusting to the era of a digital economy, where everything is based on technology and advancement.
We rely more on computers than capable human brains that can synthesise a much wider range of information and so, in order to process reliable results, we feed numbers which the computer can digest and reproduce in smaller units.
Digressing a little into my personal experience here – I come from an institution which ensures that we are trained rigorously in doing research. Research, to keep it simple is of two types – qualitative and quantitative.
Qualitative as the name suggests aims at gauging perceptions, while quantitative aims at measuring or assessing. So, most of the people that I have seen around, who have a technical background pick up quantitative research, as they find it more relatable, which is quite obvious.
The rest? The people from the bottom of the pyramid usually opt for qualitative. However, it does not in anyway mean that they are incapable of quantitative research. As far as I know people around me, some of these bottom of the pyramid people can outperform these revered science graduates.
What lies beyond the acquisition of these skills is the employment market. The employment market has grown immensely in terms of diversity and not mindset in the past few decades. The emphasis on data has been far more, and a good number of consultancies which perform research work to assist in policy making have come up. These are organisations that have kept their pace with technology and have excelled in data driven research. Often, these are led by science graduates too.
Here comes the twist for the arts graduates. The industry has a common bias that those with a technical degree are better, and so, it is often seen that they are the first ones to bag a job, and mostly ones with good pay. The policy making market demands skills that the arts graduates are not trained for, but the science ones inherently carry them due to their training.
This is what makes the difference, and this is where the encroachment can be seen growing. The science graduate can again manage to seek employment in a field which is deeply rooted in the arts domain.
The arts graduate, who are already discarded by the society, by the government (yes, when it comes to funding of colleges) are again at a disadvantaged position. Where will these people go now?
Maybe, they will feature as numbers in the unemployment reports that are yet to be published. This here is not a rant on employability. It is essentially about what course our education system is taking and how it is adversely affecting the conscious decisions of many.
Everyone has a right to survive, to sustain, but what we are pushing ourselves towards is a matter of concern given the dynamic era we live in, and the huge population we live with.
If this continues, we need to remember, there are more layoffs coming with the advancement of artificial intelligence, which won’t even spare science graduates.
In such a time, mere orientation of disciplines will not be useful. We need individuals who can look beyond that what meets the eye. Individuals who can potentially process a wide range of information, but not quantitatively. We have enough and more of those. And, by the way, I have not even brought one of the major culprits, i.e. economics to the debate.
Maybe I will reserve it for some other time, where we can understand what route economics took, how it defined the lives of entire populations which could not even conceive the concepts of externality thrown at it.
Till then, when you come across a number, question it, and if you cannot find an answer for why the number is the answer, reflect instead on why there is a need to understand and embrace a more qualitative way of looking at things in order to reach the roots of a problem, and subsequent steps that can be taken to solve it.