PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION IN PAKISTAN: KEY ISSUES AND CHALLENGES
Pakistan stands at a critical juncture in its social development. It can choose to continue with its business-as-usual approach and look the other way, while 12.4 million children between the ages of 5-14 years stay out of schools and the school-going children receive low-quality education. Or, it can accept the challenge and set itself to putting out-of-school children in (public or private) schools and improve their learning outcomes. The business-as-usual approach will keep the country mired in a vicious cycle of low-quality human resource and poverty. Accepting Accep ting the challenge promises to lead the nation on a trajectory of progress p rogress and development. The latter, however, is an enormous task requiring concerted efforts in several areas. It will require, inter alia, allocating a larger proportion of national resources for the provision of education. Dealing with complex and inter-linked issues of medium of instruction, curriculum and assessment, and improving governance of the school education sector in general and of government gov ernment schools in particular, will also require attention. This note is an effort to inform the national debate on this subject. It is divided into four sections. Section 2 defines the challenges, by presenting updated statistics on the status of school education in Pakistan. Data is presented on current enrolment and learning outcomes to show significant deficits on both accounts. Gender gaps in enrolment and educational achievement are also highlighted. Low levels of investment in the sector are compared to budgetary allocations in other countries, within the region. Section 3 briefly discusses four issues that are central to improving school education in Pakistan. These are: 1) The choice between the public and the private sector as the appropriate vehicle; 2) Medium of
This technical note was written by ASP Consultant Dr Muhammad Ahsan Rana at the Lahore University of Management Sciences to serve as basis for class di scussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation. This material may not be quoted, photocopied or reproduced in any form without the prior written consent of the Lahore University of Management Sciences. This research was made possible through support provided by the United States Agency for International Development. The opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US Agency for International Development or the US Government.
© 2013 Lahore University of Management Sciences
16-293-2013-1
instruction; 3) Curriculum and assessment; and 4) Governance in government schools. Appropriate policies in these areas will have a direct bearing on enrolment and the quality of education. Section 4 concludes the paper. THE STATE OF EDUCATION IN PAKISTAN Low Levels of Literacy and Enrolment 1
Pakistan’s overall literacy rate, for persons aged 10 years and above is only 58.5% (Table 1). These statistics are even worse for women and for the population in rural areas.
Compared with 70.2% men, only 46.3% women can read and write. Similarly, the literacy rate drops from 73.7% in urban areas to 50.2% in rural areas. The difference amongst provinces is also notable – Balochistan Balochistan generally fares worse than other provinces. prov inces. Table 1 Literacy Rates (10 years and above) – 2010-11 2010-11
%age of Total Population
Area
Male
Female
Total
Pakistan
70.2
46.3
58.5
Rural
64.5
35.6
50.2
Urban
80.5
66.4
73.7
Punjab
69.0
50.7
59.8
Rural
64.3
42.3
53.3
Urban
77.9
67.5
72.8
72.3
46.0
60.1
Rural
60.3
21.1
42.3
Urban
84.1
69.3
77.1
Sindh
1
Literacy is an evolving concept. Pakistan Labour Force Survey 2010-11 defines literacy as a person’s ability to read and write in any language with understanding.
-2-
16-293-2013-1
72.0
35.1
53.2
Rural
70.2
31.6
50.4
Urban
79.8
52.1
69.0
26.2
49.8
Rural
64.3
20.0
44.6
Urban
83.5
44.4
65.7
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
Balochistan
66.2
Source: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics 2011. Pakistan Labour Force Survey 2010-11. Islamabad: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, Government of Pakistan
The net primary enrolment rate, i.e. proportion of children (5-9 years) attending a primary school is only 63% (Ministry of Finance, 2011). The total number of children of 5-14 years is 40.4 million, but only 26.3 million are enrolled in a primary, middle or high school and another 1.7 million are enrolled in religious schools (i.e. madaris) 2. This means, approximately 12.4 million children of 5-14 years are not enrolled in any school. Due to this very high number, Pakistan ranks second in the global rankings on the number of out-ofschool children (PETF, 2010). It is estimated that 26% of the countries that are poorer than Pakistan, send a larger proportion of their children to schools (ibid).
2
Figures for number of children and enrolment have been taken from the Pakistan Economic Survey (2011 and 2013 respectively) and enrolment in Madaris has been taken from the National Education Management Information System 2011. All figures are for the year 2010-11.
-3-
16-293-2013-1
Box 1 Right to Education – Education – Article Article 25A
Article 25A – inserted through the 18th Constitutional Amendment – made education a fundamental right. Previously, federal and provincial governments had provided education to the poor and the marginalised, but it was not an enforceable right per se. Article 25A rendered it the state’s responsibility to provide free and compulsory education to all children between the ages of five to sixteen years. Implementation of this fundamental right required the creation of necessary legislative and institutional framework. The Sindh Assembly recently passed the, Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Bill 2013. Similar draft legislation was being prepared by the Punjab Government. With the current rate of progress, the Pakistan Education Task Force (2010) estimated that it would take several decades before Pakistan is able to provide every child with the constitutional right to education.
