Reforms! What Reforms?

This is where the real reform begins:

---

‘Hasba bill to isolate MMA’

By Raja Asghar

ISLAMABAD, July 9: The NWFP government’s plan to enact a new law to create religious watchdogs has rung alarm bells in the country, some critics seeing it as a move by the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) government to Talibanise the sensitive region.

While the MMA government was due to introduce the controversial Hasbah Bill in the provincial assembly on Monday, the move was denounced by almost all other major political parties and human rights groups in the country.

But the MMA, which says it only seeks to reform society in line with Islamic teachings, seemed set to get the bill passed by its comfortable majority in the 124-seat house.

Designed to create religious mohtasibs, or ombudsmen, at the provincial, district and tehsil levels who will be helped by a virtual religious police in what will be known as “amar bil maroof wa nahi anil munkar” (promotion of virtue and prevention of evil) department, the bill is likely to further strain the provincial government’s relations with the federal government, political sources said.

I have already read long discussions on this article in SAT. Let me admit that the level of intellectual discussion at chowk on this issue is much higher and all members need to be acknowledged.

To understand development in Pakistan, we have to first understand the Political Economy of Development in Pakistan. The central theme is Cash Grabbing and maximising of coffers. This is a processes repeated in all knee jerk development in Pakistan in different phases, be it the PIDE/IBA model of the 60s, GIK of the 80s or HEC of the 21st century.

In 1999 Dr Ata could not open his COMSAT campus in Karachi. Once he became the minister of Science and Technology (S&T), the comsat team became the S&T Team. Comsats spread rapidly and some people like Junaid Zaidi became all en all. In this time the major preoccupation was internet, braod band et al. Tragically this came crashing this year due to the sea cables and suddenly a need for Satellite link was felt. So much for the S&T.

Now the HEC is in overhaul.
Massive fundings are going to scholarships to institutions and individuals. Dr Hoodbhoy`s aricle says it all, to which I agree.

Two other retardants are the Pakistan Engineering Council and Pakistan Medical and Dental Council. It is only after these Civic Bodies recognise the degrees of students, can they become certified engineers and doctors. So many good private sector education institutions are in limbo because of these councils. And lets not forget the omnipresent Rector of NUST who will do anything to keep NUST and his Job afloat as long as there are no competiters.

So much for now.

Cheerios

I am happy that HEC is under observation by so many people and even a 5 million rupees projects (Dr Sadia`s) is not forgiven if it is not up to the standard (or not considered by some people to be so).

On the other hand, there are organizations in Pakistan where billions have been taken away and nobody knew where the money was going. I wish Pakistan Army, Railways, WAPDA, Telecom and other ministries also become like HEC where it becomes easier for the people to see inside what is happening and to express themselves freely.

Lastly a comment from Hoodbhoy`s articlen, Hoodbhoy Wrote: ``Pakistan lost its giants, Abdus Salam and Salimuzzaman Siddiqui, a long time ago. Its academic institutions may have to wait a long time for someone to lead them out of the growing darkness.``

And another hoodbhoy might be writing an article in 2030 mentioning that Pakistani lost ots giants like Abdus Salam, Saleemuzzamman and Atta ur Rehman a long ago.... Why not to respect the giants when they are alive and only praise them on their graves. Isn`t it an odd attitude?

Re: # 73

About spreading too thin, I will like to say that any HEC chief will have to spread him too thin because the scope of HEC activities is too large. And we need to remember is that Atta is not the only person in HEC, he is only the boss with a team to work with him. It is not him who implements all the things, it is his whole team with him who are managing these projects. We can criticize their methodology of executing the projects as a team. But when people start feeling that Atta is working alone on all the projects all the times and hence he should restrict to one single thing, I believe they are not looking at bigger picture where whole team works together. Or may be, they are only criticizing for the sake of criticism to fulfil their hidden agendas. :)

Thank you for speaking out the truth out loud, Dr. Hoodbhoy...it`s depressing that not even the HEC, an institution that supposedly commands great respect, functions in the interests of its poor citizens-not even one institution in the country sadly perfoms correctly...:-( Depressing state of affairs. Will anyone stand up to change the status quo?

