COVER STORY  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Implementing the new Education Policy 2009
By Ismat Riaz

 

Pakistan is about to be given yet another Education Policy to be implemented from 2010. The draft of this forthcoming education policy (2009) has been available on the Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan’s website since the past two years. The draft policy evolved this time with the inclusion of civil society who was asked to prepare a White Paper for policy recommendations.

This process continued post General Musharraf’s Government when elections installed a democratic government at the Centre and in the provinces. The Pakistan Coalition for Education convened a series of meetings in all the four provinces to provide advocacy to the latest education policy. A lot of effort by concerned citizens has gone into making the right policy decisions and outcomes so that the education sector can be “fixed” once and for all. At present this Education Policy is being reviewed by the Federal cabinet for final approval.For a policy to start off in the right direction and base its recommendation on, it must state the “vision” for the coming generation’s education or what outcome it hopes to achieve from its educational provision. This particular policy’s vision formulated by the Ministry of Education is:

“Education is a categorical imperative for individual, social and national development that should enable all individuals to reach their maximum human potential. The system should produce responsible, enlightened citizens to integrate Pakistan in the global framework of human-centred economic development.”

No doubt the above vision leaves no stone unturned to provide the kind of educated individual who will be a model for fellow Pakistanis as well as one for all countries of the world. The 21st Century skills and fast-paced knowledge revolution demands such a vision through a national education system. However, to accomplish the policy’s aims, the present Pakistani system requires a high percentage of enrollment, minimum drop out rate, equity, access and a “qualitative” approach to learning in the classroom. So far, in the 60 years of its existence, the earlier policy makers have failed miserably in achieving even a modicum of the requirements stated above.

What makes Education Policy 2009 different in its approach for a workable solution to achieving the impossible? For one, Chapter Three (3) Understanding System Deficiencies, of the policy document exhaustively defines and analyses the deficiencies that have plagued the education sector in the past. It identifies two major reasons and I quote:

“There are two fundamental causes for the weak performance of the education sector:

(i) a lack of commitment to education  a commitment gap  and

(ii) an implementation gap that has thwarted the application of policies”.

 

Commitment gap

The Planning Commission’s Vision 2030 document says that “We cannot spend only 2.7 per cent of GDP on education and expect to become a vibrant knowledge economy.” The commitment to educating the whole country for a viable economic base is reflected totally in the kind of budgetary allocation the education sector has received over the last three decades. The result has been a low literacy rate and a poorly educated service and tertiary sector that have made Pakistan lag behind India in its bid for markets abroad and at home. The elitist education managed to produce top doctors, engineers, pilots, Chartered Accountants, initial bureaucrats and military personnel but failed to provide an exemplary secondary support group of nurses, technicians, cabin staff, district officers who were mostly educated in the public schools. The public sector schools were of a good standard up to ’70s but then the neglect started to eat away at a valuable resource of the country.Lack of commitment to education may also be attributed to two other reasons. Pakistan’s colonial past played a major role in the way education was managed in the initial years of independence. Although a break with the colonial past was tried but as the policy comments: “The tradition of British education, which Pakistan inherited, emphasised academic skills (to serve the colonial administration) rather than skills and competencies for use in the production sector.”

Furthermore, Pakistan’s economy was mostly agrarian and the skill based needs of the economy did not influence the structure of educational provision. The change to an industrial base in the ’60s did not bring the expected change to a more relevant educational structure. The nationalisation policy of the ’70s caused further fall in standards in colleges and schools across the country. For the present, the Economist Intelligence Unit in its latest review of Pakistani education says:

“Pakistan’s Education System is among the most deficient and backward in Asia, reflecting the traditional determination of the feudal ruling elite to preserve its hegemony.”

Thus, the commitment gap is all too visible in the successive governments’ neglect of the public sector schools which serviced the middle and lower income groups. These groups were eventually denied the justice to acquire a meaningful education for social and economic mobility up the ladder of success. In today’s Pakistan, the divide between the rich and the poor is so great that it negates the concept of the welfare state that the founding fathers had envisioned.

