July 23, 2005

CORRUPTION, dishonesty, incompetence and cronyism. These are just a few of the very serious charges laid by Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy at the doorstep of the Higher Education Commission (Sci-tech World, June 9). This article is aimed at setting the record straight.

Let us start with the claim that HEC’s projects are riddled with “gross administrative incompetence.” As proof, Dr Hoodbhoy refers to the Best University Teachers programme. Please note that there is no objection to the project itself, merely to the manner in which it is being implemented.

However, what is this highly objectionable course adopted by the HEC? Let me clarify that the commission selects the “best” university teachers on the basis of nominations received from university administrations. But, the administrators are not supposed to make nominations based on their personal whims. Instead, nominations are supposed to be made on the basis of numerous factors, including student evaluation, a point that has been completely ignored.

There are more than 250,000 university students in Pakistan. Surely, the HEC cannot interview all those students itself. So, once the hype is stripped away, what we are left with is a programme that Dr Hoodbhoy admits is innovative and desirable. The HEC is trying to implement it in a reasonable manner and yet the programme, according to Dr Hoodbhoy, is conclusive proof of gross incompetence on the part of the commission.

The real problem here is that Dr Hoodbhoy sees the rest of Pakistan as a problem, not as an opportunity. The HEC, however, does not have the luxury of living in an ideal world.

Instead, it has to make do with the human resources which exist in the country today. Dr Hoodbhoy is right when he says that the HEC sees existing faculty members as “part of the solution.” The HEC feels no reason to be ashamed of that vision.

Another example of the “gross incompetence” cited by the professor is the Master Trainers in Physics programme, being run by the Quaid-i-Azam University (QAU). Once again, we can safely assume that there’s no objection to the concept itself because two years ago, when the project was first proposed, Dr Hoodbhoy had demanded that he be placed in charge of it.

So, once again his only objection to the programme is the manner in which the project is being implemented. But, the HEC is not in charge of the implementation of the project. That responsibility belongs entirely to the physics department of QAU, of which Dr Hoodbhoy is a very senior faculty member. Contrary to what he says, the HEC has not selected, let alone “hand-picked,” a single trainer.


Research funding
We come then to the allegation that the HEC is throwing “enormous sums… at half-baked proposals.” The first exhibit in this regard is the grant sanctioned by the HEC for the purchase of a Van de Graaf accelerator.

Obviously, a Van de Graaf accelerator’s use for “cutting-edge” research is limited, but that was never its purpose. Instead, it was always intended to be used for teaching and general research, for which purpose it was, and remains, a very useful machine since cutting-edge particle accelerators cost billions of dollars.

Similarly, much scorn has been heaped on the grant awarded to Dr Saadia Chishti, who holds a PhD in education from Cornell and has been a senior research fellow at both Oxford and the Divinity School, Harvard. Her project, like any other research grant proposal funded by the commission, was not examined by the HEC itself.

Instead, as per standard procedures, the proposal was examined first by the focal person in that subject — normally, the most recognized scholar in that discipline — and then referred to other competent scholars, who examined it. That internationally recognized method remains the procedure which is adopted whenever a grant proposal is to be reviewed.

In his article Dr Hoodbhoy asks, “How true is this?” The question which he needs to be asked is: “Where is the proof that this procedure is not being followed?”

While discussing a chemistry project awarded to the Allama Iqbal Open University, Dr Hoodbhoy notes that according to the project summary “this work aims to correct the mistakes made in this area by a Nobel Prize winner in chemistry” and that “such grand notions of challenging Nobel Prize winners are highly suspect.” What the abstract of the proposal clearly states is that initial work of the project was carried out in 1972 by Dr Atta-ur-Rahman and that the resultant research did in fact show the work of a Nobel laureate to be incorrect.

The current work is only an extension of that research. In fact, the 1972 article by Dr Atta-ur-Rahman was one of the works specifically cited by the United Nations when he was awarded the UNESCO Science Prize.


‘PhD factories’
Dr Hoodbhoy specifically alleges that in the biology department of the QAU, there are as many as 40 students registered with one supervisor. The QAU has confirmed that these allegations are incorrect.

It should first be noted that as per HEC rules, the maximum number of PhD fellowship holders allowed to be registered with one supervisor is eight. Furthermore, so far as the QAU’s biology department is concerned, the HEC has not approved 40 PhD fellowships in all, let alone 40 for one supervisor. Instead, the HEC has only approved 20 PhD fellowships, which are being supervised by 10 HEC-approved supervisors.


Quality control
The quality control system introduced by the commission stipulates that HEC will not recognize any indigenous PhD unless the thesis has been approved by at least two eminent academics from industrially advanced countries and the work has been published in an international journal. Every candidate is supposed to take a GRE-type test before he or she is enrolled as a PhD student.

In addition, extensive coursework, both at the MPhil and PhD levels, has been introduced. Dr Hoodbhoy is well aware of these steps but has ignored these as well as many other measures taken by the HEC to raise the quality of higher education in the country.

What is most unfortunate is that Prof Hoodbhoy has ignored the largest programmes of the commission. These include programmes relating to sending students on scholarships to foreign universities, post-doctoral training programmes, and the foreign faculty-hiring programme under which hundreds of eminent expatriate and foreign scientists have joined Pakistani universities.

These are the programmes that have begun to change the landscape of our universities, uplifting them from their current mediocre status. Prof Hoodbhoy claims that the GRE-type test given by the HEC is worthless.

But if that is the case, why are professors from Austria, Germany, France and other countries clamouring to enrol these students? Last week alone, 92 students left for France to pursue postgraduate education. To date, foreign supervisors have expressed complete satisfaction over the quality of the students sent to them.

The HEC is aiming to be one of the first public sector institutions to implement a fully computerized financial management system in accordance with the New Accounting Model adopted for the Project for Improvement of Financial Reporting and Auditing. For the record, HEC would welcome any financial or performance audit by any agency. We have nothing to hide.

It must also be mentioned that the entire amount of government funds available for about 60 public sector universities in Pakistan do not match the funding provided to a single reasonable size university in Malaysia. Advanced countries spend, on an average, about Rs6 million per student per year, while Pakistan only spends Rs35,000 per student per year.

Today, out of an eligible pool of more than 20 million people between the ages of 18 and 23, only about 250,000 Pakistani students are physically studying at universities and other degree-granting institutions. This is one of the lowest percentages in the world. Is it not time that Pakistan improved this ratio?

Today, as a consequence of the HEC’s efforts and the increased funding provided by the government, every public sector university in Pakistan has computers, an internal computer network, high-speed connectivity to the internet, access to more than 15,000 journals and access to state-of-the-art instrumentation.

Enrolment in our universities is rising at an excellent rate, four-year undergraduate programmes are being introduced from Malakand to Khairpur. Faculty members are writing research proposals, collaborating with leading foreign universities, going on sabbaticals and post-doctoral fellowships, and presenting their research work to the world. For the first time, Pakistan is making its presence felt in the international academic world.

Over the last two years, there has been a 44 per cent increase in the number of papers written by Pakistani academics and appearing in internationally cited scientific journals. Is this not progress? Only a continued emphasis on higher education, science and technology will ensure that Pakistan prospers, becomes self-reliant, and utilizes properly its greatest asset — its people.

The writer is executive director at the Higher Education Commission, Islamabad

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)