Management of Higher Education Reforms in Pakistan: An Implementation Perspective

Higher education in Pakistan took a new turn when the Higher Education Commission replaced the old University Grants Commission in 2002. A great deal of this nation’s welfare hinges on what happens in higher education. It is not merely a question of creating a research culture, modernizing the curriculum, adopting scientific approaches, training teachers or internationalizing the issue. Implicit in the exercise is a massive overhauling of attitudes and expectations, but without threatening cultural norms held dear by most citizens of this country. The task is a huge one. Pakistan is a large country with a highly stratified population and diverse ethnic and linguistics features. Some of its problems stem from endemic regional poverty, some from external pressures and some from deeply entrenched attitudinal factors. All need to be identified and addressed. The researcher decided that an overview of the situation was highly desirable at this stage. Some people might argue that the commission has not had enough time for its programs to take root. Patience and stamina are required. There is some truth in this way of thinking, but an equally forceful opposing argument is that the workings of the commission should be brought out into the light as quickly and as frequently as possible, so that false turnings leading to irremediable educational or developmental dead-ends are not taken. Complacency is a luxury we cannot afford. Too much is at stake here. Doubts might also be raised as to the suitability of a ‘non-official’ analysis of the situation. To these doubts the researcher answers that both official and non-official analyses have their place. The arguments are developed at various points in this dissertation. Underlying this study is a half-articulated fear that the initiative might fail, or simply sink into the bureaucratic torpor that has characterized so much of what has happened in higher education during the last sixty years. Pertinent to the study is an analysis of why the University Grants Commission (which had a mandate not greatly dissimilar from that of the Higher Education Commission) failed to make its mark. The researcher has spent some time trying to identify factors to account for this failure, partly to clarify his own thinking, and partly to provide a comparative framework for his analysis of the Higher Education Commission. He has composed his thesis in two interlinked parts, one given over to the University Grants Commission, and the other to the Higher Education Commission. Many a good plan has foundered on the rock of implementation. The researcher has employed an American experiment in top-down implementation as his model for this aspect of the thesis, and has attempted to predict the Higher Education Commission’s ‘success quotient.’ It should be mentioned here that ‘success’ is an uncertain concept, but that there is an intuitive understanding of the term. Some initiatives can be seen to have positive outcomes, others negative or neutral ones. Based on his general analysis, the researcher finds that there is more hope than otherwise, at least for the foreseeable future