The problem with the projects initiated at HEC and before that at MoST has been their excess. Dr Ata spreads himself too thin. Instead of focusing on 300 or 3000 projects, he should focus on 30 (or better still 3) and ensure that they become a resounding success.
It would be interesting to find out the number of ``new`` projects that have been initiated with a fanfare at HEC and how many of them have succeeded in achieving their objectives. How many of these publicity driven projects have fizzled out. We know what have happened to Model University initiative at HEC, we also know what happened to foreign faculty hiring program at MoST. We need to know the output and effectiveness of these
initiatives. We have heard about thousands and now tens of thousands of PhD that we would be churning out. Do we know who would absorb them and at what pay? We know of scores of projects being approved and millions being doled out. But, what do we know of output measurement. Some of the examples being quoted in this thread refer to the lack of ``attention to detail``. A necessary consequence of spreading oneself too thin.

re #59 cutehumna

I am sure this reply is a hard slap on the face of HEC critics and author of this article Pervaiz HoudBhoy

Mr. Hoodbhoy choose to criticize HEC but miserably failed to suggest corrective measures...this in simple terms called criticism for the sake of criticism

Despite the much touted claims of the HEC, the situation on the ground is zero...

Professor Hoodbhoy is on the dot. We have become so used to manipulation that we have laid waste an enormous talent vis a vis Theoretical Physics and Mathematics... Indeed we are so out of touch with modern advancements... how many of Pakistan`s best and brightest can explain or atleast hint to what the string theory is?

There are many Pakistanis, some Professor Hoodbhoy`s students, who are today involved in cutting edge research at the Fermilab ... this country produced Dr Abdus Salam for god`s sake... why can`t we produce many others like him.. Science is without religion, ideology or national boundaries... and this what we in Pakistan need to understand... and I have sneaking suspicion that despite the onerous ``Villayet-e-fakih`` the Iranian Mullahs have understood this...

HEC vs Dr. Hoodbhoy: The Controversy Continues

By Mamoona Amjed

ISLAMABAD, July 18: With reference to a rejoinder by Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy captioned: “Pakistan Buying Costly, Obsolete Scientific Junk” it is stated that in his response to the rejoinder by the Executive Director, HEC, Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy continues to distort, falsify and twist facts to fit his own viewpoint.

It is absolutely incorrect that HEC has spent or is spending Rs400 million on the purchase of a Van de Graaf Accelerator. HEC is not purchasing any equipment! HEC had allocated a total of Rs180 million to the National Center for Physics, (NCP) Quaid-e Azam University, Islamabad for the establishment of an Accelerator and an associated experimental Physics Laboratory. Out of this amount only Rs90 million were estimated to be spent on the purchase of the Accelerator and not Rs400 million as claimed by the writer.

The worthy writer finds it “shocking that no meeting of potential users of this large scale project was called, as is the practice in the rest of the world. And no one will have a clue of what to do when this machine finally arrives in Pakistan”.

It is to be noted that the top scientists of the country in the discipline of Physics were involved in the preparation and submission of the project to HEC. The project was prepared by Dr. Riaz ud Din, HI, a top notch physicist of the country and the Director of the National Center for Physics. Prof. Hoodbhoy claims that Prof. Riazuddin has acknowledged to him that he made a mistake. Even if his statement is true, how, is that the fault of HEC?

The project for the purchase of the Accelerator was reviewed by Dr. Samar Mubarakmand, NI, HI, SI, Chairman NESCOM and a top nuclear scientist and submitted to HEC by Dr. Ishfaq Ahmad, NI, HI, SI, our leading nuclear scientist, in his capacity as Chairman Board of Governors of National Center of Physics.

The actual specifications and type of the Accelerator to be purchased are still under consideration. A committee of scientists constituted for this purpose will take the final decision.

It is highly unfortunate that by making remarks about the project such as “stupid decision” and ridiculing the competence of those who are involved in establishing this facility, the worthy writer has insulted the above mentioned top scientists of the country as HEC is only sponsoring a project prepared, recommended and submitted by them.

Regarding the objections raised on the research proposal of Dr. Saadia Chishti, it is clarified that only Rs.400.000 and not Rs5.5 million have been released for the project. While processing the case HEC procedure of a rigorous peer review by top experts in the field, in line with international norms and practices, was strictly followed.

The project as well as the total amount to be allocated was approved on the recommendation of the Referees. Later on, HEC has had the progress report of her project evaluated by experts and the case is being processed for final decision in the light of evaluator’s comments. No further funds beyond Rs0.4 million were released after July, 2004.

The honorable writer has also falsely contended that the Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU) has only a distance learning program and questioned the feasibility of carrying out chemistry research by Prof. Atta-ur-Rahman at such an institution.

