TakingITGlobal - Panorama - Education in...

Published on: Sep 15, 2003

Topic:

Type: Opinions

https://www.tigweb.org/express/panorama/article.html?ContentID=1905

Education is important, above all, because it empowers people to take more control of their lives. At a personal level, it provides people with self-confidence needed to make their opinions heard. At a community level, it provides the skills through which people can protect their rights--to land, to schools, or to participation in public life. At a national level, it creates a demand to be heard. Without education, democracy is an empty shell.

There are some other commitments reconfirmed by the government at EFA-SAARC meeting, which requires revolutionary changes in policymaking to implement and achieve them. Elimination of gender disparity is one of the big challenges in this regard, which may never be achieved without introducing a co-education system from primary to tertiary levels. This task is politically difficult, as there is a chance of resistance from politico-religious circles of the country, who, at the moment, are very much engaged in decision-making.

Ministers for education of SAARC countries, through a ministerial meeting held last month in Islamabad, have advised the governments to allocate progressively a minimum of 4% of GDP to education. This, too, seems very difficult and an almost impossible task in near future because 4% of the GDP means that education needs approximately Rs170bn annually, and that ample amount, which is more than our total defence budget (160bn for the year 2003-4), would never be earmarked. Under the camouflage of 'national interest', invisible economic managers are not going to cut down defence allocations to meet this demand.

A meagre amount of Rs3.1bn has been allocated for the development of education sector in this year's budget, compared to previous year's allocations of Rs2.7bn. According to the latest economic survey, in the year 1995-96 the total allocations for education sector were equivalent to 2% of the GDP. In the year 1996-97, they were raised to 2.62 %, but when the military government took over in 1999, these allocations were reduced to 1.6% for the year 2000-01, and were slightly increased to 1.7% of the GDP for the fiscal year 2003-04.

The education sector is facing a huge gap between rural and urban areas as well, similar to the rest of the social sector components. In every programme, which aims to bring reforms and to increase overall literacy rates, policymakers give priority to urban development in terms of allocations and projects. As a result, in the year 2003, the estimated rural literacy (40.91%) is less than that of urban literacy (68.74%). Although the UNESCO Pakistan report reveals that growth rate for female literacy has nearly doubled, still the gap between the two genders is very huge. Estimated figures for 2003 show that female literacy rate is 38.57%, while male literacy rate is 61.93%.

If we compare female literacy rates of urban and rural areas, the gap is still larger--61.89% urban literate women and only 27.06% rural literate women. Another evidence of the increasing divide between rural and urban development is that of 21 districts where literacy is very low. Only two of these districts are urban-based. Gujarat and Jhelum had their status changed due to very high literacy. There is a need to further explore such success stories and what factors lie behind such rapid achievements through research and analysis, and replicated in areas where there is low or very low levels of literacy.
Policymakers and planners have been emphasizing on investments in higher literacy education, instead of primary education, to achieve set target. Low levels of investment in basic and primary education, successive failures of promises made in every plan, and the practice of missing well-marked deadlines, have created a credibility gap. Information technology education--which is more or less a completely urban-based education--is enjoying a larger chunk of the budgetary allocations as compared to formal education sector.

Planners are unable to understand the reality that increasing monetary allocations to formal and informal education, with special focus to the rural sector, will only lead to an increased growth rate of literacy. This year's announced Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) is also an evidence that higher education and money-oriented IT sector has been given much importance than the people-oriented formal education sector. PSDP figures show that higher education sector, including IT sector, has been allocated Rs6.5bn, while the formal education sector is left to pick up the crumbs, with Rs3.1bn. It is being claimed that the formal education sector allocations rose from Rs5.5bn in 2002-03 to Rs7.5bn in 2003-04, which translates to a ratio of merely 4.7% of the total allocations for development sector.

Rural literate candidates who are competing for jobs in public and private sectors, for admissions in standard educational institutions that are again situated in urban areas, find it impossible to survive due to the fact that the rural areas are facing deprivation in every social sector. The only system that saves them from complete isolation is the quota allocation, which prevails in public sector jobs and in educational institutions; yet it, too, is arguably unjust.

Another very important and often unnoticed reason affecting and discouraging the rural literate population is the command over spoken and written English language, as candidates with better English language skills are given preference to those who, albeit talented and educated, are rejected.

In Pakistan, formal schooling is a two-tier education system, each representing two different classes. The standard of education for the rural poor is very shabby, while urban areas enjoy the luxury from well-paid teachers to furnished accommodations. Disparity is also evident among urban-based primary schools in the shape of government's primary schools and model schools. Officers and members of the elite class usually do not want to enroll their children into ordinary schools, identified with federal government's primary schools. The building, furniture, facilities, fee structure, method of teaching and admission procedures of elitist schools and educational institutes create an inequality in our education system.

