The state of education in Pakistan has long been a subject of concern, with each passing year revealing the widening gaps in both primary and higher education.
The Times Higher Education rankings for 2024 have brought this issue into sharp relief, as only one Pakistani university managed to break into the 401-500 bracket, a grim testament to the deteriorating quality of higher education in the country.
This single statistic, while stark, is emblematic of a broader crisis that affects every level of education in Pakistan.
A legacy of neglect
To fully understand our current predicament, one must first consider the historical trajectory of education in Pakistan. Since its inception in 1947, the nation has struggled to establish a robust education system that could cater to its rapidly growing population. The early decades were marked by sporadic attempts to improve literacy rates and expand educational access, but these efforts were often undermined by political instability, lack of funding, and insufficient infrastructure.
In the 1970s, the nationalisation of educational institutions under Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's regime led to a significant decline in quality. His sweeping reforms, intended to democratise education, instead resulted in widespread mismanagement, inefficiency, and a lack of accountability. This period set the stage for the chronic underfunding and bureaucratic inertia that would plague the education sector for decades to come.
The establishment of the Higher Education Commission (HEC) in 2002 was a turning point, offering a glimmer of hope for the revitalisation of higher education.
The uncertainty and instability caused by slashing of the budget left many universities in financial disarray, struggling to maintain even the most basic operations
Under Dr Attaur Rahman, the HEC initiated several ambitious reforms, including expanding research funding, faculty development programmes, and promoting international collaborations. These efforts led to a brief improvement period, with some Pakistani universities gaining recognition on the global stage. However, the momentum was short-lived, and the subsequent years have seen a regression into old habits of neglect and mismanagement.
Primary and secondary education: Foundation in crisis
The current crisis in higher education cannot be viewed in isolation; it is deeply intertwined with the failures of the primary and secondary education systems.
According to a 2023 UNICEF report, a staggering 26 million children in Pakistan are out of school, while 70 million children cannot read or write. These numbers paint a horrifying picture of a system that is failing at its most basic function: to provide every child with the opportunity to receive an education.
The root causes of this crisis are manifold. Poverty remains a significant barrier, with many families unable to afford the costs associated with schooling, such as uniforms, books, and transportation. Moreover, gender discrimination continues to be a major issue, particularly in rural areas where cultural norms often prioritise the education of boys over girls. The lack of infrastructure, including the absence of basic facilities like furniture, rooms, teaching facilities, toilets and clean drinking water, further exacerbates the problem, particularly for girls.
Government efforts to address these issues have been piecemeal at best. There have been some initiatives, such as the Ehsaas Scholarship Programme and the enrollment drives in various provinces, these have failed to make a significant impact. The challenges are simply too vast and deeply entrenched to solve by short-term or isolated measures.
Budgetary crisis: A case of misplaced priorities
The crisis in higher education is further compounded by chronic under funding.
The government's initial decision to slash the higher education budget for the fiscal year 2024-25, sent shock waves through the academic community. Although the decision was later reversed due to the public outcry, the mere fact that such a cut was considered highlights Pakistan's precarious state of education funding.
Initially, the budget was set at Rs25 billion, a significant reduction from the previous year's allocation. This was met with fierce resistance from the academic fraternity, who argued that such drastic cuts would cripple the already struggling higher education sector. The government eventually reinstated the budget to Rs65 billion for recurring expenses and Rs21 billion for development, but the damage had been done. The uncertainty and instability caused by this episode left many universities in financial disarray, struggling to maintain even the most basic operations.
The broader implications of under funding are dire. Without adequate resources, universities are unable to invest in research, update curricula, or improve infrastructure—not to mention retain critical faculty. This, in turn, affects the quality of education and diminishes graduates' ability to compete in an increasingly globalised job market. Moreover, the lack of funding perpetuates a cycle of mediocrity, where universities are forced to rely on outdated materials, poorly maintained facilities, and under qualified staff.
Higher Education Commission's role
The HEC was established with the mandate to oversee and improve the quality of higher education in Pakistan. While it has made some positive contributions, such as increasing the number of PhD programmes and promoting research, it has also been criticised for its heavy-handed and often bureaucratic approach.