He seems to ignore the reality on ground that AIOU has a first rate chemistry laboratory with a functional gas chromatograph, mass spectrometer system, Fourier transform infra-red spectrometer, ultra-violet spectrometer, high pressure liquid chromatographs and other sophisticated equipment installed and fully operational.

Students are carrying out M.Phil and Ph.D. level studies in AIOU with the help of these facilities. Prof. Atta-ur-Rahman is the leading scientist in the country who has written/edited 87 books published mainly in USA, Europe and Japan, many of which are used in courses in the West. He also has over 600 research papers, chapters in books and international patents to his credit which have won him numerous international prizes.

He had the rare distinction of becoming a Cambridge Don (1969-1973 ) and he is the only Pakistani scientist (besides late Prof. Abdus Salam) to have been honored by the University of Cambridge with award of an honorary degree of Doctor of Science (Sc.D.) by Cambridge University.

He is also the only scientist from the Muslim world to have been awarded the UNESCO Science Prize by the Director General of UNESCO in the 30 year old history for his eminent scientific contributions. Yet Prof. Hoodbhoy feels that being incharge of more than one institutions Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman should not carry out research.

Regarding the “Best Teachers” awards, the worthy writer now acknowledges that it was impossible for HEC to interview 250,000 students (note that this is what he had recommended earlier -- that the students opinion should have been sought!) -- this time he has now changed his stance and made a different set of allegations against HEC saying that the “Administrators simply nominated themselves as best teachers” (presumably he means departmental heads).

The reality is that nominations under the program were accepted by HEC only from Vice Chancellors and not directly from any “Administrators``.

The new objection raised by the worthy writer in “Physics Master Trainers Program” is not understandable. HEC has given the project to the Physics Department Quaid-e-Azam University and it is being run by the Head of the Department.

HEC welcomes positive criticism however, articles based on incorrect figures, spinning of facts and those creating public misperceptions about sincere efforts to develop S&T and higher education don’t serve any noble purpose.

Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy responded to this latest rejoinder with these remarks on Saturday, July 16, 2005:

The HEC appears terribly confused. The official rejoinder of the HEC (17 July) to my article states that I have misrepresented facts and that only Rs 90 million shall be spent on a Tandem Accelerator. But this is not what the HEC chairman wrote on 25 June, 2005 (Dawn, Sci-Tech section, http://dawn.com/weekly/science/archive/050625/science3.htm).

According to the above article: “HEC has allocated Rs180 million to establish a 5MW Tandem Accelerator” and, to support its function, “HEC will spend Rs164 million to set up laboratories at the NCP, Quaid-i-Azam University”. Whoever on the HEC payroll is charged with defending the HEC has obviously not read what the boss has written.

I have no idea, or interest, of which individuals are behind this senseless project, one that is an astonishing waste of precious national resources. The author’s attempt to drag in other names is a mischievous move designed to create and inflame conflicts.

My previous statements are correct and can be easily verified: Professor Riazuddin, whose scientific credentials everyone seems to agree upon, has expressed his view saying that he cannot support this project on grounds of scientific merit. He has communicated this in writing to the HEC chairman.

In the matter of Dr. Saadia Khawar Chishty, the HEC web page shows for the project “Quranization Of Science Courses At The M.Sc level” the following entries: Total Amount – Rs5,581,000 and Current Year Award – Rs1,857,000. I do not see the figure of Rs 400,000 anywhere. Where is it?

It is my hope that the HEC will not make yet another attempt to change these figures or tamper with web pages that were created in 2003-2004. One such shallow trick has already been caught and exposed.

Best Teacher Awards: it is alleged by the HEC-commissioned author that I have “changed my stance” on the issue of getting students to evaluate a teacher’s performance in class. Rubbish! I think that without getting this crucial input, the whole idea of a “Best Teacher Award” is nonsensical. The problem seems to lie in the author’s limited comprehension of English. And, yes, I did mean that departmental heads had nominated themselves as the best teachers. It is perfectly normal to call departmental heads as “administrators” in the English language.

As for the other matters raised by the HEC’s second rejoinder: I think I have made my position clear in my initial and follow-up articles. There is no need to prolong a now tedious debate.

Ms. Mamoona Amjed is Director General Public Affairs, Higher Education Commission, Islamabad, Pakistan

A Strong Rejoinder to Dr Hoodbhoy by HEC

Dr. S. Sohail H. Naqvi

ISLAMABAD, July 15: Corruption. Dishonesty. Incompetence. Cronyism. These are only a few of the very serious charges laid by Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy at the door of the Higher Education Commission. One would expect such charges to be fully substantiated, especially when made by a distinguished academic. Unfortunately, Professor Hoodbhoy does not seem to believe in research any more.

