Graduate Unemployment

Background

Before we begin proceed to more substantive discussion on the topic, it is good to ponder on the following data on unemployment rate:

Table 1: Unemployment Rate by Age Group (%)

Year	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004
All Ages	3.1	3.6	3.5	3.6	3.5
Age 20 – 24	6.7	7.7	8.2	8.8	9.9

Source: Malaysian Institute of Economic Research

Table 2: Unemployment Rate by Educational Level (%)

Year	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004
Primary	1.9	2.1	2.0	2.0	2.1
Secondary	3.7	4.4	4.1	4.3	4.0
Tertiary	3.3	3.4	3.8	3.9	4.0

Source: Malaysian Institute of Economic Research

The unemployment rate in Malaysia since 2000 has been consistent at the range between 3% and 3.6% (Table 1). This range indeed is not alarming and can be consider normal as the unemployment could be due to transition between jobs or temporary unemployment.
However, the unemployment rate for the age group of 20 to 24 has been increasing significantly. The rate was 6.7% in 2000 rose to 9.9% in 2004. This figure could be viewed positively or negatively. The positive argument could be that the young people are staying away from the labour market because students in tertiary education are increasing. However, the argument could be misleading as the average age of an undergraduate to venture into the labour market is 22 years old. Therefore the increased unemployment rate could be interpreted as graduate unemployment problem.
The second figure reinforced the seriousness of graduate unemployment in Malaysia. The unemployment rate of those with tertiary education is increasing steadily from 3.3% in 2000 to 4.0% in 2004 (Table 2). This increase does not seem to correlate with the economy cycle, unlike the unemployment rate of the secondary level.
Mismatch?
After looking at the statistics and figures, let us revisit some of the arguments concerning the problem of “Graduate Unemployment”. There is much debate on the problem of mismatch between what was taught in universities and what was expected from the job market. On a personal note, I viewed this statement rather negatively. A simple comparison of the course structure taught in the local universities and foreign universities are almost similar. The only difference was the usage of the language. If the course taught in local universities are considered mismatch, then the logic explanation is that the foreign graduates will face the same difficulties in getting a job.
System Downed
I would rather look the argument from another point of view. As a local graduate, I have to admit that the lack of emphasis on the English Language has truly dampened the opportunities of local graduates in competing in a global job market. In addition to that, the quality of the local universities is declining. When the Times Ranking for Higher Education was announced in 2005, the whole focus of the debate was on the declination in University of Malaya’s (UM) ranking. However, I would rather think that the problem lies in the entire tertiary education sector of Malaysia rather than the declination of UM’s ranking. Please forgive me for some element of biasness as a UM graduate, UM still ranked number one in Malaysia. Why was there not much “hoo-ha” as where are the other 16 public universities in Malaysia? There are not even listed as the top-200 universities in the world.
Academic Quality
Furthermore, as the highest ranked university in Malaysia, UM has scored “zero” in the citation category in the similar survey conducted in 2004. What does this have to indicate? Are UM’s professors not producing enough publication? Once again back to the problem of English Language. After the introduction of Malay Language as the medium of instruction in tertiary education, sad to said, majority of the lecturers cannot write and speak English with confidence, especially those trained locally. How could we expect them to produce quality work in English and compete among the intellectuals in the global world?
If the lecturers could not even communicate effectively in English, how could English be used in lectures? I could remember there was an article in one of the local newspaper reported that the students are prepared to use English as the medium of instruction but the lecturers simply could not teach in English. This reflects the quality of the academicians. However, I have to acknowledge there are still many lecturers and professors in local public universities that could speak and write excellent English. However the black sheep seems to outshine the good ones.
English Language
Furthermore, I strongly feel that neglecting the English Language has severely affected the development and quality of tertiary education. One could hardly find references and journals in Malay Language, particularly in sciences and social sciences. Even if the materials are available, they are either locally written or translated. This has limited the capacity for knowledge development of the academia. (Please note that I am not against the Malay Language. I truly acknowledge and respect that Malay Language is the national language of Malaysia).
However, all the undergraduates in Malaysia (prior to 2005) received their secondary and pre-U education in Malay Language. Majority of the undergraduates are unable to understand and communicate effectively in English. Writing skills was even worse. Malaysia introduced an English exam, the Malaysia University English Test (MUET), as a subject in the pre-U (STPM) examination. Initially MUET is supposed to be a requirement to enter into public universities and students must obtain at least Band Three as criteria for graduation. However, the rule was lifted after the large numbers of undergraduates could not graduate because of the English factor. This action was simply sweeping the problem under the carpet. Universities are doing a disservice to the society and the country by allowing these graduates with poor command of English to flood into the labour market. If that is how we solve the problem of graduates with poor command of English; then let us not complaint about our graduates not being marketable.
Bookworm vs Academic Allergic
Besides examining the policy and the overall view of the problem, another focus should be on the undergraduates. Examining the culture in public universities, one would realise two contrasting scenario. There are lots of students whose only focus for the entire three to four years in university is STUDY. They never took part in student activities or sports; but only set their goals in scoring all A’s in exam. I called them the bookworms.
On the contrary, there are also lots of students whose focus is in everything except studies. There are hyper-active in student activities, student politics, sports, arts and even road demonstration; but never seems to achieve even satisfactory level in their academic performance. They might take ages to complete a degree and in certain cases they might even switch to a totally new course in their final year. Their focus seems to be everything, except being a student. No one, except themselves, seems to understand what they are doing in the universities! I would labelled them as ‘academic allergic students’
If the universities do not rectify this imbalance, then we could perhaps forsake and forget about training all-round graduates. The university education should aim to equip graduates with the ability to acquire knowledge rather than spoon-feeding them directly. Like the proverb, “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.” Universities play an important role in providing the training and abilities in pursuing knowledge. In the meantime, universities also provide a platform or stepping stone for graduates to move ahead in the labour market. Through all the student activities, sports, arts and cultural interaction, students gain experience and insight of the challenging world outside the universities.
Conclusion
By looking at the scenarios, problems, obstacles and challenges, it was not surprising that country is facing problem with graduate unemployment. Merely putting the blame on the universities does not seem to be the solution for the problem. Rather I believe the problem was spiralled from the education system. We might be producing quite a huge numbers of top scorers in the secondary examinations but are they truly knowledgeable or merely A’s producing machine. If majority of them are A’s producing machine, then these top scorers will eventually be our graduates in a few years. The problem does not only lie in the tertiary education but the entire education system, which needs to be revamp and review in order to solve the problem of graduate unemployment in the long-run.