 

Implementation gap

The policy document looks at a number of reasons that impact on the way previous policies have failed to deliver. Some of these include:

  • Almost all aspects of governance in the education sector.

  • Mismanagement of allocation and use of resources leading to amounts of allocated development funds remaining unutilised.

  • Lack of planning (other countries plan years in advance of a reform intervention).

  • Capacity building ahead of introduction of reforms.

  • Lack of accountability.

  • Constant monitoring of reform efforts.

The Policy 2009 has a short chapter on “Implementation Framework” on what has to be done but nothing concrete in terms of by “whom”, “how” and “when” it is to be carried out. The plans will, presumably, come later rather than earlier which mistake previous policies have made already.

 

Corruption a root cause: is implementation of policy possible?

However, the crux of the matter in proper implementation of policies is clearly enunciated as point 3.1.5 of Clause 92  it is endemic corruption at all levels of the education sector. It is said in the document that:

“Political influence and favoritism are believed to interfere in the allocation of resources to the districts and schools in recruitment, training and posting of teachers and school administrators that are not based on merit, in awarding of textbook contracts, and in the conduct of examinations and assessments.”

With such rampant corruption in a department where selfless and noble service is required for the future security and wellbeing of the country, failure should definitely be laid at the non performance of the kind of character building done through religious teaching in the curriculum.

It has no doubt been a waste of time and effort to “rote learn” Islamiyat for examination purposes without application of those pristine moral principles to every day life. The assessment system should have tapped critical thinking skills to put value on these moral principles so that it made a meaningful impact on the learner. In the case of Pakistan Studies, too, students do not find any meaningful satisfaction in learning about their country as syllabi are rote learned. No effort has been made to access actual “sources” of history to be critically analysed at various stages of education to leave a lasting impression on the learner.

Consequently, how learning is effectively done is a missing element in the policy document as no innovative approach to the education of teachers is recommended. The teachers will continue to acquire a B.Ed or an M.Ed degree as a training certification. These two degrees are still based on the syllabus which the colonial masters instituted pre-Partition. Since the standard of education is below par, the policy recommends that teachers now must be an MA for secondary school teaching and a BA for primary school teaching.

Promises of professional development and rewards abound but the bottom line has not changed. What is needed is a fresh or novel approach to the way efficient teachers can be educated for the kind of pedagogical needs of the 21st Century. What is essential is a pre-service certification course with the modern approach to teaching which all teachers in the country must acquire. This will inculcate a professional outlook to becoming a teacher negating the attitude that anyone can take up teaching.

 

The great divide: Pakistan’s education system

The national education system set up after Partition in 1947 only lacked uniformity in the media of instruction. The post-Partition public schools had Urdu as the medium of instruction and the colonial British government and missionary schools had English as the medium of instruction. However, according to the recent report by the Planning Commission “Vision 2030” the divide is visible in all areas of the education system:

“There is a divide between the prevalent school structure and differences in levels of infrastructure and facilities, media of instruction, emolument of teachers, and even examination systems between public and private schools. The rich send their children to privately-run English medium schools which offer foreign curricula and examination systems; the public schools enroll those who are too poor to do so.”

Despite the pluralistic nature of society, there has been a constant refrain for uniformity in educational provision within Pakistan. The new state’s promise of equal opportunity through education has been denied to the disadvantaged in society. There is no level playing field in the domain of education. Consequently, the poor have become poorer and the rich, richer. The preamble to the policy paper admits this gap and its long term consequences when it says in Clause 86:

“…There are close links between equity in educational opportunities and equitable income distribution and income growth. If the education system is constructed on a divisive basis, the divisions it creates can endanger in the long run economic growth. An unjust society creates an unstable society and an unstable society cannot sustain stable long term growth.”

The Quaid’s vision for a cohesive Pakistan had made him declare Urdu as the national language. Urdu without any doubt became the lingua franca of the country with Baluchis, Sindhis, Punjabis and Pakhtoons communicating with each other through this common language. This nation building exercise has been eroded by thoughtless interventions in the education sector.

