Voice of Bhavit

Category: Education & Youth

Learning, careers and the next generation.

  • Before Choosing a Career, Understand the Person

    We spend years searching for the right school, classes and college. But when it comes to choosing a career, do we spend enough time understanding the person who will actually live it?

    Marks matter. Opportunities matter. Earning potential matters. But a career decision can become more meaningful when we also understand the person making it — their interests, strengths, aspirations and the kind of work they may eventually enjoy doing.

    Different strengths. Different possibilities.

    Think about sport. A sprinter, a weightlifter and a high jumper are all athletes. Each may be talented and hardworking, but their strengths, training and events are different. We would not put all three into the same event simply because that event is currently popular.

    Career choices deserve similar thought.

    Some people naturally enjoy numbers and logic. Some are drawn to machines and how things work. Some enjoy design and visual thinking. Others are energised by people, language, biology, creativity or practical problem-solving. These tendencies do not determine someone’s destiny. Skills can be developed and interests can evolve. But understanding them can make the starting decision more informed.

    Before choosing the course, understand what you will study

    A career decision often begins with the name of a profession. But before choosing the profession, it is worth opening the course itself. What will the student actually study for the next four, five or six years?

    Computer science involves logic, problem-solving, programming and continuous learning as technology changes. Architecture combines design and spatial thinking with technical learning, detailed work and visual communication. Mechanical engineering involves machines, mechanisms, physics, design and manufacturing. Medicine requires much more than an interest in biology — it involves years of detailed study, clinical learning, patient interaction and significant responsibility.

    Can I see myself engaging with what this course will actually ask me to learn?

    Then understand the profession behind the degree

    The degree is only one part of the journey. Will the work usually happen in an office, hospital, laboratory, plant, site or field environment? Could it involve shifts, travel or irregular hours? Is the work highly people-oriented or more individually focused? What kind of workplace culture is common?

    None of these conditions is automatically good or bad. The point is to understand them before committing to the path.

    Money matters — but look at the complete picture

    Earning potential is a legitimate consideration. But salary should be considered alongside further education that may be required, relocation, working hours, travel, stability, lifestyle and the time it may take to reach different earning levels.

    Look beyond the first job

    Students often evaluate a course through placement statistics or the first job after graduation. Those are useful indicators, but a career may last several decades. It is useful to look at the visible 10–15 year path.

    Can someone grow as a specialist or individual contributor? Does the field offer people-management or leadership paths? Are research, consulting, entrepreneurship or independent practice possible? No one path is inherently better.

    And consider where the profession itself is going

    Technology, AI, automation and changing business models are reshaping many professions. We cannot reliably predict the exact job market decades from now. But we can look at the direction visible today: which capabilities are becoming more valuable, how technology may change the work and whether the profession is likely to demand continuous reskilling.

    A better fit can make a difference

    No career choice can guarantee happiness or a stress-free life. But when people have opportunities to use their natural strengths, develop relevant skills and find genuine interest in their work, there is a better chance that the work feels engaging and meaningful rather than becoming a long-term mismatch.

    Make the choice more informed

    There may never be a perfect formula for choosing a career. Interests can evolve. Skills can be developed. Opportunities change. And young people often discover new strengths with experience.

    But when the time comes to choose a stream, course or career, the decision can go beyond marks, trends and college placements.

    Understand the person. Understand what they will study. Understand the profession they may enter.

    Consider their interests and strengths, the skills they can develop, the nature and culture of the work, earning opportunities and possible growth over the next 10–15 years.

    The aim is not to find a perfect career. It is to make a more informed choice.

    We already invest enormous effort in finding the right school, classes and college.

    When the time comes to choose a career, let us put equal thought into understanding the person who will live it.

    Not just: “Which career has the best future?”

    But: “Which direction can help this person build a better future?”

  • Teachers Need Time to Teach

    When did we stop allowing teachers to simply teach?

    Teaching is more than completing a syllabus. A good teacher prepares, explains, observes, listens, adapts, gives feedback and sometimes spends extra time with the student who has not yet understood.

    Teachers can also be expected to manage documentation, reports, KPIs, compliance requirements and institutional administration alongside their classrooms. Many of these activities exist for legitimate reasons. Accountability matters. The question is one of balance.

    The problem begins when demonstrating that education happened starts consuming too much of the time required to actually make education happen.

    Students need teacher time

    Students do not all understand a concept at the same pace. One may need a different explanation. Another may hesitate to ask a question. Someone else may need greater challenge. Good teaching requires time to notice these differences.

    It requires time to prepare, interact, notice learning gaps, change an explanation and give meaningful feedback. Excessive administrative load can also mean less time to understand the student behind the marks.

    KPIs should support outcomes

    Education systems need ways to understand whether students are learning and whether institutions are performing responsibly. But measurement should remain connected to purpose.

    KPIs should help us understand outcomes. They should not become substitutes for outcomes.

