The abolition of the Higher Education Commission has caused some uproar in the political and academic circles. The political parties and groups are reacting to this decision in their typical partisan way. The PML(N), the Jamaat-i-Islami and other opposition parties are criticising this decision simply because it is initiated by the PPP-led federal government.
The protest by the HEC staff is understandable. The academic community is divided on this issue. A small number of academicians from smaller universities have expressed resentment but they are not expected to pursue it seriously. The Vice Chancellors of various universities have demanded the retention of the HEC in a press conference in Islamabad. However, if you talk to them individually on the merits and demerits of the HEC, diversity of opinion is noticeable. The Islami Jamiat-e-Tulba, an affiliate of the Jamaat-i-Islami, has managed a student protest in the Punjab University and a couple of other places.
It is interesting to note that no professional organisation of academic staff in any major university has so far passed a resolution for retaining the HEC.
The abolition of the HEC is a consequence of the history-making 18th Constitutional Amendment that has increased the quantum of provincial autonomy and transferred 10 administrative departments, including education, from the federal government to the provincial governments.
The notion of centralised Pakistan has been discarded in favour of the principle that empowered provinces mean strong Pakistan. Now the federal government is gradually taking steps to implement the new framework of centre-province relations. This seems to have perturbed those whose mindset is fixated on centralised governance. Most of them see the transfer of many subjects to provinces as alarming because in their estimation, the provinces do not have the capacity to manage new responsibilities.
They are particularly upset by the transfer of education to the provinces because they doubt if the provincial governments can inculcate the imperatives of Pakistani identity and nationhood among the young people. They conveniently forget that when Pakistan lost East Pakistan in 1971, education was under the firm control of the federal government.
The constitution gives a limited role to the federal government in education. This relates to international interaction and standardisation of education. It may also acquire limited role for curricula uniformity. Beyond this education is now a provincial subject. Therefore, the present HEC cannot be retained because it has become very intrusive in university affairs. Most state universities are provincial. A large number of private sector universities have been set up by an act of provincial legislature.
However, if the provincial governments, federal government and academicians agree a new, limited in scope Higher Education Commission can be established by an act of the parliament whose functions and role will have to be defined carefully keeping in view the changed character of Pakistani federation.
The roots of the HEC can be traced back to the University Grants Commission (UGC) established in the mid-1970s. It was set up with limited scope of funding the universities, standardisation and course uniformity and teachers training. Subsequently, like a bureaucratic institution, it expanded its role by setting up new institutions.
The UGC was replaced by the present HEC during the Musharraf era, primarily on the initiative of Dr. Attaur Rahman, the first chairman of the HEC. He had two advantages which enabled him to create an imperial HEC over Pakistani universities. First, being very close to Musharraf, he had a free hand to articulate an expanded role of the HEC to his satisfaction. His relations with Musharraf enabled him to bypass the bureaucratic bottlenecks. Second, funding for education became available from the United States and the World Bank from 2002 onwards.
The HEC used these two advantages, especially the foreign funds, to establish its stranglehold over the universities and virtually destroyed their autonomy. With the assumption of power by the elected government, Dr. Attaur Rahman lost his job. The funding for education declined in 2010 because of diversion of foreign funds to flood relief work.
The HEC had a mixed track record. It sent a large number of students for higher education to different countries. It also provided funding for research and the doctorate degrees within Pakistan.
However, the HEC was obsessed with controlling the universities to the extent that cannot be seen any other country. It was the HEC that determined who would do PhD in Pakistani universities and who could supervise them. Similarly, it decided where the university teachers should get their articles published. It also used the threat to limit funding to compel some universities to launch 4-year graduation programme. Most colleges still teach 2-year graduation degree. There is much confusion regarding the post-graduate education of 4-year graduation degree holders? How would they do the Masters degree or are they treated equal to the Masters level?
The local PhD programme is known for quantity rather than quality. Around 75 percent PhD theses in social sciences are weak in quality. There is a serious shortage of supervisors in Social Sciences. Some teachers agree to supervise 15 to 20 PhD/M.Phil and MA theses. Invariably, the supervisors hardly read theses. External examiners in foreign universities often complain to this writer about the poor quality of theses from Pakistani universities.
When poorly supervised PhDs teachers start supervising PhD students immediately after getting the degree, they can hardly ensure quality by their students. In this way, academic deficit multiplies.
It is a praiseworthy that the HEC or the university provides funds to teachers to participate in international conferences. However, there should be some criterion to judge their performance. Normally, after three to four foreign visits these teachers should get foreign invitation for academic assignments with all expenses covered. If this does not happen, the academic performance must be poor.
There is a need to distinguish between fact and fiction while evaluating the performance of the HEC. It is wrong to assume that foreign funding will stop or the foreign universities will stop recognising Pakistani degrees if the HEC is abolished. The recognition of degrees depends on the number of years of education and academic evaluation of the university rather than the existence of the HEC. There is a need to examine if the policies of the HEC have led some dishonest teachers to resort to plagiarism?
A new federal law or executive order will be needed to set up a new higher education commission or committee for funding, standardisation and uniformity. However, it should not be allowed to become the super-boss of the universities.
The writer is an independent political and defence analyst.
