Introduction:
“He who asks a question is a fool for a minute; he who does not remains a fool forever.”
In light of this famous Chinese maxim, the question we wish to pose today is; is the current National Education Policy (NEP) of Pakistan capable of achieving that which its predecessors have failed to deliver? The answer to this question is not quite as simple as it may seem at first sight. In the course of this paper, we intend to take a step back from the deluge of specific data available on Pakistan’s educational sector and instead, analyze the broad strategic importance of education and the NEP at large. Furthermore, we would, through the course of this paper, dig to the roots of the main problems that have marred the NEP of Pakistan in the past. The representation of numbers will be used where it is most comprehensive, but it should be borne in mind that the strategic importance of education policy, and its effectiveness, takes precedence over the depiction of specific policies being followed at various levels in the education sector.
Education, Strategy & the NEP:
The vital role of education in the economic growth and social advancement of the society is undeniable. In fact, the relevance of education to the global competitiveness can be gauged from the fact that education forms two pillars (out of twelve) of the Global Competitive Index (GCI). Exhibit 1 shows an excerpt from the GCI report of 2007. The position of Pakistan on the education front relative to its major international competitors is indeed grim. What then, is the NEP targeting?
Here, it will be useful to understand what the educational policy of a country actually stands for and where it evolves from. The broad objective of the educational policy is to ensure an education system that can impart quality education and enable realization of individual potential and contribution to the development of society, and the nation. The educational policy is influenced by a number of factors, as shown in Exhibit 2. The composition of educational policy is based upon the current state of affairs of these factors.
In the context of Pakistan, these factors pose significant challenges for the government. For instance, the cultural and ethnic diversity is a major hurdle with respect to the implementation of a uniform education system. Consequently, the lack of a uniform education system is one of the biggest reasons of the poor performance of the NEP. All modern states have a ‘national education system’ which is implemented by the government. The government, by its inherent nature of duties, is supposed to implement an effective, equitable, widely-accessible education system of quality education. Adding to this quandary is the staggering income disparity in the Pakistani society. Again, the government finds itself lagging behind in its attempts to bridge the gap between the education standards of the rich and the poor. The government’s inability to deal with the situation has led to the growth of private sector education, which provides quality education by charging premium from the rich. This level of education is inaccessible to the poor and therefore, most of them end up in the mismanaged and misgoverned public education institutions. We can now see that the problem of a non-uniform educational system is self-reinforcing in a way; as the government fails to meet accessibility-quality-equity criteria of education, the proliferation of the private sector will inevitably take place, thereby “reinforcing” the problem of non-uniformity.
Ergo, we can establish that the major deficiencies harbored by the educational system in Pakistan lie along the dimensions of social exclusion, lack of accessibility at all levels of education (Exhibit 3) and the quality of education, which is fairly sub-standard as compared to the world. On the strategic level, these three problems are extremely detrimental and definitely rank in the “urgency” zone of the urgency-importance matrix. The resolving of these problems will bring the various parallel systems of education closer and this will be the single largest stride towards a better educational future, at par with the world.
The interesting part is this; the government is fully aware of all these problems and the proposed change in the NEP structure of 1998-2010 is shown in Exhibit 4. From a previously used time-bound model, the NEP has now shifted to a temporal model which is more cognizant of the reality of education. This model will incorporate feedback from the implementation of existing policies and will revise the NEP as and when required. The 2009 NEP report is rife with policy suggestions for tackling the complex problem of education in Pakistan. What then is the catch?
“The NEP 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.” Who, how and when’s of the proposed policies are the target of the Action Plan, not the NEP. The Inter-Provincial Education Ministers (IPEM), who are envisaged as the highest body to oversee the development of education in Pakistan define that “the Action Plan will be developed by each Province and collated at the Federal level.” Therefore, it is noteworthy that the policy will be implemented and monitored within the principles of provincial autonomy and ownership i.e. each province will develop its own mechanisms of implementation and monitoring of each policy. However it is astonishing to notice that currently, the IPEM is a voluntary body and has no set rules or procedures to guide its functioning! With the rendition of strategic heads of our educational policy in that state, what can we say about the stark situation at hand, a brief account follows?
A Tale of Two Gaps:
It all boils down to two pivotal problems which are responsible for the weak performance of the education sector: Firstly, the lack of commitment to education (the commitment gap) and secondly, the poor governance of the implementation of policies (the implementation gap).
The commitment gap can be a result of two reasons. Either there is a lack of belief in the true worth of the socio-economic benefits of education in the Pakistani society, or there is a lack of belief in the goals (set by policy makers) themselves. In our view, it is the latter reason that is causing the commitment gap and it can be inferred from Exhibit 5 which shows the forecasted expenditures on education (as a percentage of GDP) from a government report. The expenditure on education has been hovering between 2.5 to 3% for the past several years. What can be said about the commitment to education of a government with the stated level of spending? Keeping in mind that Iran spends 4.7%, South Korea spends 4.6%, Malaysia spends 6.2% and India spends 3.8%.
