At NUST: Fined for ‘wearing tight’ or no ‘dopatta’

As its contribution towards disciplining the youth of this country, the National University of Sciences and Technology (Nust) imposes fines on students for breaking their dress code.

In their haste to fine students for wearing jeans and not wearing a dupatta they overlook something called grammar. No one is perfect, but when one is running an institution of higher learning perhaps one should have higher expectations. However, I digress.

According to dawn.com, Nust has denied the report and stated only that students are instructed to wear ‘decent’ dresses. The fact, however, remains is that this isn’t the first time students have been fined at Nust or other similar higher educational institutions and this surely won’t be the last time.

If there was ever an illustration of why our educational system is failing, the picture above speaks a thousand words. The lazy assumption that regimentation, discipline and uniformity makes one educated died a mournless death back in the early 20^th century. Individuals associated with the military, bureaucracy or civil service who then venture into the education sector impose what they know to be the best system – or at the very least what they believe works best for themselves.

This top down, administration pleasing approach to education is of little service to the students themselves. Rather than situating teachers as the centre of academic learning, students face the red tape and bureaucracy of administrators who arrive at these positions with little or no background in formal education.

This patronising and condescending attitude of educational institutions towards their students which assumes that adults are unable to make good choices for themselves does little to help young adults mature and broaden their exposure if they continue to be treated as if they are in school. While an 18-year-old can join the military, drive a car, obtain a pilot licence, Nust believes that a 22-year-old must conform to an individual administrator’s whims of what is and what is not proper.

However, should any of us be surprised that an institution of higher learning enforces a dress code and treats it as a disciplinary issue?

When the picture of the notification went viral, the obligatory commentary on how we are an Islamic country and women (in particular) should observe “proper dress”, followed. Somehow our culture and society is hotwired to view any woman who makes choices that essentially impact her, a public matter.

Are all the men present in Nust unable to avert their gaze if they are offended by a woman not wearing a duppata? Can the concerned instructer keep his personal world view a private matter and not impose it over an entire community of learners?

Hypocritically, while the youth of the country who end up at such institutions need to be disciplined and regimented, the sons and daughters of the very same administrators who end up running these institutions, attend the undisciplined universities abroad.

The vigour with which such rules are enforced is sadly not met with the same enthusiasm when substantive issues regarding teaching and student welfare hit the headlines. When allegations of rape were made in another institution that enforces a dress code; International Islamic University, the dean at the time commented that to protect the institutions honour the case should be hushed up. When a teacher and some students protested against the administration of Bahria University the administrators called in naval intelligence to keep tabs on the demonstrators. A retired Brigadier assaulted a lecturer in National University of Modern Languages (NUML) and he was made to apologise for “inflaming the emotions” of the retired officer.

When all else fails the following argument is offered:

If the students are unhappy they can leave.

What a shameful fall back. Higher education, or indeed any form of education should be about inclusiveness, reducing barriers and encouraging individualism. These institutions are subsidised by the tax payer, receive state land at a subsidised rate. To say, students should have to leave an institution of higher learning because of the clothes they wear does not conform to the administration’s world view shows how warped our idea of what education is and should be actually is.

Why is it then that students and parents put up with this? Do parents believe that their son or daughter in their early 20s needs to be treated in a university as if they are in school? Do students accept these norms because they have been socialised to believe that being told what to wear as an adult is acceptable?

Perhaps what is most frightening: do the administrators at Nust believe that such rules actually equate to an education? That is the question that we must all consider. If we think it does, then perhaps someone should send an email to all the universities currently ranked higher than Nust, as they have definitely missed a trick.

From the Tribune Blogs: http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/18977/at-nust-fined-for-wearing-tight-or-no-dopatta/

Tweaking our understanding of education in Pakistan

Pakistan's uncharted educational landscape

Its nearly election time, and while everyone goes back and forth in an increasingly emotive manner, cheering on their respective side, one issue that does stand out amongst all speakers is the importance of education for whoever comes to power post 11/05.

This is perhaps as good a time as abt to evaluate what education should be and how it should be delivered. This too has seen a lot of debate. But then sometimes in the midst of all the discussion it seems as if each party is cheering on their own interpretation of how they will reinvent the wheel, in mostly symbolic ways, i.e. exam boards, examination methods etc.

Alot of good work has already been done. I won't go into the specifics at this point, but at a more general, macro level, I believe that small tweaks and changes in our understanding of education is important before we move forward. Ignoring the basics, while trying to change the complex is bound to fail.