Table 2 below shows that, female enrolment at various levels is significantly less than male enrolment. Their share in total enrolment is 44.1% in primary schools and drops to 42.9% and 41.9% in middle and high schools respectively. Table 2 Gender Gap in Enrolment (2010-11) Enrolment (000)
Institution Type
Male
Female (%)
Total
Primary Stage (Grade I-V)
10,092
7,971 (44.1)
18,063
Middle Stage (Grade VI-VIII)
3,223
2,421 (42.9)
5,644
High Stage (Grade IX-X)
1,527
1,103 (41.9)
2,630
Total
14,842
11,495 (43.6)
26,337
Source: Ministry of Finance 2013. Pakistan Economic Survey 2012-13. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan .
Not all children enrolled in a school complete their education due to high dropout rates rat es (see 3
Table 3 for a global comparison ). Only 63% students enrolled in Grade 1 make it to Grade 3
Global comparison of dropout rates not available for later years
-4-
16-293-2013-1
V, 40% make it to Grade VIII and only 27% make it to Grade X (NEMIS, 2011). The rest drop out at various stages. The overall dropout rate for all grades as a proportion of the primary school cohort is 30.3%, which compares favourably with India and a nd Bangladesh but dis-favourably with the average for South Asia. Figure 1 High Dropout Rate in Pakistani Schools %
120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grade 9 Grade 10 10
Source: NEMIS 2011, An Analysis of Education Indicators of Pakistan. Islamabad: National Education Management Information System, Ministry of Education and Training, Government of Pakistan.
Table 3 Dropout Rate (% of Primary School Cohort) – 2005-08 2005-08
Pakistan India Bangladesh Sri Lanka Bhutan South Asia Average Turkey Malaysia
30.3% 34.2% 45.2% 2.0% 9.9% 24.1% 5.8% 7.8%
Source: UNDP 2010, Human Development Report 2010. New York: United Nations Development Program. -5-
16-293-2013-1
Inadequate Educational Facilities and Poor Learning Outcomes
The total number of public and private schools in Pakistan is 222,000 and the number of teachers is approximately 1.2 million (Table 4). Although the number of primary schools is much higher than middle/high schools, a greater proportion of teachers work in the latter because middle/high schools are larger and often also have primary classes. The overall student-teacher ratio is 39.7, which compares favourably with Bangladesh (45.8) but disfavourably with Bhutan (27.7) and Nepal (31.9) (UNDP 2011)4. Even though the school network is large in Pakistan, the infrastructure lacks in several respects and needs improvement/maintenance. As per the official records (NEMIS, 2011), about 15,000 schools (9.2% of the total) do not have a building, which means children sit in the open. Another 17,000 are housed in dangerous or dilapidated buildings. 78,000 schools (49%) do not have electricity connections. Children sit in poorly ventilated rooms in hot and humid conditions. 42,000 schools (26%) do not have drinking water facility. 44,000 schools (28%) do not have a toilet. For the ones that do, on average 74 children use one toilet. Often, there is no arrangement for regular cleaning. 40% schools do not have desks or chairs for students. Only high schools have a library; these are usually poorly stocked and mostly comprise of books for general reading for teachers. teach ers. Table 4 Level-Wise Institutions and Teachers in Pakistan (2010-11) Institutions (000)
Teachers (000) Female
Institution Type
Male
Female (%)
Total
Male
Primary School
97.3
58.2 (37.4)
155.5
230.4
210.1 (47.7)
440.5
Middle School
21.2
20.4 (49.0)
41.6
114.7
220.3 (65.8)
335.0
High School
15.7
9.5 (37.7)
25.2
217.5
235.3 (52.0)
452.8
Total
134.2
88.1 (39.6)
222.3
562.6
665.7 (54.2)
1,228.3
(%)
Total
Source: Ministry of Finance 2013. “Pakistan Economic Survey 2012-13.” 2012- 13.” Islamabad: Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan.
4
Student-teacher ratio not available for India and Sri Lanka for 2010-11
-6-
16-293-2013-1
More worrisome than the inadequacy of infrastructure and facilities, however, is the poor quality of education in public and private schools across Pakistan. This has been noted in various large-scale surveys. The Annual Status of Education Report (SAFED 2012), for example, documents region-wise how poorly children are learning in our schools. The report notes that the majority of children are unable to respond appropriately when asked to construct simple sentences in Urdu and English and to solve simple mathematical problems, such as subtraction and multiplication. Only 68% children in grade I are able to read or write simple words, 49% children in grade II can read simple sentences and 58% children in grade III can read simple stories in Urdu (ibid). As expected, the situation is worse with English words and sentences, which only 53% and 46% children can read in grades II and III respectively (ibid). Only 41% children in grade II can do simple subtraction and only 43% in grade III can do simple division (ibid). Similar findings are recorded in the Learning and Educational Achievement in Punjab Schools (LEAPS) report (Andrabi et al. 2009), which notes that only one out of every three children in grade III can construct a sentence using the word ‘school’ in Urdu. Less than 30% can answer the most basic questions after reading a short paragraph and only 12% can correctly convert simple words from singular to plural. The survey concludes that in Urdu, most students in grade III are performing at the standard meant for grade I. Students’ performance in English is worse (ibid). About 14% students in grade III cannot write the letter ‘D’ when they hear it spo ken and 80% students cannot correctly spell the word ‘girl’.