Let us start with Dr. Hoodbhoy’s dramatic announcement that HEC’s projects are riddled with “gross administrative incompetence.” As proof, Dr. Hoodbhoy refers to the “Best University Teacher” program. Please note that Dr. Hoodbhoy has no objection to the project itself, merely to the manner in which it is being implemented. But what is this highly objectionable course adopted by the HEC?

Admittedly, the HEC selects the “best” university teachers on the basis of nominations received
from university administrations. But those administrators are not supposed to make nominations based upon their personal whims. Instead, those nominations are required to be made on the basis of numerous factors, including student evaluations, a point which has been completely ignored by Dr. Hoodbhoy.

In any event, is the HEC’s approach really so unreasonable as to justify a charge of “gross incompetence?” Is Dr. Hoodbhoy really arguing that no factor other than student opinion can ever be important in determining who is a good teacher? Is he really saying that the opinion of one’s peers is irrelevant?

There are more than 250,000 university students in Pakistan. The HEC cannot interview those students itself. The HEC therefore has no option but to work with the existing administrations of universities to implement its programs. So, once the hype is stripped away, what we are left with is a program which Dr. Hoodbhoy admits is innovative and desirable, which the HEC is trying to implement in a self-evidently reasonable manner, and yet the program, according to Dr. Hoodbhoy, is conclusive proof of gross incompetence.

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 today in Pakistan. Dr. Hoodbhoy is right when he says that the HEC sees existing faculty members as “part of the solution.” Unlike Dr. Hoodbhoy, the HEC feels no reason to be ashamed of that vision.

We come then to Dr. Hoodbhoy’s other example of “gross incompetence “– the Master Trainers in Physics program being run by Quaid e Azam University. Once again, we can safely assume that Dr. Hoodbhoy has no objection to the concept of the program itself since two years ago, when the project was first proposed, he demanded that he be placed in charge of it.

Once again, his only objection to the program is the manner in which the project is being implemented. But, the HEC is not in charge of the implementation of that project. That responsibility belongs entirely to the Physics department of Quaid e Azam University, of which Dr. Hoodbhoy is supposedly a very senior member.

Contrary to what Dr. Hoodbhoy says, HEC has not selected (let alone “hand-picked”) a single “master trainer.” Instead, each and every “master trainer” has been selected by the Physics Department at QAU. Dr. Hoodbhoy may be justified in his criticism of the master trainers but that is something for him, as a senior member of the QAU Physics Department, to raise first with that department.

Of course, Dr. Hoodbhoy chose to spend the last year on extraordinary leave so perhaps he was not in a position to offer his views. Dr. Hoodbhoy also alleges that the Master Trainers are being grossly overpaid. Perhaps Dr. Hoodbhoy has forgotten that he spent part of his extraordinary one-year leave giving lectures at Rs. 45,000 per hour. The Master Trainers are only paid a fraction of that amount; but then perhaps they lack Dr. Hoodbhoy’s facility with the truth.

It should be noted that the object of this article is not to unfairly malign Dr. Hoodbhoy. However, Dr. Hoodbhoy has not given a single name of a single Master Trainer whom he believes to be unqualified. Instead, he has simply slandered the entire lot of them without bothering to give any details whatsoever.

To the extent Dr. Hoodbhoy has specific and verifiable details regarding the Master Trainers he should first try to resolve his qualms at the departmental level and if that fails, then approach the HEC. If the HEC then refuses to listen to him, he can justifiably claim that the program is a disgrace. Till such time he bothers to substantiate his allegations though, it is only Dr. Hoodbhoy who can be considered a disgrace.

We come then to Dr. Hoodbhoy’s allegation that HEC is throwing “enormous sums ... at half-baked proposals.” Dr. Hoodbhoy’s first exhibit in this regard is the grant sanctioned by the HEC for the purchase of a Van de Graaf accelerator. Admittedly, 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. Cutting-edge particle accelerators cost billions of dollars which is why HEC has partnered with other developing nations to have access to the SESAME project in Jordan.

It should also be remembered that the proposal for the accelerator was submitted by the National Center for Physics, whose board is manned by the most eminent physicists in Pakistan. If Dr. Hoodbhoy is to be believed, those physicists are all either fools or criminals. The alternative does not leave Dr. Hoodbhoy in good company.

