FOR a decade, we have been boasting about grand education-sector reforms in Sindh. But things are not improving. Half of the schools in the province are still without basic facilities such as drinking water, electricity, toilets and furniture, etc — even though in every year’s budget documents, there is always a special mention about providing such essentials. Institutional inefficiencies and vested interests continue to plague the education sector.
The second Sindh Education Sector Reform Project (SERP-II), a five-year plan with a total budget of $400 million, is about to complete its full cycle by the end of the current month. To everyone’s dismay, achievements under SERP-II are pretty much the same as they were at the end of SERP-I. We have not only squandered money, a World Bank loan, but have also lost time.
Broadly, the project sets two main targets: increase school participation at the primary, middle and secondary levels, and improve students’ learning outcomes. Specific targets included an increase in net enrolment at the primary level (six-10 years) from 61.6 per cent to 67pc, at the middle level (11-13 years) from 35.7pc to 40pc, and at matriculation (14-15 years) from 23.1pc to 26pc.
We’ve not only squandered a loan, but have also lost time.
These baselines were developed according to the Pakistan Living Standards Measurement Survey 2010-11. According to the latest PSLM data for the year 2014-15, released in 2016, there is no significant improvement in the above indicators. The government of Sindh may question the reliability of the data but it still would not be able to absolve itself of its due share of blame because the same source of data was used to design the baselines.
Another crucial indicator is the quality of education, where the situation does not look promising either. In 2012, the provincial education department started assessing the performance of students of Class 5 and 8 in three subjects: languages (English, Urdu, Sindhi), maths and science. These assessments were done though a third party, the Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur. Since then, the Standardised Achievement Test (SAT) is carried out across the province on an annual basis. To date, four assessments have been carried out.
Again, the results are very disturbing. Overall, the provincial average score in languages for Class 5 was 32pc and for Class 8 it was 37pc, while the average score for maths and science was around 24pc for both classes. The performance of the education department has been pathetic and there is no sign of improvement. Can this department, which received 18-20pc of a share in the provincial budget, even justify its existence?
Yet it would be unfair to not mention some positive developments, such as the biometric verification of all employees of the education department and the establishment of a directorate for monitoring and evaluation, amongst a few other things.
Unfortunately, these small gains are being squandered. Some employees who were in the custody of the National Accountability Bureau on corruption charges, and submitted to ‘voluntary return’, have not only been reinstated but even promoted.
Furthermore, absent and irregular employees (identified as a result of the biometric exercise), whose salaries had been frozen, are now being facilitated in getting their salaries before Eid. The political leadership is eyeing the upcoming general elections, so its top priority is to consolidate its vote bank. And officers are so wedded to their posts that they are happy to find any ways and means to oblige the leadership.
Sindh cannot progress without an educated and skilled labour force. Who will fix it, and how? There is a no simple answer. First, understanding is required as to where the fault lies. Only sincere and honest efforts can steer us out of the education crisis. While working for international aid agencies, NGOs and the government of Sindh, I have observed a strong network of vested-interest parties. The situation has plummeted with the involvement of huge funds and poor accountability mechanisms. Whenever someone dares ask critical questions, all opposing forces come together to silence it. Therefore, to begin with, it is essential that the nexus be understood and exposed.
Currently, plans are being made to get approval for SERP-III. Would this be wise after the failure of SERP-I and II? Why do we even need a loan when we fail to spend our own funds? Given the poor quality of service delivery by the education department, it would be prudent to put our own house in order first.
Is anyone listening? I doubt it. No one appears concerned about the education of Sindh’s poor; all the ‘haves’ have withdrawn their stakes from the public education system.
The writer has worked with national and international organisations in Sindh.
Published in Dawn, June 13th, 2017
STEVE Jobs once said, “sometimes when you innovate, you make mistakes. It is best to admit them quickly, and get on with improving your other innovations.” Innovation is an adaptive or inventive learning process. By being adaptive, an organisation can produce the same products cheaper to improve profits. By being inventive, an organisation can keep producing better products to keep customers paying, which is what Apple successfully did. Deciding between these two approaches, whether to improve upon existing solutions or design new ones altogether, is a choice that education policymakers are currently facing in Pakistan.
The test score data in the Annual Status of Education Report for all provinces from 2011 on shows little improvement in learning. Ten years from now, Pakistan may have more high school graduates, but that may not mean much in terms of being employable. If learning does not improve, policymakers could even argue that these children are better off outside school learning a trade or being employed. I have encountered fifth-graders who, despite having attended school diligently, cannot name a second word starting with ‘A’ after apple. The injustice aside, this is a waste of precious material and human resources, something that a developing country like Pakistan cannot afford.
What is truly surprising is that the government has tried every single policy in the standard playbook to improve matters.
I and others from the Learning and Educational Achievement in Pakistan Schools (LEAPS) programme researched education reforms in Pakistan from 2000 onwards.
Evidence should guide our choices in education.
The first surprising fact was that there have been more than 100 reforms since 2000 alone. The second surprising fact is that all these reforms make sense; they are consistent with what countries around the world do to improve their educational outcomes. They include incentivising teachers, raising teacher qualification levels, improving the curriculum, more testing, better textbooks and better education support services. Name any reform, and it is almost guaranteed that it has been tried.
Given this huge emphasis on education reform, why has learning not improved?
At the recent Ednovate conference, many representatives from public, private and non-profit educational sectors agreed on the need for effective innovation in education reform, however it became clear that consensus on the approach remained elusive. Should the focus be on improving the current system or trying out new strategies? Because all consequences, good or bad, of either route cannot be immediately envisioned, any proposal could be countered with legitimate dissent.
To illustrate, take the 2010 Punjab school merger and staff rationalisation policies. To counter teacher shortage, the government of Punjab introduced teacher rationalisation policies that allowed teachers to be transferred from low to high-enrolment schools, where they were needed. The government had done this twice before in 2005 and 2008 with the aim of having one teacher for 40 students in a school. However, the imbalance kept returning because teachers sought transfers to their previous schools. The government took an adaptive approach in 2010 to improve upon the current solution by merging low-enrolment schools with high-enrolment schools before shifting surplus teachers to schools that needed them.
The policies led to unintended consequences including a loss of female teachers because the merged schools tended to be further away, causing some women to leave the profession, along with increased teacher absenteeism. In fact, this effort worsened the shortage of teachers.
Despite an adaptive approach, this policy did not achieve its desired objectives. Perhaps the mistake is that we are not challenging the policy’s fundamental underlying assumptions. In fact, the assumption that schools require one teacher for 40 students has not even been tested, let alone challenged. Being inventive means challenging the underlying assumption, and managing the process of change with the bureaucracy.
A common theme emerged from the conference: A prerequisite for effective innovation is to bring all stakeholders on the same page, and one way to achieve that is through evidence-driven decision-making. If the 2010 Punjab school merger policy had been tested before it was executed, policymakers may have accounted for unintended negative impacts, perhaps by involving teachers at the policy development stage. Policymakers too may have been less wedded to the idea and thus more open to reassessment if glitches were spotted before too many resources were spent on large-scale policy implementation.
Being committed to evidence-driven decision-making can lead to more effective innovation. Now is the time to let the evidence speak for itself and guide our choices, whether they rely on improving on current solutions or designing new ones altogether.
The writer is programme manager for the LEAPS program team led by Tahir Andrabi, Jishnu Das and Asim Khwaja at the Centre for Economic Research in Pakistan.
Published in Dawn, October 26th, 2017