As English medium schools managed to sustain a level of quality in their teaching and learning with a transparent foreign examination system, it was felt that only “English medium” meant a qualitative or better education. It is conveniently forgotten that almost all who went through the public sector Urdu medium schooling also shone and were successful in all the careers. Privatisation of education encouraged the new schools to just opt for an English-medium education which was out of the reach of the less privileged classes who now demand this as a right to a successful future.

However, in the last 10 years, a solid base in language acquisition is lacking. The constant matrix of Urdu and English spoken today on media channels and by the younger generation is a product of the confusion in the education provision. No policy has taken a firm decision of equalising the opportunities for everyone to acquire proficiency in both Urdu and English.

The fault lies with the medium of instruction  for English medium, English has to be learnt first and then the acquisition of knowledge takes place. With Urdu, this is not the case  a lot of time is not wasted when knowledge is acquired through this language which also lays the base for Pakistan’s religious, social and cultural identity. This identity is lost when education is in a foreign language and a foreign curriculum meant for the needs of countries whose society, culture and religion is different to Pakistan. The consequences of such a policy are explained by the linguist expert Dr Tariq Rehman in “Standard Education System in Pakistan” a Pakistan Coalition for Education Position Paper Series.

Dr Rehman says that the purpose of education is to impart knowledge and information that encourages critical thinking and empowers people. However, he continues: “As regards the medium of instruction, which is the focus of this paper, it would be fair and justthat most services of the State and the private sector should operate in the local language and Urdu. It is quite unjust that, in the centuries-old colonial tradition, our people face an alien State that does not serve them in their languages. This must change so that as far as possible, the people are able to speak to State officials in their own languages and be responded to in the same. This will also ensure that in this age of globalisation people will remain in touch with their identities.”

For the new commercial schools which offer the British system with O/A levels, Dr  Rehman analyses their output as: “Typically, students of these schools show aversion to Urdu and pride themselves on not knowing it, indicating the degree of alienation from their own culture. While it would not be wrong to call them ’brown sahibs’ or what is now more appropriate ’native Yankees’, they generally hold more tolerant and peaceful views as compared to their counterparts in Urdu medium schools and madressahs. Thus, this educational apartheid, unjust though it is, is not the end of the story. It corresponds to an acute polarisation of views, attitudes and thinking in these different kinds of educational institutions.”

 

Concluding thoughts …

The time is now. A new education policy is in the offing as the review of the 1998- 2010 policy claims that the policy has failed to deliver once again on its implementation of a uniform curricula for all private and public schools. Where language is concerned, UNESCO studies on education research recommend that the initial schooling or early childhood learning should be in the mother tongue. So, let all provinces take that on board with the decision to do just that.

Dr Tariq Rehman recommends that learning from Class-III onwards should be in Urdu with English being taught as a subject from Class-I which is already being done in Urdu medium schools. Learning a language well depends on the quality of the classroom teaching and, not on whether it is an English medium or Urdu medium school.

Efforts to make learners acquire proficiency in English which is Pakistan’s second language and language of instruction at the university level is solely dependent on the “quality of learning experiences”. Pakistan will not suddenly become backward if this (doing away with English as the only medium of instruction for quality education) is followed  the backwardness of the nation stems from the inequality in and low quality of educational provision.Education Policy 2009 recommends excellent policy actions on all aspects of the education service. The question to ask then is when and how will the policy be implemented.

Since the government has failed at running the public schools which are a valuable asset of this country, a council of dedicated educationists from the public sector should take on the task to revive and pull up their standard. New textbooks and curricula are already at hand  the task is to educate teachers who are capable of taking on the job of teaching in the new pedagogical requirements. This new, committed force of teachers should then be inducted into the public schools. An independent monitoring department selected from the public must be set up to overlook and review the implementation of Policy 2009. When ownership of reforms by the people and for the people happens, then only can results be expected.

The citizens of Pakistan must now take part in the commitment to rectify education in the country. Change comes from the people themselves who have to let go of their malaise and slumber and put the country’s interest first before their personal gain. Implementation of policies has been blocked by vested interests and through corruption and inefficiency in the education sector, time and again.