Only 11% can construct a grammatically correct sentence using the word ‘school’. The same is the case for mathematics. 11% and 35% students in grade III cannot do single digit addition and subtraction respectively. Slightly more difficult questions involving double digit subtraction are answered correctly by only 32% of the tested children. This is far below the curriculum standard, which expects students in grades I and II to be able to add and subtract up to 3-digit numbers (ibid). The Growing Role of the Private Sector
There has been a phenomenal increase in the number of private schools during the past decade. Private institutions now exist across the length and breadth of Pakistan. They account for around 1/3rd of total enrolment in primary, middle and high schools ( Table 5). A larger proportion of private schools offer education up to t o middle or higher high er level. About 42% of all teachers are employed in private schools (NEMIS, 2011). -7-
16-293-2013-1
Table 5 Share of Private Sector 2010-11 Private sector share in total (%) Institutions
Enrolment
Teachers
Primary School
12
31
21
Middle School
62
39
62
High School
58
29
52
Source: NEMIS 2011, An Analysis of Education Indicators of Pakistan. Islamabad. National Education Management Information System, Ministry of Education and Training, Government of Pakistan
Both ASER and LEAPS have noted that learning outcomes are better in private schools than in government schools. Andrabi et al. (2009), for example, note that children in private schools have a knowledge score between 76 (Urdu) to 149 (English) units higher than those in government schools, even when they are from the same village5. They estimate that children in government schools will be among the worst performing, 20% and 30%, in private schools in Urdu and English respectively. They conclude that children in public schools will take 1.5 - 2.5 years to catch up to children from private schools in Grade III. Andrabi et al. (2009) also note that such poor learning outcomes are despite the fact that on average, government school teachers are better paid, have higher qualifications, are more experienced and are more likely to have attended pre-service and in-service training. Contrary to common perceptions, most of these private schools are low-fee schools that charge fees between Rs 250 – 1,000 1,000 per month depending upon the grade and their location and quality6. Enrolment in elite private schools (e.g. Beaconhouse, Grammar Schools and City Schools) is only a small proportion of total enrolment. According to one recent estimate, total enrolment in elite private schools is approximately 540,000, which is about 5.7% of enrolment in private schools and about 1.9% of total school enrolment (Rana, 2012). 5
A knowledge score difference of 150 points in LEAPS survey translates into an increase in the ranking of the child from 50th to 85th out of 100 children (Andrabi et al. 2008). 6 i.e. approximately US$ 2.4 – 9.6 9.6 per month (@ 1US$ = Rs 104.7 in September 2013)
-8-
16-293-2013-1
An important, but small, component of the very large private educational sector in Pakistan is that of religious institutions, i.e. madaris. There are 12,910 madaris in Pakistan, of which 97% are in the private sector (NEMIS, 2011). 1.7 million students are estimated to be enrolled therein, of which, approximately 38% are girls (ibid). About 57,000 teachers are employed in these madaris (77% are men) (ibid). Most madaris offer a 13 year teaching program. Generally, the first five years are devoted to Hifz-e-Quran during which time, primary level courses are also offered in various subjects. This is followed by eight ei ght years of Dars-e-Nizami, which is split as follows: two years for Nahv, Basic Arabic, Hadith and Basic Persian; four years for Fiqah, Hadith, Mantiq, Greek Philosophy, Assol-e-Fiqah, Assol-eHadith and Arabic Sarf-o-Nahv; and two years for learning Hadith in Arabic. Textbooks are mostly in Arabic, though teaching is mostly in Urdu or local languages. Madaris are affiliated with their respective Boards/Wafaqs, which also award degrees, such as Shadat-ul-Aalia (BA), Sanvia Khasa (FA) and Sanvia Aama (Matric). The highest degree, Shahadat-ulAalamia, is recognised by the Government as being equivalent to an MA degree. Low Levels of Investment
An important – though though not the only – reason reason for, inadequate infrastructure and facilities, low levels of enrolment and poor learning outcomes, is the chronic under-investment in education. Pakistan’s total allocation for education is estimated at 2.1% of the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP), which is significantly less than what other countries in the region spend on educating their children (Figure 2). Interestingly, allocation for education as a proportion of GDP has gone down in recent years (Table 6). The Pakistan Education Task Force (PETF 2010) estimates that, Pakistan must spend at least 4% of its GDP on education to achieve the targets set under the Millennium Development Goals. This increased allocation can be used to enlarge the government schools network, improve their physical infrastructure, recruit more teachers and better train them, develop better textbooks and to support the low-fee private sector.
-9-
16-293-2013-1
Figure 2 Public Expenditure as a Proportion of GDP
Country
% of GDP
Bangladesh
2.6
India
3.3
Indonesia
3.5
Iran
5.2
Malaysia
4.7
Nepal
3.2
Thailand
4.5
Vietnam
5.3
Pakistan
2.1
Source: Ministry of Finance 2010. “Pakistan Economic Survey 2009 -10.” Islamabad: Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan.
Table 6 Allocation for Education as a Proportion of GDP
3 2.5 2.5
2.2
2.5 2.1
2.1
2008-09
2009-10
2 1.5 1 0.5 0 2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
Source: Ministry of Finance 2010. “Pakistan Economic Survey 2009 -10.” Islamabad: Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan.
