'[Education expert, Professor Fateh Malik] lauded the efforts of senators towards the implementation of the Article 25-A, for the betterment of future generations. "It was only Zulfikar Bhutto who brought revolutionary reforms in the education sector by making education free and compulsory for all the children," Malik said. "Private institutes were nationalized by Bhutto and salaries of teachers of private institutes were made equal to the salaries of government teachers," he said. Education was the backbone of any country and Article 25-A would provide free education to those children who were deprived of education due to poverty and had to resort to child labor, he said. According to the UNESCO report [...] the country had 18.64 million illiterate people in the year 1951, 22.08 million in 1961, 33.59 million in 1972, 42.69 million in 1981, 50.38 million in 1998 and 55.24 million in the year 2010.'
The stats at the end of the above quote are particularly concerning - how is it that the illiteracy rate is increasing? I haven't been able to locate the report, so I'm unsure how these figures were collated, however, they do raise questions. Questions which I am prone to asking anyway e.g. do targets such as Education for All (which are due to expire in 2015) really achieve results?
On that sobering note, Happy Independence Day, Pakistan (the country is 65 years old today). Here's hoping the next 65 years of your existence is full of educational development.
Read the full news article from Pakistan Today here.
Today is World Refugee Day 2012 and it is also Refugee Week (18-24 June) in the UK. In light of this, and to continue to raise awareness of the importance of quality education in refugee situations, below are some key points from UNHCR's recently released Global Trends Report 2011.
- In 2011, 700, 000 more people than in 2010 were receiving assistance from UNHCR (either as refugees or Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)).
- The total of those forcibly displaced worldwide was 42.5 million.
- 7.1 million people were in protracted refugee situations (defined as 'one in which 25,000 or more refugees of the same nationality have been in exile for five years or longer in any given asylum country') by the end of 2011. This amounted to three quarters of the refugee population under UNHCR's protection (yet in some cases, education - particularly above primary level - is considered incompatible with refugee situations).
- Pakistan was host to the largest number of refugees worldwide (1.7 million) at the end of 2011.
- A concerning fact is that four-fifths of the world's refugees were hosted by developing countries - countries that often cannot achieve their own educational goals, therefore putting into perspective the educational struggles in refugee situations. However, it is perhaps important to note that in some cases refugees can be better off than the host community due to 'hand-outs' they get.
- Importantly in terms of education, 46% of the world's refugees were under 18 at the end of 2011.
- The top five major source countries of refugees were Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, and DRC.
- Voluntary repatriation remains the durable solution which has benefited the most refugees. The question needs to be asked if all of these repatriations have truly been voluntary however, or whether these refugees have had little choice e.g. because of camp closures. Also, in terms of education, the focus on repatriation can result in the reproduction of poor educational practice due to the focus upon using the home country curriculum.
Unless I've missed it, I couldn't see much mention of education in the report. To read the report in full, you can get it here.
P.S. If you're on Twitter, you can follow the blog @GEDBlog
I question this on the back of Imran Khan's fierce drive to get into power or at least gain more seats in Pakistani government with his party Tehreek-e-Insaf (Movement for Justice). He speaks time and time again about the need to stop aid to Pakistan if the country is to develop. I must say I agree - Pakistan has definitely seen better days. If the current aid is not working towards capacity building, then it's likely causing more damage for the long-term. In the short-term, stipends from DFID are helping those young people who otherwise would have had to stop their education for one reason or another. The question then is: is the aid all that bad? Or is it simply making issues worse for the long-term in Pakistan? Can aid ever be non-political?
Decide for yourself: Watch the story of a woman who has received one of the stipends.
We all have that one teacher we'll never forget. Did they learn how to be that good, or were they born with it? The question is an important one in the context of developing education. I read today that teachers in the private Pakistani institution Hunny would leave 'if offered a job in a government school'. The reason? 'Pay is better there, and teachers do not always turn up' (meaning less work). Full article here.
This raises the age-old question of whether teaching is a profession or a vocation. Despite the rise in child-centred approaches in the classroom, quality teachers are still required to act as facilitators in this new environment. And, they are still a prerequisite of a quality education. Why then the low status of teachers in countries like Pakistan? Although there are some exceptions e.g. South Korea, why have teachers never quite reached the same professional heights as lawyers or doctors? More importantly, what can be done to help raise the status of teachers in contexts such as Pakistan, where for example, greater teacher input into curriculum decisions is not necessarily welcomed by headteachers?