The Higher Education Commission (HEC) stands on death row. Appeals for reprieve have been rejected by the commission responsible for implementation of the Eighteenth Amendment. That commission’s chairman, Senator Mian Raza Rabbani, declared that “the HEC act will be revisited and reframed to shed its role as a centralised funding authority.”
His logic is that this constitutional amendment requires devolution of several powers to the four provinces. Since education is among them, universities cannot be federally administered. Instead, a brand new commission is to be created under the cabinet division. Other HEC functions would be turned over to various ministries and provincial administrations.
At first glance, disbanding the HEC appears to be a good idea. Its record is less than stellar. From 2002 to 2008, its budget rose by an astounding seven times — a world record. But a good chunk was squandered on various delusional mega-projects that failed spectacularly. Then, although it led to serious degradation of quality, the HEC encouraged the number of universities to double, and then triple. The number of PhD students registered at various universities was also made to explode. When confronted by students and teachers who were unwilling to meet international standards, the HEC backtracked on its quality guidelines.
The maladministration of universities by the HEC makes for a long list. Hyper-inflated salaries, recommended by the HEC, have made higher education more expensive. A full tenure-track professor nowadays can make up to Rs325,000 per month, about 30 to 35 times a schoolteacher’s maximum salary. Many produce only junk research and have poor teaching ability. Even today, the HEC puts out spurious data that mislead the public into believing that there has been some sort of educational revolution.
One might also wish to support the government’s decision from a second angle. After all, self-administration by the provinces is to be welcomed as a general principle. It could be argued, for example, that if a province is now to be in charge of its mineral wealth then it should also run its own universities. But caution should take precedence over legalism and a desire for sweeping changes. The steps to be taken, of which dispensing with the HEC is one part, will have huge consequences for Pakistan’s universities. Therefore, instead of jumping to conclusions, one must take a sober look and discuss the pros and cons.
First, the HEC’s record is not entirely bleak. It sent students to overseas universities, attracted foreign faculty to teach in local universities, created digital library access and took some positive initiatives to encourage research. Although programme implementation was flawed, these represented some progress in a country where good news is preciously short. Moreover, a full balance sheet of the HEC’s good and bad deeds is not essential for answering the question posed in the title. Rather, one must ask: What will be the consequences of the proposed devolution? Will it improve or degrade Pakistan’s higher education system?
Although I have been strongly critical of the shenanigans of the former HEC leadership, in my opinion, the government is headed in the wrong direction.
Instant dismemberment or serious disempowerment of the HEC is a recipe for producing chaos. Creating another bureaucracy or handing over the reins to existing provincial education bureaucracies, which are even more myopic and less competent than those at the federal centre, will negatively impact the quality of university education in Pakistan. This quality is already much lower compared to India, China or Iran.
The few checks and balances that currently exist, and which are actually enforced by the HEC, would disappear. Academic decisions would be made by those who have little understanding of how universities should function. This would push the system towards free fall. A wild policy zigzag is the last thing that Pakistan needs.
Instead, a responsible and nuanced approach is needed.
This means devolving surely, but slowly and carefully. Provincial administrations should be helped to build technical capacity so that they can be properly entrusted with key decisions, such as granting charters to new universities, university admission policies, etc. And while the HEC ought to be slowly downsized, some of its essential functions — such as quality control, foreign scholarships, and donor programmes — must be kept intact under federal control.
(This article was also published in The Express Tribune)
Dear Dr. Hoodbhoy,
You need good, qualified researchers as Professors and scientists at Pakistani Universities. Unfortunately, the current situation is such that the really qualified people are those who have trained in the Western World (I mean in things other than Urdu language, Pakistani studies and Islamic studies) and in many cases, they are nationals of these Western nations. How can you expect, say a Pakistani-American Professor to move back to Pakistan if he is not offered a very good financial incentive.
Dr. Hoodbhoy, you mention PKR 325,000 / month as a salary for a full-tenured position. This sum equals to approximately USD 3,800 – which is nothing as compared to what these researchers/Professors would be getting in Western countries. If you cut this amount, then it will be very hard for any Western trained Scientist to think about relocating to Pakistan.
However, I do agree that doubling/tripling number of Universities is not the best of ideas if quality is not maintained. For this, instead of disbanding a system (i.e. HEC), perhaps it ought to be reformed. I believe you would agree that whatever good work that has been done by HEC needs to be preserved and additional time should not be wasted to come up with a new system.
I hope you see the rationale behind this – you yourself are going to retire in perhaps 10-15 years and Pakistani nation would be well served by you if you can work with HEC and work to improve it instead of trying to pioneer a brand new system and then leaving it with yet another set of shortcomings.
I think having a commission but with only policy function and not getting in distributing large sums of money will be good for the commission as well as for higher ed in Pakistan
I am an asssistant professor at a university in Pakistan and do have a phd. With all the debate going on on HEC, I have been saddened by many of the negative comments being made on this isssue and especially about those teaching at university either in terms of dedication to their profession or their salary. Not has it saddened me but has also made me demotivated to work at Pakistani universities with all the interference and negative comments. I have decided to quit and move abroad. Allah Hafiz.
p.s. hoodhboy, isa daudpota and dr. atta are all grammerians. I can see why the former two are so hyper about hec. I wish they stick to their own expertise.
“The Higher Education Commission (HEC),…, is the only successful education initiative in Pakistan’s history.”
Yes true! But, how, this wonderful initiative has helped the illiterate people of the Nation?
“More PhDs have graduated from Pakistani universities in the last nine years than in the first 55 years of the country’s existence.”
A big increase as compared to a small number is not a real BIG achievement. Why do not we compare with the achievement of Indian Scientists?
“Research output (as measured by published papers) has grown six folds since 2002, from 815 to 5,086 in 2010.”
The number of publications is not the indication of research achievement. What is the citation index and impact factor of these publications. Also, what is the h-factor of an individual scientist? The h-factor is a number (n) of the articles which have been cited at least n-times or more.
“Two Pakistani universities are now ranked among the top 300 science and technology institution of the world.”
According to the population of the countries, we are 34th. Where do we stand in a lot of 300 universities? Are we above or close to 34 or close to 300?
It is a shame that the TOP Scientific Organization (HEC) gives such a wage information like:
“Two … among the top 300 ….”. This statement does not give the world position of these two (world renowned!) universities. Their correct position “n” among the “N” universities can be precisely indicated by a factor “n/N”.
Any national policy which benefits only a small group of elites (Ph.D.), while it ignores the interest of the people, (basic education) is useless for the Nation.
The debate over HEC is not over HEC at all. It is really about the fact that no one has any trust in any government institution. This or old ones. Nations need to trust their governments. We do not. Until governments give us performance to trust them this will keep hapenning.