THE launching of the National Higher Education Blueprint 2015-2025 last week marks another valiant attempt to prepare Malaysia’s human resource base to meet the challenges of globalisation that is transforming our lives.

The million-dollar question behind its grand goals of creating 10 big shifts in the tertiary education system is whether it can pull off such an ambitious transformation when the quality of our academic institutions and civil service and their human resources have been severely tested by a whole gamut of negative developments arising from socio-political, economic and demographic changes over several decades.

Indeed, it is obviously futile to expect a policy instrument such as the blueprint to “cure” the country’s youth of whatever deficiencies they are seen to have in an era of runaway technology, societal upheaval and economic turmoil.

If this scenario appears overly dark, it merely reinforces the reality of our current dilemma in a world full of churn.

Nevertheless, a healthy dose of realism can help to contextualise the challenges of re-engineering our education system to produce the outcomes that are usually desired from the educational process.

While it is easy to define these outcomes as the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that an individual needs in order to be successful at work, in the family and the community, achieving these goals in reality can be highly elusive as Malaysia’s experience has show when the quality of its students’ achievements and their encounters with the working world are examined in the bright sunlight.

Where then can we look for answers to the development conundrum that the blueprint attempts to address?

In order to create a happy ending for the story of the Malaysian enterprise, we must firstly acknowledge that some vital elements are missing from the official narrative. For example, an analysis of the blueprint carried out by the Penang Institute in Kuala Lumpur showed that the private higher education sector was largely ignored. This, noted the policy institute’s general manager Dr Ong Kian Ming, was a serious omission given that almost half of the total enrolment in post-secondary education is in private universities, university colleges and colleges.

Although Dr Ong is a DAP leader and a prominent voice in the opposition benches as the MP for Serdang, his criticism of the blueprint should be viewed from a non-partisan standpoint if we wish to see the way ahead towards educational excellence.

So, an important first step towards an education system that works is to espouse an approach that accommodates all stakeholders in the national development agenda.

With this shift in mindset, it is then possible to consider how agents of change that are outside the formal education system can complement the government’s efforts in producing a workforce that has the right qualities to take Malaysia forward.

In this context, the roles that voluntary organisations and social enterprises can play in creating a holistic educational environment are significant indeed. To illustrate the potential that the third sector offers to education, we need only note that in a 2013 global survey of social ventures that make innovative use of technology, 45 of the top 100 enterprises had an educational focus, as a report in UK newspaper The Telegraph stated.

To benefit from all this creative energy that is driving the future, it is imperative that our policymakers and the political leaders who shape the national agenda transcend the ideological constraints that have compartmentalised Malaysian society for the longest time.

It would be doubly tragic for the country if an archaic political culture prevents us from making the most of our opportunities as a nation poised on the cusp of an era of borderless possibilities.

An important advantage of engaging the voluntary sector in the national education paradigm is that much of the volunteer energy that is put into social causes comes with a valuable bonus — a passion for a good cause that often rubs off on everyone involved. When the circumstances are right, the result can often be counted in transformed lives.

In spite of the political baggage mentioned earlier, it is possible to foster positive outcomes for the youth of Malaysia if other major actors such as our corporate citizens embrace their roles as agents of change by enhancing their engagement in the education sector.

For this, they must make strategic shifts in their corporate social responsibility efforts to balance basic aid like school supplies and sponsoring meals with structured interventions that improve the life outcomes of the people involved.

In making the shift towards systemic remedial actions, Corporate Malaysia can foster a better future for the young by supporting programmes that address underlying issues that prevent disadvantaged students from drawing optimum benefit from their educational opportunities.

Here, it would be important to weigh whether a sum of money is best spent on providing study aid, for example, or whether part of the amount could go to a social enterprise that helps children stay in school. The possibilities for positive interventions like these are only limited by the awareness of the challenges facing the young and a willingness to make a difference.

For sure, such holistic approaches in the delivery of education can not only make a dramatic difference to the key stakeholders, they also have a magical ability to heal the wounds of communal distrust, parochialism, prejudice and intolerance.

R B Bhattacharjee is associate editor at The Edge

This article first appeared in Forum, The Edge Malaysia Weekly, on April 13 - 19, 2015.

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's AppStore and Androids' Google Play.