Recognize the importance of early years education  and play

Like most things in Pakistan, a top down approach to education is seen as a quick fix. The development of the Higher Education Commission (HEC) over the last decade, and how its captured middle and upper class imagination in its quest to improve Higher Ed is remarkable. The HEC perhaps matches defence organizations in its ability to churn out "strategic institution" or "disciplined institution" to whenever its faces any criticism.

While the development of a strong higher education sector is important. It seems that in Pakistan this is happening at the expense of other levels of education. Flip through the news or any newspaper, and while issues related to the HEC make headlines, schools can go without teachers or basic infrastructure for years without any mention.

Now this is probably the result of our middle and upper classes investing their energy at the top end of educational qualifications. The final product of 16 years of education, a degree and then a job.

I find this approach self defeating.

Investment and attention at the top must be matched by recognizing the importance of early years and basic education. Primarily because:

The most formative years of learning is during early childhood (See Alison Gopnik's talk above). Society may feel that what a 20 year old in university learns is more important than what a 4 year old learns in terms of practical and economic importance. However, what we ignore is that what the 4 year old learns or does not learn will have a much bigger impact on learning when older, than massive spending on higher education itself.

In the current model where the HEC offers scholarships to students and hopes to improve outcomes. This is all well and good, however, an investment in early years and basic education would help improve educational outcomes from the bottom up. Students entering university will be better prepared academically. The very best today are good in relation to a very low benchmark. We must invest in policies that lifts everyone, not just a select few at the top.

Early years interventions have the added benefit of resulting in higher social benefits. Investment in higher education helps increase private benefits of the scholar himself.

At this point, hoping for universal nurseries and kindergartens is pointless. But a recognition of its importance would help as a start. Highlighting the importance of play, open spaces, curiosity etc is as good a start as any. Providing information to parents or local communities, interlinking such interventions with the provision of vaccines and basic health would help shift attitudes.

After All, a rising tide lifts all boats.

Children learn themselves and teach each other

Sugata Mitra has done some exciting work on how children learn and how they teach each other across the globe.

Below are some extracts from his talk which speak for themselves:

So then people said, well, how far will it go? Where does it stop? I decided I would destroy my own argument by creating an absurd proposition. I made a hypothesis, a ridiculous hypothesis. Tamil is a south Indian language, and I said, can Tamil-speaking children in a south Indian village learn the biotechnology of DNA replication in English from a streetside computer? And I said, I'll measure them. They'll get a zero. I'll spend a couple of months, I'll leave it for a couple of months, I'll go back, they'll get another zero. I'll go back to the lab and say, we need teachers. I found a village. It was called Kallikuppam in southern India. I put in Hole in the Wall computers there, downloaded all kinds of stuff from the Internet about DNA replication, most of which I didn't understand. 

The children came rushing, said, "What's all this?" 

So I said, "It's very topical, very important. But it's all in English." 

So they said, "How can we understand such big English words and diagrams and chemistry?" 

So by now, I had developed a new pedagogical method, so I applied that. I said, "I haven't the foggiest idea."And anyway, I am going away."  

So I left them for a couple of months. They'd got a zero. I gave them a test. I came back after two months and the children trooped in and said, "We've understood nothing." 

So I said, "Well, what did I expect?" So I said, "Okay, but how long did it take you before you decided that you can't understand anything?" 

So they said, "We haven't given up. We look at it every single day." 

So I said, "What? You don't understand these screens and you keep staring at it for two months? What for?" 

So a little girl who you see just now, she raised her hand, and she says to me in broken Tamil and English, she said, "Well, apart from the fact that improper replication of the DNA molecule causes disease, we haven't understood anything else."

Children are curious. And this curiosity allows them to overcome linguistic, technological and economic barriers (to an extent). We must recognize this because the ability to overcome these barriers diminishes as children become older. 

A second lesson to learn here is the importance of encouragement. The "granny effect" as Mitra states refers to the importance of positive reinforcement and gentle nudges that spurs learning. For me, an inexpensive and perhaps the simplest education intervention in Pakistan, would be an information campaign to encourage parents, grandparents, uncles and aunts to show interest in children's learning and offer encouragement.

Something that I am considering to try is to get a few computers, connected them to the internet, try and get urdu dubbed lectures of Khan Academy videos and open it up to whoever wants to have a go. I personally think that such an approach of offering access, and then encouraging self learning, is an effective way to narrow the gap between poor students who may not be able to afford extra classes or tutoring and their more affluent peers. 

Play is good, boredom is bad

Its a shame that play doesn't get as much importance as it should. In a 5 or 6 hour school day, a 20 minutes "break" in a day is supposed to be enough time for a child to have a snack and play. Break Time or play is never enough, but for many teachers and parents its considered a waste of time. 

