Task force: another social disaster
By Noman Ahmed

posted: June 25, 2002

The Past few weeks have been eventful with respect to the strides of the Task Force on Higher Education (TFHE). The so-called 'consultations' with the key stakeholders continued and finally concluded during the second week of June. The governor of Sindh, who is also the chancellor of public sector universities in the province, convened a joint meeting of all the four provincial governors to discuss the recommendations put forth by the task force.

In this event, the task force members apparently succeeded in getting ratification of the governors on their sugar-coated recommendations. Various other concerned and unconcerned individuals have cited their views either directly or after meeting with the members of the task force. All this has been apparently done to prepare a draft ordinance on higher education for presentation to the President in August 2002. It has been obviously rushed to complete this whole exercise before October 2002 so that the anticipated law can be promulgated in a clandestine fashion without seeing the table of the parliamentarians. The current scenario has established some important factors that need to be noticed and analyzed in depth with respect to the impending crisis waiting around the corner.

From the consultations, not worth more than a meeting, it has become evident without any trace of doubt that the teaching fraternity of the public sector universities around the country has unanimously rejected the approach, content and recommendations of the task force. Consensus prevails on all the core issues. It has been almost unanimously demanded that the task force should be immediately disbanded and the so-called recommendations be withdrawn without delay. For instance, the Karachi University Teachers Society (KUTS), in its meeting attended by around 300 teachers ratified these points. The demands also included the restoration and implementation of the Karachi University Act of 1974 in letter and spirit, effective revival of statutory bodies viz academic council, syndicate and senate, consultative and scientific decision-making as well as making education accessible to all the cross sections of the society.

The teachers of NED University in their written response to the task force have also endorsed the same line of action. Similarly, the teachers of Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, and Islamiya University, Bahawalpur, have affirmed their approval to the same note. The teachers of other public sector universities have also expressed their support through their opinions at different occasions.It is also vital to note that the only souls that have accepted and promoted the recommendations are those who were members of the famous Boston Group - the sounding board of task force. Thus it does not come as a surprise that the vice chancellors of Karachi, Sindh and Peshawar universities have spared no moment in praising the task force initiative despite the vehement rejection by most of their faculty members. The VC, Sindh University, has gone a step further. Even before the presentation of the finalized version of the task force recommendations, he formulated a high-powered, high-profile and high-sounding committee to oversee the implementation of the recommendations.

Like every other controversial and half-baked initiatives that our governments are very fond of launching, there is a great deal of resentment and disregard shown by members of the government themselves. The outlandish suggestions of task force have been received with concern by some of the top functionaries of the regime. At the highest level, the Federal Minister of Science and Technology is reported to have consoled the teaching fraternity that the task force would be dissolved and that he himself would head the Higher Education Commission (HEC) to make sure that no irrational or out of context recommendation is implemented. In contrast, the high-ups at the Federal Ministry of Education are pushing forward the recommendations to the best of their abilities.

Unlike any rational process normally adopted to cause improvement, the task force has a time bound and specifically defined terms of reference, commensurate with their job descriptions. Most of its ingredients, such as the process of finalization of the recommendations, are rigidly outlined.

A clear indicator of this is that despite listening to so many dissenting and rejecting voices, they have paid not the slightest of heed to the concerns cited by the participants. They have basically fulfilled a pre-requisite of talking to people without incorporating their feedback. Thus like a typical bureaucratic exercise meant to cosmetically fulfil the requirements, the task force has made no real effort to make its recommendations a consensus document.

From the very outset, after the task force proceeded with its terms of reference, if was obvious that there was a hidden agenda within the spelled out framework but not to be revealed to the stakeholders. A review of the process, documents and performance of the task force, further adds weight to this assumption.

The task force has been continuously pointing out towards the existing poor status of university funding which is very low at present. This is like stating the obvious. Recommendation is made asking the government to increase the grant of funds for higher education. As per routine, the government will most probably accept the proposal reluctantly but will soon show its inability to provide such amounts due to overall unavailability of funds. It is all the more clear that education is allocated only Rs2.6 billion in the federal budget against the much-trumpeted figure of over Rs4 billion. Thus it shall open a direct access for any donor agency to extend its funding, with various pre-conditionalities.

One of such precondition is expected to be the strict enforcement of the recommendations made by the task force. Gradual privatization of universities under the garb of increasing autonomy, removal of subsidies from education, raising student fees, and reducing the faculty positions to short-term contractual assignments would follow.

A pre-conceived conclusion drawn out by the task force is that the public sector universities do not possess the capacity to absorb any extended funding for research and development. Poor management and lack of accountability are cited as the main reasons in this regard. This sweeping statement, however, has not been backed by any factual information. On the contrary, certain universities in Sindh have already begun a double entry book keeping system and stricter checks and balances, as stated by the governor of Sindh on June 13, 2002.

The actual idea to discredit the accounting and management system of public sector universities is to create a premise to replace the entire administrative structure by the proposed Board of Governors (BoG). This BoG is aimed to be created from members coming from business, commerce, trade and industry without academic credentials. It is aimed to institutionalize outside interference to the greatest extent. Thus from admissions to appointments, the 'worthy' members of the proposed BoG would use their good offices to pressurize the chief executive of the university.

The quality of higher education has been criticized to be below standards across all levels. One cannot disagree with this observation. But the root cause of this issue lies in the pre-university education and the socio-economic conditions of a majority to a considerable extent. It is a known fact that students hailing from the upper echelon schools that charge high fees normally develop abilities to make headway into better colleges and universities. Contrarily, students coming from poor and lower middle income backgrounds have to combat several persisting handicaps with sheer hard work.

Limited grasp of English language, restricted access to computer/ internet facilities, meagre family income, involvement in petty jobs/ tuition to support their families and studies, an inferiority complex in comparison to their well-off colleagues and psychological barriers of different kinds are the common place shortcomings with which a vast majority of students enter colleges/ universities. After hard work and when luck converges, they are able to overcome their deficiencies. Otherwise they do graduate but as a lesser breed. It is the field or profession which teaches them the remaining lessons of life. If we close the doors of higher education on them by citing quality as the excuse and without addressing the underlying issues of secondary/ higher secondary education, it'll amount to a grave social injustice. No sane soul can allow this to happen.

Time demands an honest view and open approach to address the problems of higher education. It must be understood that in conditions of abject poverty, helplessness and diminishing incomes, we require an unconventional strategy to address higher education issues. This strategy can best be evolved by the stakeholders who directly confront issues pertinent to higher education on a day to-day basis. Students, teachers, administrators and the government functionaries are the key citations.

Such a strategy can only be formed by the sufferers through their own mutual consultation and resolve. Experiences of all such people are invaluable and most relevant to help develop remedials. If foreign-bred solutions are imposed on us, as has been the trend in the past, then we should be prepared to face another monumental social disaster.

From: http://www.dawn.com/weekly/education/education.htm