This time around, Pakistan will not be given another chance. The forces of extremism, terrorism and backwardness that now prevail will make the country extinct. As one American president told his people at his inauguration ceremony, “Ask not what your country can do for you  ask what you can do for your country.” For Pakistanis there is precious little choice left. 

(The writer is an educational consultant based in Lahore).

TOP

 

 

 

Motivating the teachers

While paying homage to teachers on World Teachers Day, observed on Monday, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani was spot on when he remarked that the impact of a teacher is remembered by his/her students more than books and courses.

The role of a teacher is universally recognised as the key factor in the success of an education system. The National Education Policy 2009 complains of ’the presence of incompetence in such a huge quantity and permeation of malpractices in the profession’ and attributes to this the erosion of the exalted status of teachers. This realisation has prompted the new education policy to focus on teachers’ training.

Since most of our teachers are themselves the product of a decaying education system, pedagogy is the issue in need of immediate attention. Teachers serve as the link between students and the world of knowledge. A good teacher becomes a role model for his/her students and can teach them more about moral values, work ethics, etc by example than books can ever do. Hence the education policy’s emphasis on upgrading and modernising teachers’ training programmes.

But we need action and implementation more than mere words. Although the blame for the falling status of teachers is placed on the latter’s failure to perform, one cannot overlook the fact that the authorities have also contributed to this decline. Have the teachers’ terms of service been improved adequately? How many teachers figure in the honours’ list the government announces on Independence Day every year? Instituting awards for best teachers, as is being done, is a good move but teachers should also receive recognition in relative terms vis-à-vis other professionals. After all the contribution of school teachers has a lifelong impact on students. Only after solid schooling can one hope to achieve perfection in any profession. Another factor that is as important as sound training for professional success is motivation. A teacher must feel motivated in order to encourage his/her students. It is time to look into the human aspect of the teaching sector if education is to be uplifted and reformed. 

TOP

 

 

 

 

National Education Policy 2009: a critique
By Naveed Ejaz

 

The announcement of the National Education Policy, 2009, was supposed to be the starting point for a nationwide debate on much needed systemic educational reforms. Yet apart from the odd cursory analysis or two, it seems as if educationalists, academics, politicians and the media are largely uninterested in the contents of the document. The silence of this group is puzzling and criminal in itself, but the larger and more important question is how good the proposed NEP really is. And what better way to judge the national educators and policymakers that authored the document than by marking them out of ten.

Marks are assigned to the following critical areas as follows: correctly identifying the problems (two marks), proposing meaningful solutions (two marks), proper implementation strategies and assigning responsibilities (two marks) and independent feedback mechanisms for reporting on progress and quality of reforms (two marks). One mark is for general neatness, grammar and organisation of the report and one mark I reserve for myself  to give as I please  as the privilege of being the examiner.

The NEP puts the right foot forward by recognising the two major weaknesses in the current system 1) low access and quality of education and 2) dearth and misappropriation of funds. It then clearly identifies the class barriers that a tripartite (public, A/O level, madrasa) system creates and expresses the desire to move away from the status quo by reviving confidence in public-sector education. It accepts that it is the failure of the state to provide quality public education for all that has resulted in the mushrooming of private institutions and madrasas, which by-and-large are free from any sorts of checks and balances. It accepts that the national curriculum is in dire need of reform and understands the need for greater provincial autonomy when it comes to administration. It also understands that lack of proper training and pay-scales correlates directly to a reduction in the quality of education. One point where the report is notably silent is on the inclusion of minorities with respect to curriculum subjects. However, all in all, a comprehensive analysis and an excellent start, two marks out of two.

The most visible and perhaps the only solution worth celebrating provided in the report is decision to increase educational spending to 7 percent of the GDP by the year 2015. However, the fact that the same government reduced the educational funding allocation from 2.4 percent to 2.1 percent (actual amount spent was 1.7 percent) last year creates serious doubts over it’s commitment to prioritise educational spending. The noncommittal attitude of the current government with regards to its statements and policies also lend weight to the argument that the projected figures are merely for political posturing and are unrealistic at the very least.