This kind of unjust dual policy can never provide a level-playing field to the poor population. Many rural-based upper middle class parents want to move to urban areas only to provide competitive schooling to their children, which further widens the rural-urban gap.
Education is fast moving towards commercialisation, as the state is also encouraging this trend. Latest reports reveal that at middle and higher secondary schooling levels, private schools' ratio, compared to public sector schools, is 49% and 42% respectively. The dropout rate after completion of public sector primary schooling is also very high. According to UNESCO report, some 73.6% dropouts are unable to get admissions to next level of schooling. Poverty and unavailability of middle schools are the reason for this high dropout rate.

It is alarming that the targets of private sector education in our country are the middle, upper-middle and higher income groups, whereas the rural population and lower classes are struggling to provide good education to their children.

Privatisation of education sector is not a negative approach because it promotes competition and it ultimately raises the standard of education and efficiency at every level. But in our society, where the economic gap between the upper and lower class is rapidly widening, and middle and low income families are forced to shrink their entertainment budgets to avail basic necessities of life, education may no longer be on their priority list.

Private educational institutions in the Punjab are bound to maintain a 2% quota for poor students at every level, but there is no check in this regard that they are following the rules. This quota should be enhanced to 15-20% with increase in fee structure to accommodate the urban-based middle and lower classes, and that amount should be spent indiscriminately. Again, the question remains how the rural education system can be improved to bring them to the standards of urban schooling.

It is criminal injustice that 95% of the population is suffering at the expense of the remaining 5%. As a result, the country is robbed of its best minds. For intelligence, of course, is not restricted to any one class or caste.

There are views that Pakistan should allocate at least 4% (Rs170bn) of GDP to education, which is more than our total defence budget (160bn for the year 2003-4). Is it time to redefine our 'national interest'?

Article 37-B of the Constitution of Pakistan states that it is government's responsibility to, "remove illiteracy and provide free and compulsory secondary education within minimum possible period." Since the formation of this constitution, successive governments have consistently failed to fulfill this responsibility.

The Late Dr Mahbubul Haq (Former Finance Minister of Pakistan and a world-renowned economist) once said, "Political commitment for aspirated campaign to universalize primary education in the shortest possible time is still lacking in the country." Policymakers seem to have interpreted the above-mentioned clause to suit their own agenda and have not defined the timeframe of the "minimum possible period" for the removal of illiteracy.

Unfortunately, Pakistan has experienced countless unsuccessful educational reform programmes costing billions of rupees, aimed to increase the overall literacy rate; yet, they remain deeply entrenched in the quagmire of ignorance and illiteracy.

Pakistan has one of the highest numbers of illiterates in the world, and the current standard of education in Pakistan is really shocking. According to a study by Oxfam International, while the proportion of children are not attending school in South Asia will fall by half by the year 2005, Pakistan will account for an increasingly larger share of children not attending school. In fact, the study warns that by 2005, Pakistan will account for 40% of the region's children who are out of school, compared to 27% in the year 1995.

In 1990, Pakistan signed the Education for All (EFA) declaration. It took four years to sign it formally by the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, and a further six years for the ratification of the commitment to EFA at the World Education Forum, Dakar, Senegal. This reflects how our governments rush to sign international conventions and declarations, yet do absolutely nothing to ensure their implementation.

According to UNESCO's publication titled, 'Literacy Trends and Statistics in Pakistan', the enrolment rate in Pakistan did not exceed 60%, set against the target of 100% participation rate by the year 2000. This implies that 8m children between the 5-9 age group never enrolled in school, and half of the 12m that have enrolled may drop out before completing primary education.

Of all the E-9 countries, Pakistan has the lowest survival rate at the fifth grade, which will translate to 14m children out of school by the year 2003. “Government of Pakistan” has admitted in a very valuable data source for education, entitled 'Pakistan Education and School Atlas', published by newly established Center for Research on Poverty Reduction and Income Distribution (CRPRID), a research center under the supervision of Planning Division, that Pakistan has dropped far behind several other developing countries in terms of education, and immediate attention is required to catch up in this fast growing sector. UNESCO-CRPRID joint venture 'Atlas' has linked poverty and democracy with education and literacy. The report argues that the link between education and poverty is much debated. However, what is not disputed is the fact that the undereducated are disproportionately represented in the ranks of poor. Education gives people new skills and empowers them to take advantage of new opportunities. For countries, education raises productivity, innovation and output.