-10-
16-293-2013-1
KEY ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Choosing the Appropriate Vehicle of Change
It is the government’s responsibility to provide educational opportunities to the 12.4 million children currently out of school and to improve the quality of education in public and private schools. There are several approaches to meet this challenge. It can be done either through enlarging the public sector network of schools and by improving governance therein or through supporting the private sector. Both are valid strategies and have their pros and cons. In the first approach, provincial and local governments will have to increase the capacity of the existing schools and set up more schools to improve people’s access to government schools. Existence of a school in the vicinity will increase enrolment and reduce the dropout rate, as distance from school is an important factor for both concerns (Andrabi et al. 2009). Establishment/expansion of these schools will require provision of, teaching and nonteaching staff as well as textbooks and other material for use in classrooms. The advantage of using the public sector as the main delivery vehicle is that, the establishment of schools can be centrally planned to cater for the specific needs of the marginalised and poor communities. At the same time, however, this presents a governance challenge for governments that are already struggling to manage their existing network. The other option is to support the private sector as a partner in providing education. Already, 1/3rd children are enrolled in private schools and the proportion is likely to increase in coming years. The government can encourage this trend for households that can afford private schooling. In this process of shifting as many households as can afford to pay (in various categories) to private education providers, the government will reposition itself as a regulator and an arbitrator, rather than a provider. It will facilitate the private sector through performing a range of support and regulatory functions, such as training, registration, accreditation, etc. For the segments of the population that are less able to afford private education, the government can support and subsidise entrepreneurs and non-government organisations to provide education at subsidised rates. These subsidies can be provided in a variety of ways. On the supply side, this may include investing in teachers’ education,
providing soft loans or developing textbooks. On the demand side, such support may include provision of education vouchers to poor families or direct assistance to education providers against their current enrolment. An example of such demand-side support is the Punjab -11-
16-293-2013-1
Education Foundation (PEF), which channels around Rs 3 billion in annual subsidies to private providers (see Box 2 ). The advantage of relying exclusively or mainly on market provision of education is that it enables an efficient allocation of national resources and provides for direct accountability of providers by their clients, i.e. parents. The disadvantage of a market-led solution is that private providers provide rs tend to cluster in relatively better-off b etter-off areas. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that despite subsidies, private providers often fail to reach the most marginalised communities.
Perhaps the advantages of both approaches can be combined in a hybrid model in which public and private sectors work as partners to provide education to all segments of society. In this model, the government’s role is to facilitate and encourage the private sector to play a key and increasingly larger role. Hence, service provision is mainly by the (for profit or non profit) private sector, though the government continues to provide education in areas and for population segments that are underserved or neglected. It must be clarified cla rified that, this is not a suggestion for withdrawing the public sector from education provision; rather it is a suggestion for revisiting its role from a direct provider to an enabler and a facilitator. This is a call for, what Pritchett and Pande (2006) have termed, a shift from education ‘production’ to education ‘provision.’
-12-
16-293-2013-1
Box 2 PEF – PEF – A A Case of Publicly-Funded but Privately-Provided Education
PEF is an autonomous organisation organisation of the Government of Punjab that supports low-fee private sector in providing education to the poor and the marginalised. It provides around Rs 3 billion as annual subsidies to private providers in various areas of the province. Following are the major program interventions.
New School School Program Program supports educational educational entrepreneurs entrepreneurs in developing developing physical infrastructure in distant and under-served areas. PEF partners with entrepreneurs of good repute who are willing to construct a school in a locality which does not have a public/private school within a radius of 2 km. In addition to an initial grant for school establishment, New Schools are paid Rs 400 per student enrolled. So far 453 schools have been set up under this Program and the current enrolment stands at 48,000. New Schools also serve as feeder schools for other PEF Programs. Foundation Assisted Schools is PEF’s flagship program . Selected schools in under-served settlements are given Rs 400 per child for elementary classes and Rs 450 and Rs 500 respectively for secondary classes in arts and sciences. Rs 700 is paid for students in higher secondary schools. Schools are not allowed to charge any additional fees. The financial assistance is contingent upon good performance of schools in Quality Assurance Tests. Since its launch in 2005, this program has grown to cover more than 1.2 million students in 11,807 schools.
Launched in 2006, the Educational Voucher Scheme aims to support enrolment of out-of-school children in the 5-7 years age group. It directly benefits children from low-income families. It is a targeted subsidy for the most deserving students (either drop out or never enrolled, orphans and children of single parents), parents), each of which receives a monthly education voucher of of Rs 400 which is presentable at any designated private school of the area. Schools cash these vouchers from the Foundation. Thus, students get to choose whichever school they prefer to enrol in and the school gets its payment directly from the Foundation. So far 140,000 vouchers have been distributed to students who are studying in 562 schools.
Continuous Professional Development Program builds the capacity of education providers in various areas. Since 2011, the Program Pr ogram has focused exclusively on PEF partner schools. PEF engages professional firms of repute to conduct these training workshops.