One of the major criticisms of the HEC has been its failure to enforce accountability and transparency within universities. Despite the presence of various regulatory frameworks, issues such as plagiarism, fake degrees, and substandard research continue to plague the academic community. HEC's Quality Enhancement Cells (QECs), established to monitor and improve educational standards, have proven largely ineffective. These cells often lack the authority and resources needed to enforce meaningful change, leading to a situation where reports are filed but rarely acted upon.
Moreover, HEC's focus on quantitative metrics, such as the number of research publications or the amount of funding secured, has led to a culture of box-ticking rather than genuine academic excellence. Universities, eager to meet these metrics, often resort to unethical practices, such as publishing in predatory journals or inflating research outcomes. This has led to the devaluation of academic integrity and tarnished the reputation of Pakistani universities at home and abroad.
The autonomy dilemma
Universities in Pakistan are ostensibly autonomous institutions, free from direct government control. However, this autonomy has often been a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it allows universities to manage their affairs without undue interference. On the other hand, it has led to a lack of accountability and transparency, with vice-chancellors wielding disproportionate power.
On the one hand, the government claims to be providing opportunities to youngsters, while on the other hand, youngsters and aspirants of the next grade have been unduly forced into a queue
The process of appointing vice-chancellors is a particularly contentious issue. Following the 18th Amendment, the appointment of vice-chancellors became the prerogative of the provincial chief ministers. While this was intended to decentralise decision-making and give provinces more control over their educational institutions, it has led to politicisation and cronyism.
Vice-chancellors are now often appointed based on political affiliations rather than merit, leading to a leadership vacuum in many universities. So much so that citizens are filing petitions in the Supreme Court for the appointment of regular vice-chancellors in Pakistan's universities under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.
Currently, 64 universities across Pakistan operate without permanent vice-chancellors, relying instead on temporary appointees. This ad-hoc approach has resulted in a lack of continuity and strategic direction, with many universities struggling to implement long-term plans or maintain academic standards. It is alarming to state that out of the 34 universities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), 19 do not have vice-chancellors, while 25 out of the 34 universities in the Punjab, seven in Sindh, and three in Balochistan are without regular VCs. Besides, 25 varsities of Sindh have been working without permanent finance directors for many years. An additional charge or acting charge is given to someone lacking the requisite qualifications and experience.
Similarly, key academic and administrative positions are vacant in various public varsities in Pakistan. The positions of registrar, controller, deans, and heads of departments have not been filled as per the law. Most of the vacant posts are being run on an ad-hoc basis by giving acting charges to junior officials, causing serious concern amongst varsity staff, students, and parents, who often face problems at the hands of these acting-charge officials.
In some places, governments are extending the tenures of vice-chancellors to avoid the process of searching for a replacement, which has prompted the academic and administrative fraternity to question the government's decision. On the one hand, the government claims to be providing opportunities to youngsters, while on the other hand, youngsters and aspirants of the next grade have been unduly forced into a queue.
The politicisation of these appointments has also undermined the credibility of the entire higher education system, with students, faculty, and staff left at the mercy of an often capricious and unaccountable leadership.
Administrative dysfunction
The dysfunction within Pakistani universities extends beyond the issue of vice-chancellors. Many key administrative positions, such as registrars, deans, and heads of departments, are either vacant or occupied by temporary appointments who are not officially empowered. This has created a situation where decision-making is often delayed or compromised, leading to a breakdown in the effective management of universities.
Retired employees are often preferred over the induction and training of young talents, which has created an unhealthy working atmosphere in various universities.
Each time the government announces such an appointment, the courts are moved against it with a plethora of objections. Sources say that such petitions are planned and schemed to seek a stay order from the court so that the existing directors appointed on an ad-hoc or temporary basis can continue enjoying the perks of their post.
Another troubling aspect of this administrative dysfunction is the increasing encroachment of faculty members into administrative roles. Teachers, whose primary responsibility should be to educate and mentor students, are increasingly vying for administrative positions, attracted by the financial benefits and influence of these roles. This has led to declining academic standards, as teachers prioritise administrative duties over teaching and research responsibilities. Teachers are paid hefty sums for drafting exams, checking the papers, and deputing teaching staff on exam duties. If, in addition to these, teachers are given administrative tasks, then the purpose of appointing administrative staff in universities dies.
