|
By Dr Shahid Siddiqui THERE is no harm in admitting that education has never been our national priority. This can be blamed on the fact that Pakistan has experienced long periods of military rule. If we look at our budgetary allocation, defence was usually given the lion’s share. According to the CIA’s fact book, from 1958 to 1973, the defence budget accounted for nearly 60 per cent of the total government expenditure.
This is indicative of the trend and tone set by our military rulers. This approach impacted on the subsequent budgets as well. On the other hand, for a long period education was allotted less than two per cent of the GDP. This extreme disparity suggests the harsh treatment education has been receiving in Pakistan. If we compare these figures with those of other countries, we realise that the minimum possible allocation is being allocated to education. On the other hand, relatively huge sums are set aside for military expenditures.
The most intriguing fact about the defence budget in Pakistan is that no break down was mentioned and only a certain figure was quoted in a single line. In the 2008 budget it is promised that from this year onwards the defence budget would be discussed in the parliament and a proper break down would be given of different categories of expenditure. Education, on the other hand, would get relatively smaller chunks of funds. In the 2008 budget, Rs24.6bn has been allocated for education (at the federal level). The exact percentage of GDP will be available later when provincial budgets are announced.
The former prime minister, Mr Shaukat Aziz promised that allocation for education would be ensured as four per cent of the GDP. This promise was never realised as last year it was only 2.1 per cent of the GDP despite the fact that we got huge foreign funding for education sector reforms. Low allocation is just one aspect of the problem. The real issue is that in education we have been making cosmetic changes and quick fixes. The result is that no meaningful, sustainable change could take place. Let us look at some of these strategies to inflate the figure of literacy and at the internationally accepted definition of literacy — ‘reading with understanding’.
A list of definitions of literacy adopted in different years is as follows.
1951: One who can read a clear print in any language.
1961: One who is able to read with understanding a simple letter in any language.
1972: One who is able to read and write in some language with understanding.
1981: One who can read the newspaper and write a simple letter.
1998: One who can read the newspaper and write a simple letter, in any language.
In 1951 we followed a literacy definition that did not include the condition of ‘understanding’. The result was 17.9 per cent literacy. But in 1961 the condition of ‘understanding’ was added to the definition. This would mean that people who could read the alphabets (the reading of Quran in some cases) without understanding could not be included in the list of literates. From 1981 onwards, the condition of ‘understanding’ was once again taken out which naturally inflated literacy numbers. This leaves a question mark about the validity of figures of literacy in Pakistan.
Another aspect of measuring literacy is that internationally, it is measured at the level of age 15 and above. Quite interestingly in Pakistan, the literacy figures, quoted in the Economic Survey of Pakistan, are at the level of age 10 and above. What is the difference in measuring literacy at two levels? If we measure literacy at the level of age 10 and above, the figure comes down to 55 per cent but if it is measured at age 15 and above (as is the international norm) it comes down to 52 per cent. If we want to make these statistics more reliable, we should be reporting figures at age 15 and above as is the practice in other countries.
The reported literacy rate of 55 per cent (age 10 and above) does not reflect some areas of very low literacy as a number of high and low literacy areas are averaged to get a final figure. This does not reflect the literacy distribution in the masses. This situation can be equated with the increase in figures of per capita income reported in the 2008 Economic Survey of Pakistan where enhanced income of a few rich people helped in raising the per capita income creating a false impression of distribution of income. Instead of making cosmetic changes, the government needs to face the challenge upfront and do some serious planning for real improvement in literacy. This also means bringing about a qualitative change. Education and development has a strong correlation but education per se is not development. It is quality education, however, that equips a person to explore and enhance his/her chances of progress.
Gender disparity is another concern in the education system of Pakistan. In the Pakistan Economic Survey 2008, the male literacy rate is reported at 65 per cent whereas the female literacy rate is only 42 per cent. This shows a gap of 23 percentage points between male and female literacy in Pakistan, which is too large. A gap of more than 10 per cent is internationally considered a serious point of concern. Needless to say, some real concentrated efforts are required to reduce it.
If the new government is serious about education they should not only enhance the allocation for it but also ensure proper utilisation of funds. The past tells us that almost half of the allocated funds remain unspent for various reasons. And even the 50 per cent that were spent were not used appropriately. What is needed is an effective monitoring system and an accountability mechanism.
Education, the backbone of socio-economic development of society, needs to be dealt with more seriously and with a certain political will. Unfortunately, the ministry of education has always been viewed as less important and unqualified people have often been appointed at the helm. One such example is a retired general of the army who was asked to bring a qualitative change in the educational system of Pakistan. Currently as well the ministry is not headed by a full-time minister. It is time we realised the significant role of knowledge economy and human capital and instead of cosmetic tinkering with the educational system, we should plan meaningful and sustainable changes in the qualitative improvement of education in Pakistan.
The writer is Director of Centre for Humanities and Social Sciences at Lahore School of Economics and author of Rethinking Education in Pakistan.
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
RSS