Toys also figure as an obvious distraction. "Put your toys away and come here and study". Now only if we appreciated play as much as the forced "study" a lot of creativity and curiosity that will later reinforce educational ability, would not be wasted. 

Arvind Gupta shows a few examples of very simple, some familiar toys that highlight the importance of both play and toys in facilitating learning. Again, a very simple intervention that can inspire.

But wheres the policy stuff?

I will go into specifics in another post. But here I wanted to highlight some areas towards which I believe attitudes must change. The recognition or certain forms of education and certain age groups as key stakeholders in educational processes will help approve enrollment and attainment for all students.

So in short, if you ever have to lobby for educational reform, remember to:

1) highlight the importance of early years and basic education

2) play is education

3) children can learn on their own, education policy should not dull their curiosity or creativity

4) children teach each other, social interaction is important

5) encouragement, especially for young children is extremely important. Encourage, support and let kids thrive

Refund policy: The end of university looting (IHC rules in favour of university students)

The following blog was originally posted on Tribune Blogs.

There was some speculation regarding who this judgement applies to. According to the lawyer involved in this case, Bilal Mirza, this applies to both public and private institutions. Essentially no educational organization can demand non-refundable deposits, at least that's how I have interpreted the order.

Read the detailed verdict here: 

Detailed Judgement: ISB HC ruling on University Fees

Largely unreported, Pakistani students earned a well-deserved victory in the Islamabad High Court last week. The High Court ruled the current policy adopted by several public and private universities to demand non-refundable deposits at the time of offering admission ‘illegal’.

This is a problem that many students are familiar with. When the admission season starts, they apply to a range of institutions and even start hearing back from a lot of them. However, they are still in waiting for their first choice to respond.

In the meantime, unsure whether they will get into their most preferred university or not, they start making deposits at other institutions; only to later gain admission where they originally wanted and losing out on the sums deposited at all the other universities.

Recently, a student named Muhammad Usman Syed filed a petition at the Islamabad High Court, holding Comsats Institute of Information Technology and the High Education Commission (HEC) as respondents. His legal representatives, Bilal Mirza and Omer Farooq of Farooq Khan & Mirza argued that the policy of holding deposits and deeming them non-refundable is against international practises, where many institutions employed a pro-rata rate of refund.

The court was found in favour of the plaintiff and the HEC has been directed to implement a fee-refund policy in universities.

The findings of the case have a major impact on students across the country, especially at this time of the year. Over the summer holidays, a large number of students will submit admission applications in local universities. While the HEC may still take some time to implement the new policy, aspiring students in local institutions should be aware of their rights during the admission process.

Now that the precedent has been set, perhaps it’s also time for private schools to look into their admission practices and the hefty deposits that they charge?

I had the chance to briefly chat with Bilal Mirza, Advocate High Court, on the details of this case. Here is the transcribed interview:

1) Could you give a brief background of what policies the universities had adopted and why the plaintiff considered them to be unfair? 

There has been a prevalent practice adopted by many universities to announce their results well in advance of top tier universities in any given field. It requires the applicant students to deposit a hefty amount, which the prospectus ambiguously refers to as security deposit and the amount is stated as ‘non-refundable’, to be paid before a deadline deliberately set just prior to announcement of admission results by top tier universities.

Therefore, a student who wishes to secure his academic future and applies to several universities, is coerced into paying this amount in order to have a back-up option in the event he/she does not qualify for the top tier university. Many students, who do eventually get admission in top tier universities, are not returned this amount on a arbitrary ground that the applicant paid this amount with full knowledge of the fact that it is non-refundable and therefore now ‘estopped’ from claiming it.

The petition was filed to challenge:

• The practice of announcing results early with a deliberately short deadline
• The non-refundable policy of universities where students are forced to forfeit a sum paid to the universities without any legitimate reason – as the universities have provided no services as consideration.

Federation of Pakistan, through the Ministry of Education and the HEC were made parties to the proceedings. This was done so that appropriate directions may be issued for formulation and implementation of rules and regulations on this matter which was previously not being regulated by the HEC.

2) When was the case filed? What was the respondent’s response to the courts proceedings?

The case was filed in early 2011 at the Islamabad High Court not long after it was re-constituted. The respondent university’s main submission was that every university is empowered to formulate, approve and promulgate its own policies. It said that the present no-refund policy has been posited in pursuance of the same. Furthermore, as the amount is stated as non-refundable in the prospectus, therefore doctrine of estoppel was attracted and applicant students are not at the liberty to claim a refund.

3) What does the verdict mean? What can universities do and not do?

The judgement passed by the Honourable Islamabad High Court has declared that there is no estoppel against law. Even if an applicant was aware of the terms of the prospectus, it is not possible for one to contract out of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan.