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

Instead, as per standard procedures, the proposal was sent to be examined by the focal person in that subject (normally, the single most eminent and recognized scholar in that area in Pakistan) who then referred it to other competent scholars, who examined and reviewed the proposal. That internationally recognized method remains the standard method by which HEC reviews all grant proposals. Dr. Hoodbhoy asks “how true is this?”

The question which Dr. Hoodbhoy needs to be asked is, “where is your proof that this method is not being followed?” Dr. Hoodbhoy tries to gain much mileage from the fact that some of the research proposals he reviewed were dubious. But clearly, HEC is not responsible for the quality of research proposals sent to it, only for the quality of research proposals actually funded by it.

Assuming Dr. Hoodbhoy did indeed review a proposal containing a request for a $90,000 fridge, how is that proposal in any way represented of HEC’s performance?

Dr. Hoodbhoy drops dark hints about how his refusal to fund $90,000 refrigerators has resulted in his no longer reviewing research proposals. It is a routine matter for reviewers to reject unreasonable requests submitted by scientists, and Dr. Hoodbhoy`s rejection of such a request was a normal response. The item was thus never funded by the HEC. Dr. Hoodbhoy is here trying too hard for the halo of martyred sainthood. HEC has no control over who is selected by the focal person to review proposals, nor has it created any “black lists.”

If Dr. Hoodbhoy is not being selected to review proposals by the focal point in Physics, that would be the focal point’s decision, not that of HEC. It should further be noted that the focal point for Physics is Professor Dr. Riazuddin, one of 25 Distinguished National Professors in Pakistan, the Director of the National Center for Physics, and according to one internationally accepted method of ranking scholarly achievement (the “Impact Factor Assessment”), having an impact factor nearly eight times as that of Dr. Hoodbhoy.

The same shoddy approach can also be seen in Dr. Hoodbhoy’s discussion of the grant to the Allama Iqbal Open University. He 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 actually states is that, “In our earlier investigations . . . we had found the earlier work of the Nobel Laureate Sir Ropert Robinson and two of his eminent colleagues Sir W. H. Perkins and R.H.F. Manske . . . to be incorrect.” The project abstract clearly states that the initial work was done in 1972 by Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman, that the resultant research did in fact show the work of the Nobel Laureate in Chemistry to have been incorrect, and that 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 it awarded him the UNESCO Science Prize. Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman remains, till date, the only Muslim scientist to have received this honor. It is tempting to believe that that Dr. Hoodbhoy simply misread the project abstract. Unfortunately, it appears more likely that he has deliberately misrepresented its contents.

Dr. Hoodbhoy’s allegations with respect to HEC’s efforts to increase the number of PhDs in Pakistan is one of the few instances in his article where he actually substantiates his allegations with concrete facts. Unfortunately, those facts are all wrong.

Dr. Hoodbhoy specifically alleges that in the Physics department of QAU, as many as 15 PhD students are registered with one supervisor while in the Biology Department at QAU, there are as many as 40 students with one supervisor. The Quaid-e-Azam University 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 any one supervisor is eight.

Furthermore, so far as the Biology department at QAU is concerned, HEC has not approved even a total of 40 PhD fellowships, let alone 40 for one supervisor. Instead, HEC has only approved a total of 20 PhD fellowships at the QAU biology department, which are being supervised by 10 HEC approved supervisors. Similarly, so far as the QAU physics department is concerned, HEC has only approved a total of 33 fellowships which are in turn being supervised by 11 professors. It should also be noted that none of those 33 students are enrolled with Dr. Hoodbhoy. In fact, Dr. Hoodbhoy has not published any work with a Pakistani student for almost a decade now.

It is unfortunate that the HEC’s efforts continue to be greeted with scorn and suspicion. Dr. Hoodbhoy, like many other education reformers in Pakistan, has called for more funding of the sciences on numerous occasions. Now that funding is being provided, it is necessary for Dr. Hoodbhoy to remove the blinkers of the past and give the HEC a fair hearing. For example, Dr. Hoodbhoy says that the PhDs which will be produced locally as a result of the HEC’s efforts will be worthless.

What Dr. Hoodbhoy fails to mention is that the HEC has stipulated that it will not recognize any local 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. In fact, the quality control system that has been introduced includes the introduction of an international subject GRE before a student is allowed to be enrolled into the Ph.D. program and extensive course work both at M. Phil. and PhD levels. Dr. Hoodbhoy is well aware of these steps but has conveniently ignored these, and many other measures, taken by the HEC to raise the quality of higher education in Pakistan.

