There are no two opinions about the fact that the existing system of
education is in shambles. Almost daily the colleges and universities are
getting into news, not for research or scholastic achievements, but for
strikes, protest processions, gheraos of the Vice-Chancellors and
Principals and other non-academic matters. Hardly any university or
college, in any part of the country, has been totally free from this
infection. The students are on the war path. They are out to fight battles,
for which any excuse is good enough. The main reason for youth’s
rebelliousness is that the syllabi and text-books are hopelessly outdated.
The students find them pointless and irrelevant to the present needs and
future requirements. The courses are just time-fillers their only aim is to
get the label or the degree (by fair means or foul), which is supposed to be
a passport-often a fake one-to some employment. Since the students feel
that their books and instruction will not be of any use to them in later life,
they treat them most causally, unable to put their heart into class-work.
Hot action and excitement attract them. Since the degree and not
knowledge is the goal, they go in for shortcuts, like ‘sure shot’ guess
papers and mass copying in the examination. Through these questionable
means, mediocre scholars score good marks and divisions, and serve as a
disincentive to serious study. Examinations were meant for education; now
the whole educational process is geared only for examination. This
education develops neither character nor discipline, it inculcates neither
initiative nor self-reliance in young boys and girls. It is just a formality, a
status symbol and a doubtful investment for future gains. Oureducationists
and concerned authorities have pointed out many times that educational
standards had touched such a rock bottom, that anything would be a
change for the better.
For the last four and half decades, we have been hearing sermons on
the need for a revolutionary change and complete overhaul of the
educational system We are told that system fathered by Macaulay for
colonial Pak-o-Hind is absolutely out of tune for the present-day needs of Pakistan. But then no one had the inventiveness and originality to give us
the shape of a new education that was expected to replace the old system.
And, though, everyone advocated radical change, yet the moment any real
change was proposed, all the innate conservatism of the educational
community
came to the defence of the system, of which they themselves
were such worthy’ products. Even the Prime Minister said that there was
nothing hopelessly wrong, but much good in the present system.
Numerous educational committees and conferences went into all these
questions and thought, their duty ended with the presentation of
voluminous reports, which gathered cobwebs and which few read and the
country was none the wiser for them. So we talked revolution and
practised conservatism.
Since the situation is desperate, something has to be done
immediately and the government should embark on the implementation of
the new scheme. Three chief features call for attention: (i) Schooling
should last 12 year (10+2 scheme) and that should be the terminus for
most students. The stresss should be on vocational training and fitting the
to earn his livelihood as soon as he leaves school. (ii) admission to
colleges and universities should be severely restricted. Only genuine
students interested in academic (non politician-students or the interested
mass) should be admitted, and (iii) to break this imbroglio of mass
copying and completely outdated syllabuses and courses, autonomous
colleges should be created, which will fix their own courses and hold their
own examinations and award their own degrees. They would be mini
universities.
Take the school reorganisation first. The first stage up to the 10th
class should impart general education. During the next two years, stress
should be on vocational subjects such as agriculture, radio, engineering,
carpentry, repair of electrical gadget, dairy-farming and three dozen such
topics, out of which the pupil could choose one or more, depending upon
his inclination and local talent and market availability. This part will
consist of practical work only. This can be idea of Nai Roshni or Basic
Education which meant, learning by doing’. So much activity would
relieve tensions of adolescence and enable the pupil to be a productive and
earning member of society, immediately on leaving the school. The
system of examination and evaluation is also to be changed. No student
will fail under this system. He will be awarded Grade in each separate
subject, for the guidance of his future employer: Grade-A Outstanding, Grade-B Very Good, Grade-C Good, Grade-D Fair and Grade-E Poor. A
student may get Grade-E in one subject but Grade-A in his favourite
subject or special field. It is not fair the to give a purely literary education
in a country where 75% of population is agricultural and 10% industrial.
This useless’ education was devised in England for the elite or sons of
lords who just wanted to refine their intellect and felt no need of earning
their broad in those feudal days. This new education can help the poor
rural masses or proletariat of Pakistan. The new system will teach our
pupils innovations and resourcefulness and they will create self-
employment, where apparently no opportunities existed. But the irony of
fare is our political instability. Political Govt. changes after two or three
years. The new government, puts all the plans of the former Govt. to end.
As a result we make no progress and are forced to a standstill at the same
point where we were 48 years back.
The next main feature is restricting entry to higher education. Huge
crowds in colleges and universities must be cut to size, else they turn into
a mob and commit anti-social acts like arson and violence under the
umbrella of anonymity. Most of these students join only to fail. According
to the report at some universities, the failure are 70-75%. That means that
75% of money spent on education just goes down the drain. Expenditure
on education for year 1994-95 is envisaged to be Rs. 43 billions. Since the
failures are a pure waste, it means that Rs. 34 billions per year are spent
merely on keeping these potential failures at the college or university. The
cost per student for higher education is very high. The student pays only a
small portion of it by way of fees. The rest of money comes from the
pockets of the general tax-payer, for the upkeep of these failure-students.
Commission on Education proposed the linking of higher admissions with
employment opportunities, so that when a student got his degree or
diploma, he would also get a letter of appointment as well. But our
statistics regarding man-power requirements of the future were very
inaccurate. Also the have-nots will demand admissions to higher courses
on such tickets as being or belonging to rural or backward areas or being
the minister’s voters. These non-admitted students can pass privately
through Correspondence Courses of Open University System. But that
would again means over-supply of graduates and post-graduates and
accentuate educated unemployment. In spite of all this, we have kept an
open door policy for admissions to colleges and universities. The third item relates to autonomous colleges. Well established
ages will receive that status. They could prescribe or change their
courses with quick judgement and swiftness (in the universities such a
pwww takes years) and hold their own examinations or devise their own
method of continuous evaluation and internal assessment. The danger is
the since 50% of education is imparted by non-government colleges and
most of them flaunt caste and communal names, they may start giving
easier courses and awarding high grades to help their community. They
may keep the interest of their community above that of education. The
sudents may have a jolly good time and leave with undeserved degrees
and grades. Another danger is that since students have little confidence in
de impartiality of their teachers they oppose the internal assessment,
where their own teachers are examiners. It may be recalled that some of
the universities introduced internal assessment in the past, and each time it
had to be withdrawn in the face of mounting student protests and
opposition. It is unrealistic to be blind to proven facts. Students have the
impression that under this system marks and grades go according to
personal favouritism, money power and for caste and communal
considerations. They don’t expect justice, justice should not only be done,
but it should also seem to be done. For this reason, this proposal remained
abon-starter.
Lately, the Govt. has introduced a “Self-Finance Scheme” at
University level and professional colleges. But it is not very encouraging
and hopeful step for the poor masses, and industrious students. Those who
ally deserve but cannot afford may miss the chance to study at that level.
stead of this scheme open competition is appropriate and more
atractive.