While the previous section clearly identified the pitfalls of a tripartite educational system, the policies put forward do very little to rectify the situation. Partnerships between private and public institutions are proposed while madrasa reforms are hinted at. Details of any sort regarding how and when these objectives will be achieved are absent.

Additionally, the policy sets itself a few notable milestonesi.e., provision of free primary education by 2015, provision of free education up to metric by 2025, increase in adult literacy rates to 86 percent by 2015, increase in higher education enrolment from 4.7 percent to 10 percent in 2015 and 15 percent in 2020. What is most worrying about all these milestones is that they seemed to have been plucked out of thin air, with no data provided to show any projections that might have been carried out. In the absence of any such projections, these numbers seem to be more of a wish-list than the result of any careful planning and deliberation.

This wish-list attitude has been notably present in all previous educational policy documents that successive military and civilian governments have come up with. It’s also notable that all such policies spread themselves too thin over what they hope to achieve rather than certain key areas to focus on. The NEP is no different in this regard, and for that reason, the recommendations and milestones it proposes seem highly unrealistic and just for political gain. Hence, for the reasons of not providing any visionary leadership, failing to ground projections on reality and strong allegations of doublespeak, I am compelled to give the solutions section a poor 0.5 out of 2.

After the particularly disappointing solutions section, the implementation plan needs to be clear, concise and to the point. It does exactly that when it proudly states “The NEP thus outlines what is to be done. The NEP does not deal with who will do what, how will something be done and when is something done.” 0 marks out of 2.

To report on the nonexistent implementation framework, the NEP proposes the setting up of a national forumi.e., the inter-provincial education ministers (IPEM). Under this framework, the IPEM will serve as both the judge and the executioner in that it is both responsible for creating an implementation roadmap as well as gathering data to see how well the implementation is being carried out. Those familiar with public policy and development work will know that policymaking and research bodies are kept separate and independent from each other so that their conclusions can be considered to be unbiased. On a brighter note this section talks of implementing both 1) greater provincial autonomy and 2) greater interaction between policy monitoring bodies such as the Higher Education Commission (HEC) and the National Vocation and Technical Education Commission (NAVTEC), though again details regarding how these goals will be achieved are notably absent. Therefore for getting the very basics of policy monitoring wrong, this section gets graded 0.5 out of 2.

On the general neatness, grammar and organisation front, this report gets a 0.5 out of 1. Half-a-mark has been docked for it being very repetitive between sections and in places referring to itself as NEP 2008.

It’s clearly apparent that NEP 2009 is not the solution to the myriad of problems plaguing our educational system. The situation is extremely grim, given that work on the NEP was started as way back as 2005 and that it serves as an educational policy document for the next 10 years of our nation. Furthermore there is the highly contentious fourth chapter of Islamic education. Including such a section into the national policy document is clearly a political move. In doing so it risks further alienating the religious minorities which are already under significant pressures following recent attacks and events. The chairman of the Pakistan Minorities Teachers Association (PMTA) has already condemned the policy, calling it discriminatory towards non-Muslims. Educationalists also hold the opinion that this education policy, like all others before it, violates the article guaranteeing religious freedom in the Constitution when it makes Islamiyat a compulsory subject from grade 1 to 12.

It is clear from the scorecard that the NEP is merely an elaborate exercise in political posturing and offers very little in terms of meaningful reform. And while the responsibility for this lack of vision and determination falls largely on the shoulders of the current government, the silent members must also be taken to task; educators and policymakers for their inability to create a national debate on the subject, political parties for being uninterested in taking ownership in the educational arena, the media for showing more interest in the conspiracies of ex-generals than in education, so-called secular parties for not protesting over the Islamic education chapter and all of us for our general disinterest in the genuine problems that face our nation and the possible solutions that might help put us on the long road back.

As those that are keeping count will notice, I haven’t allocated my final mark yet. That’s because it hardly matters. At the current score of 3/9, even my deciding editorial vote is not enough to help NEP 2009 reach the minimum 50-percent massing mark.

The writer is a doctoral student at Imperial College, London.  

TOP