Source: www.pef.edu.pk
-13-
16-293-2013-1
Medium of Instruction
Another important issue is the choice of medium of instruction. Choosing the right medium for children, especially in their early years, is extremely important for their personality growth and effective learning. Unfortunately, this has been a contentious and divisive issue in Pakistan. Various provinces follow different systems, which are discussed below. In Punjab, nominally all government schools are English Medium since 2009-10. Effectively, all but a few are Urdu medium mainly due to, shortage of teachers who can teach in English and the non-availability of textbooks. Complex concepts are often explained in local languages as much due to children’s greater receptivity as due to the teachers’ limited
capacity to effectively use Urdu (or English) for this purpose. Only elite public schools, such as the Divisional Public Schools, use English as the medium. Most private schools that follow the syllabus prescribed by the Punjab Textbook Board are also Urdu medium. Box 3 Medium of Instruction - Diverse Global Practice
India Elementary: Regional (mother tongue) or English Secondary: Regional (mother tongue) or English Higher education: English Sri Lanka Elementary: Sinhala or Tamil Secondary: Sinhala or Tamil Higher education: Sinhala or Tamil or English Malaysia Elementary: Bahasa Melayu for ‘Malays’, Mandarin for Chinese, Tamil for Indians Secondary: Bahasa Melayu (Science & Mathematics in English to continue till 2016, afterwards revert to Bahasa Melayu). Higher education: Bahasa Melayu and English Singapore Pre-School: Chinese/Melayu/Tamil or English. Elementary: English and Special Assistance Plan for Chinese community where Mandarin is the medium of instruction in the schools. Secondary: English Higher education: English The Philippines Grade 1-3: Regional (mother (mother tongue) tongue) Grade 4-6: Filipino and English Secondary: Filipino and English Higher education: Filipino and English –
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
-14Source: Author’s compilation from various sources
16-293-2013-1
They use Urdu textbooks, though pedagogy is mostly in Urdu and local languages. Assessment is also in Urdu. Only elite private schools use English as the medium of instruction. English is taught as a subject from Grade I in all a ll schools. In Sindh, both Sindhi and Urdu are used as medium(s) of instruction in government schools in rural districts. Textbooks are also available in both languages. High schools and colleges use Urdu and English. Elite public and private schools use English as the medium of instruction. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), all subjects are taught in Urdu in primary schools. From Class VI, English language is added as a subject but other subjects continue to be taught in Urdu. In High Schools, there is a choice between English and Urdu but very few opt for English. Most private schools also use Urdu as the medium of instruction, although elite public and private schools school s (like elsewhere) teach in English. A very similar situation prevails in Balochistan, where Urdu is the medium of instruction in government and low-fee private schools, whereas elite schools use English to teach various subjects to their students. Religious schools in all provinces use Arabic and Urdu texts for pedagogical instruction, but teach mostly in Urdu and/or local languages. Two observations emerge from the above discussion. First, Urdu and English are the two major mediums of instruction in Pakistan. Of these, English is a foreign language and Urdu, despite being Pakistan’s national language, is spoken by only 6.8% of the population
(Coleman 2009). Thus, Punjabi, Siraiki, Pashto and Balochi – the the other major languages in Pakistan together spoken by about 60% of the population (ibid) – are are not used as a medium of instruction anywhere in Pakistan, despite overwhelming evidence that children learn best in languages spoken at home (ibid). Instruction in the mother tongue not only increases children’s comprehension of fundamental concepts, but it also helps them relate education
with their everyday lives. There is also clear evidence that, use of local languages increases school attendance (e.g. Smits et al. 2008). Second, being an elite or an ordinary school is more relevant than its sectoral affiliation to a school being English medium. Thus an educational apartheid starts to emerge at these early stages. At one end of the spectrum are low-fee private schools and most government schools that use Urdu textbooks (except in Sindh) and use Urdu as the formal medium of instruction. At the other end are elite public and private schools, which use (mostly developed abroad) -15-
16-293-2013-1
English textbooks and employ English-fluent teachers in ample numbers to teach from these textbooks. There is hardly a quick fix for this apartheid. English is the global language and is a definite source of advantage in global negotiations and business. At the same time, it becomes a barrier in pursuing education edu cation for an overwhelming majority of students across the length and breadth of the country. Perhaps one option is to use local languages in early years of schooling (say up to Class V) and then gradually introduce English until it becomes the medium of instruction for all post-secondary education. This will enable a large number of students to pursue education in their local languages – and, and, therefore, with greater ease and better learning – and at the same time prepare a cadre of English-proficient students for higher education and white collar jobs. Curriculum and Assessment
A similarly contentious issue is the setting of curriculum. Since the passage of the 18th Constitutional Amendment in 2010, setting of curriculum is a provincial responsibility 7. Previously, the Concurrent Legislative List included ‘curriculum, syllabus, planning, policy, centres of excellence and standards of education.’ Accordingly, the Federal Government had
established a Curriculum Wing as part of the then Ministry of Education. This was established under the Federal Supervision of Curricula, Textbooks and Maintenance of Standards of Education Act of 1976. The wing was responsible for setting up of national Curriculum and Syllabus. To support the federal Curriculum Wing, each province had also established Curriculum Bureaus. The 18th Constitutional Amendment abolished the Concurrent List and (except a few subjects that were shifted to the Federal List) all subjects including curriculum automatically became provincial subjects. The Curriculum Wing was abolished and the responsibility of setting up Curriculum fell entirely upon the provinces. For the time being, none of the provinces have deviated from the Curriculum that was last revised in 2007-08. However, it is only a matter of time that provincial Curriculum Bureaus will start modifying the same to suit their educational needs.
7
Setting of curriculum was a provincial legislative subject in the Government of India Act of 1935, Constitution of 1956 and Constitution of 1962. It was put in the Concurrent List in the Constitution of 1973 and reverted to be a provincial subject after the 18th Amendment (NMC 2012).