Students are systematically excluded from the decision-making processes. They have no representation in key statutory bodies such as the Senate, Syndicate, and Academic Council, and their voices are rarely heard regarding issues that directly affect their education and welfare
Besides, teachers are given allowances to check thesis papers at the undergraduate and graduate levels. The quality of research produced by local academics in public universities has always remained questionable.
If calculated, a teacher costs the university anywhere from Rs 300,000 to Rs500,0000 per month, including salary and other allowances.
The influence of teachers' unions further exacerbates the power struggle between the faculty and the university's administration. These unions, originally established to protect the rights and interests of teachers, have become powerful lobbying groups capable of exerting significant pressure on university leadership. In many cases, they have successfully pushed for the appointment of their members to key administrative positions, often at the expense of merit and competence. This has created a toxic environment where political manoeuvring and personal gain take precedence over educational excellence.
Moreover, the power to influence university decision-making often outweighs financial benefits. Backed by associations, teachers wield considerable influence over vice-chancellors, who are frequently appointed based on political considerations and thus compromised.
The Sindh government, in particular, has been notorious for undermining public institutions, leading to widespread ridicule. The appointment of HEC's chairman, board members, and Public Service Commission officials has often been a source of national mockery. Recently, the Sindh government extended the tenure of a vice chancellor for another term even before the first term had concluded.
Governance failures in statutory bodies of varsities
Ironically, university statutory bodies, which include influential figures such as judges, members of parliament, HEC representatives, and prominent social and business leaders, are often ill-equipped to handle these institutions' governance and operational issues.
Syndicate members who rarely attend meetings still receive their allowances and perks. Their close ties with vice-chancellors often lead to sensitive matters, such as financial issues and employee-related concerns, being swept under the rug. Mandatory meetings are frequently delayed, causing critical matters like promotions, time scales, and the approval of NOCs for employees to remain unresolved.
Impact on students
Universities in Pakistan generally enrol between 3,000 and 30,000 students annually, making them the largest constituency within these institutions. However, despite their significant numbers, varsity students are systematically excluded from representation in important statutory bodies such as the Senate, Syndicate, and Academic Councils.
Their absence is conspicuous after it was observed in various internal committees, including those addressing grievances and harassment. These bodies are responsible for making decisions that directly impact the student experience, yet students' voices are not included. Internal committees, particularly those dealing with grievances and harassment, do not include student representatives. This exclusion is problematic as it marginalises students, preventing them from having a say in matters directly affecting their welfare and rights.
While much attention is often given to the issues facing faculty and varsity administration, the students are the silent sufferers.
Despite forming the largest constituency within universities, students are systematically excluded from the decision-making processes. They have no representation in key statutory bodies such as the Senate, Syndicate, and Academic Council, and their voices are rarely heard regarding issues that directly affect their education and welfare.
This exclusion is particularly problematic when it comes to matters of student rights and grievances. Internal committees, including those dealing with issues such as harassment and disciplinary actions, often operate without student representation. This not only marginalises students but also undermines the fairness and transparency of these processes.
In cases of harassment, for instance, the lack of an independent and impartial mechanism for addressing complaints has left many students vulnerable to abuse and exploitation.
The absence of a robust support system for students has also led to a growing sense of disenchantment and disillusionment. Many students feel their concerns are not taken seriously and that the education system's failings are jeopardising their future. As a result, employees and students contact others for redressal of grievances, but it is very embarrassing that applications are unheard of on account of the administration's vested interests.
Students who earn PhDs from low-quality institutions, particularly in China and other countries, are often hired directly as assistant professors or professors in Pakistan without prior teaching or research experience
Employees refrain from going to court, as it is time-consuming and wastes money. Varsity administration derives undue benefit from prolonged court cases and keeps employees under pressure. Syndicate members do not discuss the matter adequately. The minutes are prepared per the vice chancellor's wish list, while most meetings are called when the number of members is inadequate.