The implementation effect stems from poor governance and leads to the misallocation and misuse of resources. According to one modest estimate, 20% to 30% of the allocated funds are left unutilized. This is alarming because corruption comes into play here. Like most other sectors of our economy, education is also suffering at the hands of corrupt officials. Preferential training and posting of teachers, awarding of textbook contracts to favored individuals and bribe-accepting examination officials are just some of the sad examples of this gap. Such behavior indicates that the operating system does not have the interest of students as the main focus of educational policy!
So what can we say about the NEP? One thing is for sure; the current strategy of the NEP to only focus on what-should-be-done cannot be evaluated separately from the implementation and monitoring of those policies. Conversely, even though the NEP is full of policy proposals that will go a long way in improving the current situation of the education sector in Pakistan, it is meaningless to say that the NEP is any better than its predecessors, unless we can see tangible implementation and feedback of those reforms. After all, what good is a prescription from a leading practitioner if the prescribed medicine is never used? The two gaps have put us in a deadlock.
Impact of Education on Economic Welfare:
The deadlock has reverberating detrimental effects over the entire economy. Pakistan has been a victim to illiteracy since its inception and the improvement has been sluggish. This leads to a labor market which mainly comprises of less educated and unskilled workers. The role of education in building efficient and effective labor force is well known. The human capital nurtured in the youth of a nation through effective schooling plays a pivotal role in the long run economic growth of the country. Studies prove that schooling helps improve productivity which in turn leads to higher earning amongst individuals. “Emadzadeh et al. (2000) analyzed the effect of education on economic growth in Iran and found that education had a positive and significant effect on economic growth” (See Exhibit 6).
Education has multidimensional impacts on the economy. On one hand, it impacts the economic growth positively through efficient labor markets and entrepreneurship and on the other hand, it reduces poverty by creating a social and political environment that draws foreign investment. A study conducted in Pakistan by Nasir and Nazli showed that each additional year of education brings about 7 percent additional returns in income. Furthermore, an additional year of training increases the earnings by 2.4 percent on average.
This indicates education’s critical role in ameliorating the economic welfare of a nation. It not only helps at a micro level but also has staid economic implications. Therefore, it is imperative that the government focuses on developing human capital which would lead to growth of the nation in the long run. However, increase in literacy levels should not be the sole aim of an educational policy. One of the key success factors of an educational policy is its coherence with the labor market requirements. Education should be consistent with the requirements of the labor market. Collaboration between industrial and educational sector is therefore important.
Best Practices of Educational Policy in the World:
Comparing the state of education in South Asia with the world reveals that three regions of the world—Latin America, East Asia and Pacific, Europe and Central Asia—have achieved as of 2005 more than 95 per cent enrolment rates for children of primary school going age. South Asia as a whole has increased net primary school enrolment from 55.6 per cent in 1990 to 87.5 per cent in 2005. In terms of combined gross enrollment ratio South Asia seems to be on track as well. The only country that seems to be lagging behind significantly is Pakistan. (See Exhibit 7)
One of the examples of a successful implementation of education policy in South Asia has been Sri Lanka. The strategic decision of Sri Lankan government to introduce free education, scholarships for disadvantaged students, mid-day meals, free textbooks, free uniforms, and subsidized transport enabled Sri Lanka to achieve an adult literacy rate of 90.7% in 2001 from 87.2% in 1981 (both census years). It attained a primary education completion rate of 98.4% and a secondary education completion rate of 87.1% in 2004. Sri Lanka, moreover, was an early achiever in terms of the Millennium Development Goal of universal primary education, having reached a near-universal primary enrollment and completion in the 1990s relative to the target of 2015 for most countries.
Recommendations & Conclusion:
The gravity of the situation as established above screams for a resolution. A very major shift is needed in the implementation of the education policy. The GDP expenditure on education in Pakistan is one of the lowest in South Asia and to expedite the implementation of educational reforms proposed in NEP 2009, a significant increase in education budget is vital. Also, the focus should not only be quantity of schools but rather the quality of education being provided across nation. It is significant that there is a close coordination between academia and industry, so that the system can keep pace with the changing demands of the business environment.
Secondly, a strong association between technical trainings and earnings has been observed, which implies that improved training of individuals according to the demands of modern labor market will have a positive impact on the economy. Also, standardization of vocational and technical education across nation is imperative in order to ensure recognition in job market nationally and internationally.
All the recommendations above can only be useful if the national policy will be focused on not only what needs to be done but also on how it has to be done. Despite recognition of problem and clear objectives, NEP-2009 has not been that successful on the implementation front. For sustainable implementation it is important that IPEM is not a voluntary body rather it should be institutionalized. Only then can the policies on paper can be translated into action and results.