-16-
16-293-2013-1
Historically, curriculum setting in Pakistan has been used as an opportunity to pursue national cohesion and ideology, regardless of what it meant to the people at the helm. For example, there was massive Islamisation of the educational content under the Zia regime in 1970s and 80s. The 1979 education policy read as follows: The highest priority would be given to the revision of the curricula, with a view to reorganising the entire content around Islamic thought and giving education an ideological orientation so that, Islamic ideology permeates the thinking of the younger generation and helps them with the necessary conviction and ability to refashion society according to Islamic tenets. This mind-set of using curriculum for pursuing ideology can be seen in subsequent education policies as well, though the phrasing is different. There is a need to liberalise and decentralise the development of curriculum, so that the curriculum represents a wider consensus, rather than representing the ideological biases of a particular p articular group. Table 7 Comparison of Class III Curricula Pakistan •
Cambridge
Living Things
•
–
Animals as living things
–
Animals and their environment
–
Characteristics of birds, insects and
Biology (Plants) –
stems and flowers –
mammals
•
–
Part of a plant
–
Plant as a living thing
–
Classification of crops
Explain observations that plants need water and light to grow
–
Know that water is taken in through the roots and transported through the stem
–
Matter and Energy –
Know that plants have roots, leaves,
Know that plants need healthy roots, leaves and stems to grow
Definition of matter and three states of
–
Know that plant growth is effected by temperature
matter –
Water in all three states
–
Importance of water and air for survival
•
Biology (humans and animals) –
Know life processes common to humans
of human beings
and animals include nutrition (water and
–
Force and motion
food),
–
Law of gravity
reproduction
-17-
movement,
growth
and
16-293-2013-1
–
•
Uses of heat and light
–
Earth and Universe
Describe the difference between living and non-living things using knowledge
–
Soil and its formation
of life processes
–
Classification of rocks according to
–
Explore and research on exercise and the
different colours, shapes and hardness
adequate, varied diet needed to keep
–
Surface of the moon
healthy
–
The solar system with special reference
–
Know that some foods can be damaging to health, e.g. very sweet and fatty foods
to the positions of the sun and the moon –
Explore human senses and the ways we use them to learn about our world
–
Sort living things into groups, using simple features and describe the rationale behind groupings groupings
Source: Author’s compilation from National Curriculum 2007-08 and Cambridge curriculum (www.cie.org.uk)
Another problem with the current curriculum is that it promotes accumulation of information, rather than understanding of things and issues. Table 7 compares the Class III curriculum of Pakistan with that used in the Cambridge school system. The Pakistani curriculum requires students to acquire information about various things, such as parts of plants, classification of crops, etc. Thus, it encourages accumulation of knowledge without critical thinking and even rote learning. In comparison, the Cambridge system requires students to know, explain and explore these very things, which enables a critical understanding of the environment. The choice of curriculum is dictated by how a particular school wants its students to be assessed. Currently, there are several assessment systems in Pakistan. The most common is the public sector assessment system whereby students are examined at various stages by institutions established by provincial (and federal) governments. Another system is followed by madaris, which have their own curriculum, syllabus and examinations. Yet another system is followed by elite public and private schools, in which students appear in O and A Level exams after 11 and 13 years of schooling, respectively. As per current estimates, approximately 100,000 students sit the O Levels exams, whereas around 1.6 million students appear in Matriculation exam every year (Rana 2012). Thus for every six students appearing in O Levels, 94 students on average appear in matriculation examination.
-18-
16-293-2013-1
There are advantages and disadvantages of having multiple systems to test educational achievement of students. On the positive po sitive side, this encourages diversity and provides students a menu of choices. On the negative side, this contributes to the educational apartheid mentioned earlier. Clearly, there is a need to critically rethink the existing systems in these areas. Improving Governance in Government Schools
Since around 2/3rd students are enrolled in government schools, it is important to improve governance therein to enhance the quality of education and to make government schools into more effective instruments of education provision. A critical examination of the current governance regime follows. Weak Monitoring and Evaluation Framework at the District Level
Since the local government reforms of 2001, school education is a subject that has been devolved to the district level8. Executive authority is exercised by district officials; provincial education departments only perform a policy and supervisory role. In this devolved structure, elected District Councils pass the budget and are ipso facto responsible for financial allocation to education from the district budget. Approval of the district education policy and overseeing its implementation is also their responsibility. District level education managers are responsible to these elected Councils. The chief education manager in the district is the Executive District Officer (EDO), Education. The EDO is supported by District Officers Education (DOEs), Deputy District Officers Education (DDOEs) and Assistant Education Officers (AEOs) in the discharge of his functions. Each district has three DOEs, as there are separate DOEs for secondary schools and for male/female elementary schools. DOEs perform wide-ranging duties and are required to personally visit each school within the district, at least onc e every year. The Th e next official in the hierarchy is the DDOE, who comprises the functional tier at the district level. He is
8
Currently, provincial governments are in the process of reforming their local government systems. Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan have recently legislated new local government laws and KPK is in the process of developing its legislation. These reforms leave unaffected the devolved nature of school education in all provinces. The official hierarchy also remains the same, albeit different nomenclature has been adopted in different provinces.