The no-refund policy of the universities has been declared to be against principles of natural justice. As it is exploitative, therefore it is in contravention of the tenets of the Constitution of Pakistan.

The Honourable judge also stated that is against the dictates of Islam and moral values to make claim to an amount against which no service, labour or product is given.

Furthermore, it has been emphasised that the educational institutes are expected to demonstrate parental conduct and approach towards students instead that of businessmen.

Educational institutes cannot be allowed to operate purely on commercial considerations rather main object should be to impart education with purpose of building nations.

It was also observed that the brunt of such policies is borne by the lower and middle classes, which is blatant discrimination as the right to education is not reserved only to the rich, influential and mighty ones. Also, entire families suffer due to these policies and brilliant students are deprived of education due to lack of resources to pay non-refundable security deposits.

 4) Is there any scope for this verdict to be applied retrospectively? If I was in a similar situation a year or two ago, can I claim money back?

Directions have been issued to the Ministry of Education and HEC to conform their policies with the observations made. The HEC has already adopted the dictum of the judgement by announcing that it will issue detailed regulations in compliance of the judgement and will eliminate the no-refund policies. Only expenses actually incurred by universities in processing applications etc. may be retained and the remaining amounts are to be refunded to the applicants. The judgement, unfortunately, does not have retrospective application but will benefit all students who henceforth apply for admissions in Pakistan.

5) Can this verdict be applied to other institutions such as private schools and colleges?

Yes, it applies to all public and private sector institutes.

Arsalan Bilal on Hunger Strike - UPDATED

Words are mightier than the sword.

Ask the administrators of Bahria University Islamabad who have expelled Arsalan Bilal from the University for threatening staff members by forwarding a poem by Faiz Ahmed Faiz. It appears irrelevant to the administrators that the same email was forwarded to his friends, class fellows, and family members, yet Faiz’s poetry is a reason good enough to warrant expulsion if a teacher is added to the mailing list.

Bahria University has also declared Arsalan Bilal “psychologically unstable”, even though they are no experts in psychiatry. If so, the university appears to have set aside its responsibility towards student welfare and supporting vulnerable members of its community and gone about adding to his mental stress by deciding to expel him.

This should all sound very familiar. In April 2011, Professor Qamar Riaz Mahmitkhel was dismissed from Bahria University for questioning the role of retired military officials and whether creativity could flourish in a military style setup. The question was asked in a packed auditorium and the response of the university’s administrators was for the Director Campus Commodore (retired) Mohammad Ali and security personnel to grab him by the collar and assault him. A 100 or so students subsequently protested against his dismissal at which point Naval Intelligence officials harassed the protestors and the administration threatened them with expulsion.

Mr Bilal who also runs Insight News – Bahria University, a Facebook page dedicated to news related to the institution, had also questioned the role of ex-Naval officials and certain faculty members policies in the university. He has been discouraged in pursuing his undergraduate research in ‘Politicization of religion in Pakistan’ and faced discrimination as he belongs to a minority sect.

As a result, Arsalan Bilal has gone on an indefinite hunger strike before Bahria University Islamabad from the 6^th of April.

When challenged, administrators usually explain their actions by pointing to the greater good. For example, the case of women being raped in International Islamic University Islamabad was hushed up, as the administration wanted to protect the reputation of the institution.

Universities in Pakistan, especially those of the Bahria University variety have reduced higher education to an extension of secondary school. The emphasis is on discipline, uniform, fines for poor attendance etc. What is ignored, is the quality of teaching and the content of the curriculum, emphasising rote learning and propaganda over thoughtful analysis and evaluation. The incident involving a retired Brigadier who assaulted a lecturer in NUML University for “daring” to “say something about the Army” comes to mind.

The fact is that HEC regulations are not enforced and individuals without the prerequisite qualifications are appointed in universities based on their affiliation with either the military or the civilian bureaucracy is not only HEC’s failure to enforce the law, our collective silence fails those students who study in these institutions.

The fact is that despite HEC’s efforts, the quality of Higher Education in Pakistan remains dismal. We are not producing mature, analytical and creative individuals ready to take on the world. Some universities are nothing more than over glorified finishing schools where 20 year olds are treated like children. The same administrators may send their own children to foreign universities where they are no uniforms, no attendance and the environment lacking any “discipline” of the variety they enforce on others.

Public universities cannot and must not be used as the post retirement, cushy appointment for retired bureaucrats, whether military or civil. I am sure there are many ex-military officials who can make excellent contributions to learning in education, however, the variety that expels students for raising questions and assaults teaching stuff have little to offer apart from their massive egos.

