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)
While we are crying about HEC issue, people in US are not even in favor of higher education and preaching to start business at very early age.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/business/2011/04/pe ter-thiel-believes-future-belongs-college-dropouts /36561/
Dear all,
We have been talking about the higher education where basically the scientific research work is concerned. The research achievement is measured by the number of publication and also the impact and importance of these publications.
For this purpose there is a number which is called h-factor. The “h” is number of articles which have been cited at least h times by other scientists.
HOODBHOY P h = 15 : 67 publications
REHMAN A, h = 9 : 102 publications
In case of Hoobhoy, out of his 67 publications 15 articles have been cited by others.
I will let you choose your favourites.
BTW:- I am a retired and unknown Research Scientist with h-factor higher than either of the two.
1) I cannot agree more with Hoodbhoy on this. He is spot-on: The reform of HEC needs to be a nuanced, delibrate one, instead of buying into the ‘devolution’ idea without thinking of the consequences.
2) Once again some people have found it an opportune moment to criticize Zardari/PPP over the HEC issue. ***They fail to understand that this is part of the 18th Amendment which has broad political support in the current Parliament of Pakistan.*** May be, just may be the Parliament is wrong here but then democratic institutions can self-correct issues. Look at how the Parliament peacefully settled the objections to a few parts of the 18th Amendment raised by the judiciary? Was that not good for Pakistan?
3) I read an article by Prof. Ata ur Rehman from HEC on tribune.com.pk today. His arguments are, of course, very supportive of HEC. ****Perhaps we really need these two gentlemen (Rehman and Hoodbhoy), along with others to hold public debates about this vital issue?***
4) In the said article by Prof. Rehman he has shamefully asked the **** the ARMY CHIEF of Pakistan*** to interfere in this matter! I just hope the Prof. got carried away. He should apologize before too long.
5) There is also an ‘ethnic’ angle to this debate: HEC scholarships are perceived to be mostly gobbled up urban Sindh and Punjab. So, in the name of ‘devolution’, I have seen comments by Pakistan’s ethnic minorities wanting more resources, even if they may not necessarily have the required calibre of candidates.
6) Finally, I think HEC should be reformed. But no exaggerated ‘Affirmative Action’ in the name of ‘devolution’ of power to the provinces. I don’t have much faith in the highly provincial provinces’ capabilities in this matter!
I just want to reply to Mr. AHsn.
I think you have lost your mind. You don’t consider things you mentioned any achievement. Before HEC, was any Pakistani university at 34th in world? Or was the quality better than India scientists. I think none was even at 1000th. Or your definition for a successful commission is that they should take Pakistan from ditch to stars overnight? You need to study some logic before commenting on such issue. Then you might discover that change comes gradually. You can’t expect that one day you wake-up and see that Pakistan has out-performed USA in development.
The following is the last paragraph of Dr. Sahib’s article which I received from him by email. The Express Tribune chose not to publish this. Probably (Pakistaniat.com) would want to append it to their article.
It is true that the HEC failed to sufficiently expose parliamentarians with fake degrees. But this is largely because our social milieu treats corruption so lightly. Indeed, irrespective of whether the HEC stays or goes, Pakistan can have better universities only when social and cultural values change for the better. Academic honesty will have to become part of the new values. In particular, faked degrees, plagiarized papers, faked data, and cheating in examinations should evoke the opprobrium reserved for a person who goes inside a mosque with his shoes on.