-19-
16-293-2013-1
required to inspect all middle schools at least thrice every year and at least 25% primary schools once every year. DDOEs are assisted by AEOs, who are the field officials in the district education hierarchy. AEOs are required to carry out at least two summary inspections and at least one detailed inspection of all elementary schools in their respective area of jurisdiction (usually a set of union councils). They do not have any executive powers per se , but can report delinquency to their respective DOEs, who have vast administrative powers – at least on paper – over over teaching and non-teaching staff in the district. Figure 3 District Education Hierarchy
District Council
District Corrdination Officer
Other EDOs
District Officer (Male Secondary)
EDO (Education)
District Officer (Male Primary)
District Officer (Female)
Deputy District Officer
Deputy District Officer
Deputy District Officer
Deputy District Officer
Deputy District Officer
Deputy District Officer
Assistant Education Officer
Assistant Education Officer
Assistant Education Officer
Assistant Education Officer
Assistant Education Officer
Assistant Education Officer
Source: Author’ Author ’s Notes
EDOs, DOEs, DDOEs and AEOs are drawn from the education cadre and are mostly senior teachers and head teachers from government schools. Although, their salary is determined by their Basic Pay Scale (BPS), still, postings as education managers are coveted mainly because of the administrative powers, the perks attached to such su ch postings and the capacity capacit y to -20-
16-293-2013-1
offer favours, which are reciprocated with favours in their own turn. There is also the possibility to seek rents. Consequently, it is not n ot uncommon for teachers to use their personal and professional networks to seek posting as an education manager. This strengthens their position on the one hand and places them under specific obligation on the other hand, to protect duly and unduly other members of the network. It compromises their capacity to objectively evaluate the performance of their erstwhile colleagues. It also adversely affects their ability to exercise administrative authority. Similarly, promotion has ceased to be an instrument of incentivising performance. Formally, the performance of each official is annually appraised by his supervisor and recorded in a confidential Performance Evaluation Report (PER). In practice, however, PERs do not carry much significance mainly because the supervisors rarely record their true assessment of officials in these reports. In any case, in the absence of regularly and reliably collected data on mutually agreed upon indicators, it is difficult to objectively perform a task as difficult as performance assessment. Therefore, promotion has become largely a function of seniority. After regular intervals, officials are promoted from one BPS to another. After a couple of such unearned promotions, there is hardly an incentive for an official to work hard and improve performance in any meaningful manner. Given that postings are also ensured through effective deployment of personal and professional networks, it is hardly surprising that most officials spend considerably more time building and strengthening networks than on their professional duties or even on professional p rofessional growth. The School Councils (SCs)
Provincial and district governments have made various efforts to strengthen this system of monitoring and evaluation at the district level. One of these is the establishment of School Councils (SCs) to enlist the support of local communities – more specifically parents – in managing schools. It is expected that involvement of local communities will reduce teacher absenteeism, increase teaching effort and enable a more efficient use of school resources. These Councils comprise the head teacher (who acts as the Chairperson), one or two teachers from the school and a few local notables, some of which are parents. However, it is generally seen that SCs have been unsuccessful in delivering on their mandate (GTZ 2010). This has been ascribed to a lack of interest from parents and their lack of capacity.
-21-
16-293-2013-1
While it appears to be a valid observation that SCs have by and large been unsuccessful in improving education provision, it is hard to agree that this is principally due to the lack of knowledge, commitment and/or capacity of local communities. Several commentators (e.g. Safdar 2007) have noted that households, especially mothers, have a good idea of how their children are faring in the school. Similarly, it is hard to believe that a more complex skill set is required to manage a small school than is required to run a small business or a farm – activities that households undertake on a daily basis. It is also noteworthy that these very local communities provide the entrepreneurs that have successfully set up private schools across the length and breadth of the country. Therefore, it is fair to conclude that local communities have the willingness as well as the capacity to play an important role in school management. How can we then explain, the consistent failure of SCs in delivering on their mandate? A deconstruction of the power relations between the teacher and the local community can help unravel this mystery. The teacher is the service provider in this case and the local community the client, as their children, study in government schools. In the current dispensation, the service provider is more powerful than the client – a a fact both parties fully appreciate. This relative power imbalance is recreated in everyday interaction where the latter defers to the former in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. The teacher is more educated and has an income more stable than that of an average parent. He is part of the government hierarchy and ipso facto has privileged access to state protection and resources. He is also frequently called upon to carry out various surveys and draw up lists (such as prospective beneficiaries of financial assistance) by the th e government, which wh ich places him at the giving end of the relationship. He is more mobile and often frequents district and sub-district headquarters for official duties. Most importantly, a teacher is part of several professional networks, which he can draw upon on a need basis. As Latour (1987; 2005) has shown, the capacity of individual actors to form multiple networks and deploy these networks effectively to pursue their individual gains allows them to influence policy and implementation outcomes in their favour. Teaching and non-teaching staff in Pakistan has consistently demonstrated this capacity over the years. In comparison, households are scattered, disorganised and internally divided on the basis of caste, creed and social placement. They have precarious means of subsistence, often susceptible to the vagaries of weather or to market vicissitudes. Their access to government departments is inhibited by their low literacy level and their relatively limited understanding -22-