Education is far too important to be left to individuals. The key and most important stakeholders are and should be the students themselves. The HEC has developed elaborate structures and layers of bureaucracy that serves everyone but the students. Administrators are all powerful whether in the private or the public sector. Teaching staff have little or no job security and are subservient to the whims of administrators, most of whom have no background in education.  

If you believe that education is more than wearing uniforms and wearing your tie correctly then it’s important to support Arsalan Bilal in his protest. If he is silenced then the status quo will remain unchanged and it will silence anyone else who hopes to question the powers that be. Thousands upon thousands of students will receive a poor education, undeserving for an individual in the 21^st century.

A university student is old enough to join the military, marry, drive, carry a weapon, yet university administrators seem hell bent on treating them as children. Things must not continue as they are! 

Update: Arsalan Bilal on Saach TV: http://saach.tv/2012/04/12/strike-for-justice-or-self-promotion/

Follow Arsalan Bilal on Twitter: @arsalanbilal 

This post was originally published in the ET Blogs: http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/11033/bahria-university-arsalan-bilals-hunger-for-justice/

A related post on Bahria University: http://liberalfacist.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/misplaced-priorities-in-higher.html

Misplaced priorities in Higher Education

Another day, and it seems history repeats itself.

When we are not discussing some vague educational policy buzzword, namely "uniform education", newspaper articles announce the appointment of new Vice Chancellors or Rectors to various universities across the country.

Apparently, in Pakistan there is a mass shortage of people to run universities. And if your university happens to be affiliated with the military, then most probably, your institution is probably more obsessed with "discipline", dress code and how the sexes can interact with each other.

Today I came across the following post on Insight News - Bahria University

NEWS: Vice Admiral (r) Shahid Iqbal takes charge as new Rector of Bahria University. Sources have informed Insight News that he has already indicated that the rigid rules implemented in the university shall be relaxed for students' convenience, however, the dress code will be imposed strictly by the authorities. "He is a humble and lenient person, " sources said. Iqbal's term will expire in February 2014. [HQ BUREAU]

Now I am sure, the retired Vice Admiral must be a jolly fellow who has served his country admirably over the course of his career, but what exactly is his qualification to run a university and preside over its policy and management? Is his rank in his former profession the only thing that qualifies for his post retirement cushy job?

This whole notion of "rigid rules" for legal adults is preposterous. Learning at university is less and less about what you do in class, and more about your wider experiences, independence, confidence building, building communication skills etc. 

As I commented previously, an 18 year old in Pakistan can join the military, where he or she may be required to kill someone, he or she can drive a car, a motorcycle, marry, hold an arms licence and what not. But god forbid that a 20 year old cloths are "inappropriate" or he/she is sitting too close to a member from the opposite sex. Not too mention that the students are paying consumers.

We see this everywhere from one degree to the other, NUML has had its fair share of controversies where retired Army officers have gone around throwing their weight, beating up lecturers and quite conveniently awarding their own relatives and colleagues degrees and scholarships. NUST is the same, but I believe that they have now relaxed their dress code. In Bahria University last year we had the case of a teacher who dared to question the qualifications of the ex-Naval administrators. Under whose authority, naval intelligence, and serving naval personnel were used to monitor the teachers and students protests is no big secret. The fact that the administrators got away with all this, and the concerned teacher was eventually fired, says alot about what their priorities are.

What I never understand is that, administrators with some affiliation with the military are all focused on rigidity, discipline and conduct when they run schools, colleges or universities, however, they have no qualms about sending their own sons and daughters to private schools and then foreign universities, where there is no "discipline", attendance or dress code. Hypocrisy? 

Perhaps, they have nothing else to offer apart from passing edicts about how students should behave?  

Private universities, who are sometime criticised for being "too modern" or liberal are playing catchup, telling Master level students what to wear and where to sit, while conveniently ignoring the academic product that they are offering. 

Perhaps if the International Islamic University Islamabad was spending less time enforcing gender segregation as their central duty, and placed some trust in their students, they wouldn't have sat idly by, whilst members of their staff sexually harass employees and students. 

For all there wise cracks on how higher education needs to be "disciplined", regimenting university life, in the same fashion as a primary school isn't going to add value to education. We need to really think about the direction in which higher education is moving.

Moralising over the behaviour of students as the primary concern is a pathetic cop out for educational institutions, who then overlook the academic quality they are offering, by selling themselves as disciplined institutions. 

P.S. The following link leads to the Board of Governors of Bahria University - Apparently most of the naval high command moonlights in the university as a second job. http://www.bahria.edu.pk/newSite/home.php?catId=622