Ineffectiveness of university harassment mechanisms
Universities have failed to establish effective mechanisms to address harassment. Despite numerous cases where students have been harassed by male faculty and administrators, some of which make it to the media, these issues are often silenced due to the protection afforded to teachers' and officers' unions.
Cases referred to internal committees are typically handled by members of the same institution, raising concerns about conflicts of interest. While the Higher Education Commission continues to mandate the formation of harassment committees, there is no transparent or effective system to tackle this serious issue. Consequently, students and staff often resort to compromise, as they remain vulnerable to undue influence from faculty members, especially when their academic success depends on it. This "mafia culture" has led many employees, both academic and administrative, to resign, feeling that the very forums meant to address their grievances are compromised by political and administrative biases. Many teachers and officers have left their jobs due to victimisation, as these compromised forums, entrenched in a mafia-like network, remain beyond challenge, even by the government itself.
Ineffectiveness of quality assurance
There is no system in place in any university in Pakistan to check and take action against poor teaching, infrastructure, research and innovation. While the HEC keeps changing the nomenclature of the office it creates every now and then; it had initially set out to enhance the quality of education. They must mandate every university to set up an office and formulate policies to improve its learning environment.
Today, every university has a quality and enhancement cell as per the HEC guidelines. However, the QEC is a toothless office with no mandate to take punitive measures. There is no proper way to monitor and report the quality of education in universities. The head of the QEC usually submits a report to the vice-chancellor, but no action is reported. As per the policy, students are supposed to give feedback regarding the quality of the teacher's educational and academic performance and the learning environment. Unfortunately, in most newly established universities, the management has adopted ad hocism and does not have regular faculty. These institutions are not accredited by the HEC or professional bodies, thus jeopardising the future of thousands of students.
Persistent problem of fake research and academic integrity
The issue of fake research papers and journals has been widely reported and discussed, yet it remains unresolved. Many university professors in Pakistan have been found using fake research publications to secure promotions and financial benefits. These fake academic journals often lack proper peer review, despite listing numerous editorial board members, and they charge a fee to publish articles quickly.
Ironically, even lawmakers involved in this fraudulent practice confidently acquire degrees through dubious means. Recently, some high court judges were revealed to have obtained fake degrees from universities in Karachi, further tarnishing the academic reputation of Pakistan both nationally and internationally. The Office of Research Innovation and Commercialisation (ORIC) was established to connect academia with industry and business through meaningful research. However, the focus of research has unfortunately shifted towards simply getting as many papers published as possible in any available journal to gain promotions and allowances.
HEC's qualification structure for teachers is highly ineffective and impractical. Students who earn PhDs from low-quality institutions, particularly in China and other countries, are often hired directly as assistant professors or professors in Pakistan without prior teaching or research experience. While it takes years for educators in more developed countries to complete their PhDs, these individuals obtain their degrees from substandard campuses abroad and easily secure jobs in Pakistani universities. As a result, individuals under 30 years of age are frequently appointed to Grade-19 positions within universities, leading to declining academic standards.
Politically motivated university campuses
There has been a growing trend of establishing new university campuses at the district level across the country. Unfortunately, this has led to the neglect of well-established universities with strong teaching and learning infrastructure, while the newly established campuses suffer from governance, infrastructure, and delivery issues. These new institutions often serve more to satisfy political agendas and garner votes than to provide quality education.
Consequently, the overall quality and significance of higher education are being compromised.
Given the various factors contributing to the poor quality of higher education institutions, the government should refrain from establishing new universities until the existing ones are reformed. General universities should be permitted to open schools of medicine and engineering, and new universities should focus on recruiting regular, qualified faculty. While visiting and adjunct faculty can play a role, the majority of professors should be regular hires to ensure stability and quality in education.
Higher education institutions must be provided with adequate resources to enhance research and innovation. Pending court cases related to these institutions should be resolved promptly, and no disciplinary actions should be taken against any institution or individual without first allowing them to present their case before the Senate. Finally, clear performance indicators should be established for both teaching and administrative staff, either by the Syndicate or the Senate, to ensure accountability and continuous improvement.