16-293-2013-1
of bureaucratic procedures. Often their access to government services is mediated through local notables, with whom teachers may already have a preferred relationship. Effectively, this translates into a lopsided power relation within the SC. Rather than the client superintending the service provider, it is the latter who ‘identifies’ the former to sit on the
Council. Since district education managers have little direct interaction with local communities, they often end up requesting teachers to recommend a few ‘suitable’ local persons for the Council. Cou ncil. It is only o nly natural for teachers to nominate community members who are the least likely to interfere in school affairs in any meaningful manner. Practically, it is the Head Teacher and other official members of the SC who call the shots – the the presence of community members on the Council is ceremonial. No wonder these Councils have by and large failed in providing accountability in government governmen t schools. The District Education Authorities (DEAs)
In the recently enacted, Punjab Local Government Act of 2013, the Punjab Government has provided for the establishment of District Education Authorities (DEAs) – one for each district. These DEAs will oversee the provision of school education within their respective areas of jurisdiction and will be functionally responsible for managing human, physical and fiscal resources of the district education department. Since the Act provides only a short statement on the subject, details of how DEAs will be constituted and how they will perform their functions are yet to emerge. In order for these DEAs to improve governance in government schools, it will be important for them to effectively involve local communities in school management, for the simple reason that, the best form of accountability is the one performed by clients (Pritchett and Pande 2006). Since parents of children enrolled in government schools are the ones most affected by a delinquency at the school level (such as misuse of resources, teacher absenteeism or poor teaching effort), their active engagement in managing school resources is more likely to improve the condition and functioning of government schools, than the use of authority by officials far removed from the ground realities and scarcely affected by it (Rana 2013). Existing SCs provide a convenient platform to engage parents in managing their schools. But for SCs to become effective levers of control on school affairs, the power relations between the service provider and the client must be turned on its head. -23-
16-293-2013-1
This will not only require active engagement of parents at the DEA level, but also a highly decentralised structure in which most school level decisions are made by SCs comprising parents. The power relations within the DEA and the SC – the the supervisory and the functional tiers of education governance respectively – will change only when parents are able to allocate resources, as they deem appropriate, and are able to hold teaching and non-teaching staff accountable for their actions. It is important that their involvement is direct, rather than being mediated by a layered, elected or non-elected bureaucracy. CONCLUSION
Pakistan faces a formidable challenge in providing quality education to its children. The challenge comprises, bringing the currently out-of-school children to public or private schools and improving learning outcomes. This will not only require allocation of substantial additional resources but will also require addressing complex policy questions about, medium of instruction, curriculum and assessment. There are no silver bullets, but a fresh and critical look at these inter-linked issues will enable a gradual development of a policy framework that reduces the current educational apartheid. Such a framework will produce better outcomes for a larger number of students than is the case presently. The education challenges also require adopting a decentralised framework in which most managerial decisions are made as close to the school as possible. Implementing these reforms is not going to be easy, but this long journey must be started now, if Pakistan wants a decent place in the comity of nations in the years to come.
-24-
16-293-2013-1
List of References:
Andrabi, Tahir, Jishnu Das, Asim Ijaz Khawja, Tara Vishwanath and Tristan Zajonc 2009. Learning and Educational Achievement in Punjab Schools (LEAPS).Lahore, 2009: p 197 Coleman, H. Teaching and Learning in Pakistan: The Role of Language in Education. Islamabad: The British Council, 2009 GTZ, The State of School Councils in the Punjab: A Baseline Study Stud y of Community Participation in School Management. Islamabad: GTZ, 2010 Latour, Bruno. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Scociety. Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1987. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005 Ministry of Finance 2010. Pakistan Economic Survey S urvey 2009-10. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan. Pakistan Economic Survey 2010-11. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan. Pakistan Economic Survey 2012-13.Islamabad: Ministry of Finance, Government Gov ernment of Pakistan. An Analysis of Education Indicators of Pakistan. Islamabad. National Education Management Information System, Ministry of Education and Training, Government of Pakistan. NEMIS, 2011. NMC, Syndicate Report. Lahore. Senior Management Wing. National Management College (NMC), Government of Pakistan, 2012. -25-
16-293-2013-1
Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, Pakistan Labour Force Surve y 2010-11. Islamabad: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Government of Pakistan, 2011. PETF, Education Emergency: Pakistan 2011.Islamabad: Pakistan Education Task Force (PETF), Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan, 2010: p 69 Pritchett, Lant and Vared Pande, Making Primary Education Work for India's Rural Poor: A Proposal for Effective Decentralisation in Social Development Papers: South Asia Series. Washington DC: World Bank, 2006: p 115 Rana, M. A. (forthcoming). Education Reform in Punjab: Pu njab: A Decentralised Governance Framework for Government Schools. Lahore Journal of Policy Studies, 2013 Seminar presentation: Investing in Pakistan’s Human Resource. Lahore. Lahore School of
Economics. Safdar, Qamar. Parents as Partners in the Learning Community: Co mmunity: Transforming Schools in Pakistan. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2007. Smits, J., Huisman, J. and Kruijff, K. Home Language and Education in the Developing World (Background paper for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2009, Overcoming Inequality: Why Governance Matters) UNESCO, 2008 SAFED, Annual Status of Education Report 2011, 20 11, Islamabad: South Asia Forum for Education Development (SAFED), 2012: p 400 UNDP, Human Development Report. New York: United Nations Development Program, 2010: p 236 Human Development Report, New York: United Nations Development Program, 2011
-26-