« return.



by Kashif Zulfiqar
Published on: Sep 15, 2003
Topic:
Type: Opinions
https://www.tigweb.org/express/panorama/article.html?ContentID=1905


Education is important, above all, because it empowers people to take more control of their lives. At a personal level, it provides people with self-confidence needed to make their opinions heard. At a community level, it provides the skills through which people can protect their rights--to land, to schools, or to participation in public life. At a national level, it creates a demand to be heard. Without education, democracy is an empty shell. There are some other commitments reconfirmed by the government at EFA-SAARC meeting, which requires revolutionary changes in policymaking to implement and achieve them. Elimination of gender disparity is one of the big challenges in this regard, which may never be achieved without introducing a co-education system from primary to tertiary levels. This task is politically difficult, as there is a chance of resistance from politico-religious circles of the country, who, at the moment, are very much engaged in decision-making. Ministers for education of SAARC countries, through a ministerial meeting held last month in Islamabad, have advised the governments to allocate progressively a minimum of 4% of GDP to education. This, too, seems very difficult and an almost impossible task in near future because 4% of the GDP means that education needs approximately Rs170bn annually, and that ample amount, which is more than our total defence budget (160bn for the year 2003-4), would never be earmarked. Under the camouflage of 'national interest', invisible economic managers are not going to cut down defence allocations to meet this demand. A meagre amount of Rs3.1bn has been allocated for the development of education sector in this year's budget, compared to previous year's allocations of Rs2.7bn. According to the latest economic survey, in the year 1995-96 the total allocations for education sector were equivalent to 2% of the GDP. In the year 1996-97, they were raised to 2.62 %, but when the military government took over in 1999, these allocations were reduced to 1.6% for the year 2000-01, and were slightly increased to 1.7% of the GDP for the fiscal year 2003-04. The education sector is facing a huge gap between rural and urban areas as well, similar to the rest of the social sector components. In every programme, which aims to bring reforms and to increase overall literacy rates, policymakers give priority to urban development in terms of allocations and projects. As a result, in the year 2003, the estimated rural literacy (40.91%) is less than that of urban literacy (68.74%). Although the UNESCO Pakistan report reveals that growth rate for female literacy has nearly doubled, still the gap between the two genders is very huge. Estimated figures for 2003 show that female literacy rate is 38.57%, while male literacy rate is 61.93%. If we compare female literacy rates of urban and rural areas, the gap is still larger--61.89% urban literate women and only 27.06% rural literate women. Another evidence of the increasing divide between rural and urban development is that of 21 districts where literacy is very low. Only two of these districts are urban-based. Gujarat and Jhelum had their status changed due to very high literacy. There is a need to further explore such success stories and what factors lie behind such rapid achievements through research and analysis, and replicated in areas where there is low or very low levels of literacy. Policymakers and planners have been emphasizing on investments in higher literacy education, instead of primary education, to achieve set target. Low levels of investment in basic and primary education, successive failures of promises made in every plan, and the practice of missing well-marked deadlines, have created a credibility gap. Information technology education--which is more or less a completely urban-based education--is enjoying a larger chunk of the budgetary allocations as compared to formal education sector. Planners are unable to understand the reality that increasing monetary allocations to formal and informal education, with special focus to the rural sector, will only lead to an increased growth rate of literacy. This year's announced Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) is also an evidence that higher education and money-oriented IT sector has been given much importance than the people-oriented formal education sector. PSDP figures show that higher education sector, including IT sector, has been allocated Rs6.5bn, while the formal education sector is left to pick up the crumbs, with Rs3.1bn. It is being claimed that the formal education sector allocations rose from Rs5.5bn in 2002-03 to Rs7.5bn in 2003-04, which translates to a ratio of merely 4.7% of the total allocations for development sector. Rural literate candidates who are competing for jobs in public and private sectors, for admissions in standard educational institutions that are again situated in urban areas, find it impossible to survive due to the fact that the rural areas are facing deprivation in every social sector. The only system that saves them from complete isolation is the quota allocation, which prevails in public sector jobs and in educational institutions; yet it, too, is arguably unjust. Another very important and often unnoticed reason affecting and discouraging the rural literate population is the command over spoken and written English language, as candidates with better English language skills are given preference to those who, albeit talented and educated, are rejected. In Pakistan, formal schooling is a two-tier education system, each representing two different classes. The standard of education for the rural poor is very shabby, while urban areas enjoy the luxury from well-paid teachers to furnished accommodations. Disparity is also evident among urban-based primary schools in the shape of government's primary schools and model schools. Officers and members of the elite class usually do not want to enroll