In India, the wedding season commences in October and continues till March. Usually, on a daily basis, several thousand brides and bridegrooms tie the knot. The tradition and the compulsions to follow the traditions are so sacrosanct that it is not uncommon to see the groom wearing a three-piece suit and riding the horse in 45-degree temperatures when the tar on the road is melting. (Tradition and our inability to see the practical side).
In all such marriages the feast is not only an integral part but it has all the potential to ruin or break the marriage if the items are not to the satisfaction of the guests particularly from the groom's side. It is not uncommon to see a vast spread that starts with drinks, small eats, main food, deserts and back again to drinks. The entire display of food is at times very bewildering and confusing to the uninitiated guest. And that brings me to the main theme of this article on the choice of architecture that we provide in vocational education in India. Just replace the uninitiated guest with the student who often comes from a rural background and has absolutely no idea about what is vocational education all about. In all probability he is often perceived as a 'failure' in society, a school dropout who has not done anything worthwhile in life, and his self-esteem is at its lowest level. He comes to a rickety centre due to peer pressure or cajoling from his parents. Suddenly he is asked if he wants to do training in plumbing or welding or some such course. He gets as confused as our guest at the wedding who just can't make up his mind as to what should be eaten first. In such a situation we need, to use Thaler's term 'libertarian paternalism'. Libertarian implies protecting the right to choose a course. Paternalism implies that we care for the youth. If we combine these two elements then we need to evolve a mechanism to 'nudge' the youth to opt for a course that is most suitable to his aptitude and abilities. This can be done through a scientifically validated entry gate assessment approach and limiting his choices so that his decision gets focussed. This goal can be achieved by the choice of architecture or by carefully redesigning his environment where the selection of choices becomes easier. Manipulation is a dirty word but we need to manipulate the immediate environment to help him make the right choice. Thaler argues that one needs to meddle in the student's choices. He argues that ' you can't design a neutral building. There is no such thing. A building must have doors, windows, elevators, and restrooms. All of these details influence the choices people make.'
The three elements of the choice architecture are default, giving feedback and expecting error. The course offerings should be such that they give a 'good' option to the youth by default. This can be done again by careful profiling of the youth and customizing the training. We thrive on feedback and therefore at every stage of training non-threatening feedback has to be provided. Giving feedback is an acquired skill and not many can give feedback that is aimed at behavior modification. Our usual feedback is an amplification and articulation of our frustration! The learner is bound to commit errors and we need to be prepared for that. Personally to me, the instructor's teaching credentials are more important than the learning credentials of the youth. The trick is to create a positive self-fulfilling prophecy that converts the ignorant and rustic youth into productive and wealth-generating citizens.
To conclude let us not spread a huge banquet but offer the most relevant ( needed by the industry) choices to the youth and bring out, using George Bernard Shaw's metaphor, the 'princess' out of the 'flower girl.'