    A completed form can show that an activity was recorded. It does not automatically tell us whether the student genuinely understood.

    Ask what genuinely requires a teacher

    Not every administrative task needs to disappear. But institutions can ask whether each recurring activity genuinely requires teacher judgement, whether administrative support can handle part of it, whether existing information can be reused, and whether automation or AI can reduce repetitive work.

    Technology helps only when it actually removes work. A digital platform that asks teachers to enter the same information again is not meaningful automation.

    Different educators bring different strengths

    Some educators are exceptional at explanation and student connection. Some have strong research, technical or problem-solving abilities and can add value to projects, research, competitions and innovation challenges. Some bridge both worlds.

    We do not need every teacher to contribute in exactly the same way. We need an education system that recognises different strengths and uses them where they create the greatest value for students.

    This does not make qualifications, research or professional development unimportant. Teachers also need reasonable opportunities to update subject knowledge, technology and teaching methods. The purpose remains helping students learn, grow and achieve more.

    Bring the focus back to the student

    Teachers should be accountable. Institutions should have standards. Educational outcomes should be measured. At the same time, perhaps one of the simplest ways to improve education is to protect enough teacher time for the work that only a teacher can do.

    A teacher’s greatest contribution cannot always be captured in a KPI.

    Sometimes it is recognising that one student has not understood. Sometimes it is changing the explanation. Sometimes it is giving a little more attention to a student who needs it.

    If we want better educational outcomes, give teachers enough time to focus on the people those outcomes are meant for — the students.

  • Beyond the Paper Leak: Can Technology Alone Protect Our Examinations?

    When an examination paper leaks, the immediate questions are understandable: Where did the system fail? Was security weak? Could technology have prevented it?

    These questions matter. Secure printing, controlled access, encryption, surveillance, audit trails, segregation of duties and stronger processes can all reduce risk.

    But there is another question worth asking.

    What happens when a secure system finally meets a human being?

    At some point, even the strongest process depends on people: someone prints the paper, handles confidential material, controls access, transports it, manages a system or supervises a sensitive activity.

    A recent case illustrates the problem. According to a police chargesheet reported in September 2026, question papers for an examination in Maharashtra were allegedly folded and concealed beneath shoe insoles by employees at a printing facility before being taken outside. The allegation is still part of a criminal case and should be treated as such, but the example raises an important systems question: security can be technologically sophisticated and still face a very ordinary human vulnerability.

    Technology is necessary. But it is not the entire answer.

    Technology can make misuse harder. Processes can reduce unnecessary access. Monitoring can make suspicious activity easier to detect. Accountability can create consequences.

    Yet if a person entrusted with sensitive access deliberately decides to misuse it, the system is already facing a different kind of risk.

    That is why examination security should not be thought of only as a technology problem.

    Perhaps it is better understood through four layers:

    • Technology — to secure, monitor and trace.
    • Process — to minimise unnecessary access and remove single points of failure.
    • Accountability — to make responsibilities clear and violations consequential.
    • Integrity — to reduce the likelihood that trusted access is deliberately misused.

    Who receives the key matters too

    For highly sensitive examination responsibilities, selection should not focus only on whether someone can perform the technical task.

    Where proportionate and legally appropriate, organisations can also consider background verification, past conduct, reliability, conflict-of-interest declarations, segregation of duties, least-privilege access and periodic review for people handling especially sensitive material.

    A conflict of interest does not automatically mean wrongdoing. But identifying, declaring and managing relevant conflicts is part of responsible governance.

    Similarly, background checks cannot guarantee integrity. No screening system can perfectly predict human behaviour. The purpose is not to treat every person with suspicion. It is to recognise that when the consequences of misuse are significant, trust should be supported by sensible safeguards.

    And then there is the longer-term question

    We can keep adding cameras, access controls, digital logs and verification layers. Sometimes we should.

    But what kind of society do we ultimately want to build?

    Surely not one in which every person must be watched every second simply because we assume that trust will eventually be broken.

    Integrity, ethics and character are not examination-security technologies. They are qualities developed much earlier — through families, education, institutions, professional culture and the examples society rewards.

    This is a slower solution. It cannot replace immediate security controls. But over the long term, it may be just as important.

    Stronger systems and stronger responsibility

    When an examination system fails, accountability is necessary. Technology should be strengthened. Processes should be reviewed. Loopholes should be closed.

    But perhaps examination reform should also ask a more human question: How do we make sure that the people entrusted with the most sensitive responsibilities are selected carefully, supported by strong processes and expected to uphold a culture of integrity?

    We need systems that make misuse difficult.

    We also need to build a society in which fewer people want to misuse the key in the first place.

    Perhaps that is harder than building another security layer.

    But it may ultimately be the strongest security layer of all.

    Build stronger systems. Choose trustworthy people. Build integrity from an early age.

    Source note: The September 2026 example refers to allegations described in a Thane City Police chargesheet as reported by PTI/Careers360. Allegations remain subject to the legal process.