their children into ordinary schools, identified with federal government's primary schools. The building, furniture, facilities, fee structure, method of teaching and admission procedures of elitist schools and educational institutes create an inequality in our education system. This kind of unjust dual policy can never provide a level-playing field to the poor population. Many rural-based upper middle class parents want to move to urban areas only to provide competitive schooling to their children, which further widens the rural-urban gap. Education is fast moving towards commercialisation, as the state is also encouraging this trend. Latest reports reveal that at middle and higher secondary schooling levels, private schools' ratio, compared to public sector schools, is 49% and 42% respectively. The dropout rate after completion of public sector primary schooling is also very high. According to UNESCO report, some 73.6% dropouts are unable to get admissions to next level of schooling. Poverty and unavailability of middle schools are the reason for this high dropout rate. It is alarming that the targets of private sector education in our country are the middle, upper-middle and higher income groups, whereas the rural population and lower classes are struggling to provide good education to their children. Privatisation of education sector is not a negative approach because it promotes competition and it ultimately raises the standard of education and efficiency at every level. But in our society, where the economic gap between the upper and lower class is rapidly widening, and middle and low income families are forced to shrink their entertainment budgets to avail basic necessities of life, education may no longer be on their priority list. Private educational institutions in the Punjab are bound to maintain a 2% quota for poor students at every level, but there is no check in this regard that they are following the rules. This quota should be enhanced to 15-20% with increase in fee structure to accommodate the urban-based middle and lower classes, and that amount should be spent indiscriminately. Again, the question remains how the rural education system can be improved to bring them to the standards of urban schooling. It is criminal injustice that 95% of the population is suffering at the expense of the remaining 5%. As a result, the country is robbed of its best minds. For intelligence, of course, is not restricted to any one class or caste. There are views that Pakistan should allocate at least 4% (Rs170bn) of GDP to education, which is more than our total defence budget (160bn for the year 2003-4). Is it time to redefine our 'national interest'? Article 37-B of the Constitution of Pakistan states that it is government's responsibility to, "remove illiteracy and provide free and compulsory secondary education within minimum possible period." Since the formation of this constitution, successive governments have consistently failed to fulfill this responsibility. The Late Dr Mahbubul Haq (Former Finance Minister of Pakistan and a world-renowned economist) once said, "Political commitment for aspirated campaign to universalize primary education in the shortest possible time is still lacking in the country." Policymakers seem to have interpreted the above-mentioned clause to suit their own agenda and have not defined the timeframe of the "minimum possible period" for the removal of illiteracy. Unfortunately, Pakistan has experienced countless unsuccessful educational reform programmes costing billions of rupees, aimed to increase the overall literacy rate; yet, they remain deeply entrenched in the quagmire of ignorance and illiteracy. Pakistan has one of the highest numbers of illiterates in the world, and the current standard of education in Pakistan is really shocking. According to a study by Oxfam International, while the proportion of children are not attending school in South Asia will fall by half by the year 2005, Pakistan will account for an increasingly larger share of children not attending school. In fact, the study warns that by 2005, Pakistan will account for 40% of the region's children who are out of school, compared to 27% in the year 1995. In 1990, Pakistan signed the Education for All (EFA) declaration. It took four years to sign it formally by the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, and a further six years for the ratification of the commitment to EFA at the World Education Forum, Dakar, Senegal. This reflects how our governments rush to sign international conventions and declarations, yet do absolutely nothing to ensure their implementation. According to UNESCO's publication titled, 'Literacy Trends and Statistics in Pakistan', the enrolment rate in Pakistan did not exceed 60%, set against the target of 100% participation rate by the year 2000. This implies that 8m children between the 5-9 age group never enrolled in school, and half of the 12m that have enrolled may drop out before completing primary education. Of all the E-9 countries, Pakistan has the lowest survival rate at the fifth grade, which will translate to 14m children out of school by the year 2003. “Government of Pakistan” has admitted in a very valuable data source for education, entitled 'Pakistan Education and School Atlas', published by newly established Center for Research on Poverty Reduction and Income Distribution (CRPRID), a research center under the supervision of Planning Division, that Pakistan has dropped far behind several other developing countries in terms of education, and immediate attention is required to catch up in this fast growing sector. UNESCO-CRPRID joint venture 'Atlas' has linked poverty and democracy with education and literacy. The report argues that the link between education and poverty is much debated. However, what is not disputed is the fact that the undereducated are disproportionately represented in the ranks of poor. Education gives people new skills and empowers them to take advantage of new opportunities. For countries, education raises productivity, innovation and output. « return.