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

These are the programs that have begun to change the landscape of our universities, uplifting them from their current mediocre status. Professor Hoodbhoy claims that the GRE-type administered by HEC is worthless. But if that is the case, why are professors from Austria, Germany, France and other countries clamoring for these students? Last week alone, 92 students left for France to do post-graduate studies. Till date, foreign supervisors have expressed complete satisfaction with the quality of the students sent to them.

The Higher Education Commission 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 (NAM) adopted by Project for Improvement of Financial Reporting and Auditing (PIFRA).

Already, almost all the financial record of the HEC for the previous financial year has been entered into the computer, and record of every transaction is available at fingertip. The HEC has also implemented a wide-ranging project monitoring system under which every project in every university has been physically visited, and its performance assessed against standard measures.

These reports are subsequently sent to the Finance Division, and the Planning Division. HEC also maintains the most widely accessed web site of any government department in Pakistan in which every single program is listed in detail along with results of all examinations and details regarding the award of research grants. For the record, HEC would welcome any financial or performance audit by any agency. We have nothing to hide.

It must also be realized that the entire amount of Government funds available to nearly sixty public sector universities in Pakistan do not match the funds available to a single reasonable size university in Malaysia. Advanced countries spend an average of about Rs. 6 million per student per year while Pakistan only spends Rs. 35,000 per student per year. Today, out of an eligible pool of more than 20 million people in Pakistan between the ages of 18 – 23, only about 250,000 students are physically studying at universities and degree granting institutions. This is one of the lowest percentages in the world. Is it not time that Pakistan improved this percentage?

Today, as a consequence of the HEC’s efforts and the enhanced funds 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 programs 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.

Some 500 students have been sent abroad for PhD studies, Australia has offered 500 fully paid scholarships to Pakistan and over a billion rupees scholarship program has been initiated for poor and deserving students to study in private and public institutions which were previously beyond their financial means.

Over the last two years, there has been a 44 per cent increase in the number of papers by Pakistani academics appearing in internationally reputed scientific journals. For the first time, Pakistan is making its presence felt in the international academic world. Is this not progress?

To conclude then, Dr. Hoodbhoy’s diatribe against the HEC is completely unfair and unjustified. The HEC is doing its best to reform and serve higher education in Pakistan with both honesty and integrity. Unfortunately, that statement cannot be made with respect to Dr. Hoodbhoy’s efforts.

The writer is Executive Director, Higher Education Commission of Pakistan and this rejoinder has been issued in response to Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy`s article published on July 9, 2005

re:59 ``cutehumna`` (sic),
i am glad to know that ``HEC`` is neither one of your parents` name, but you are a case study of what is wrong with our education system, and please dont take this personally at all. you are somone who is probably at university yet you find it quite difficult to express yourself in the english language. my emphasis on english is because at the university level most of your assignments, research material, and instruction is in the english language. here lies the failure of the HEC, which is to fund PHD`s for people who cannot grasp the course work they are engaging in properly which in turn leads to substandard research and ``work``. as an employer I can safely say that 80% of the masters` level job applicants that i have seen are not even at par with someone who has passed their A-Level exams. Now that in my mind is a problem.

re: 67 ``freesoul``. you are absolutely correct. this is not a popularity contest; it`s about recognizing a problem and then fixing it. as a nation, we pakistanis, go on the defensive anytime anything other than our views are aired. what we should be doing is listening and looking within as to how we can fix our own problems.

Re: # 64

Charlie and rv3

Lets not make this artcile a popularity contest b/w Hoobhoy and Atta. We r not comparing the scientific research or the impact factor of these two gentleman.

Do we all agree, a great PhD might not be a good administrator?

If yes, then everyone has the right to be skeptical of HEC projected and earned achievements.

Re: # 63

cutehumna,

The slogan of ``national hero`` is a dead horse in pakistan. One national hero was gang-raped on TV by no other than the president, who became the witness, prosecution and the judge. I think this Atta sahab will shudder at yours labeling him as nationa hero.

Lets keep human beings as human beings. Lets be very skeptical of ppl in power. Lets watch how the national money is being spent by them.

Re: # 64 I must say, I have to agree with Charlie on his previous reply to you....These facts and figures would never make any sense to a person who is completely oblivious to the costoms and tricks in research work...
There is on hell of a difference between writing a paper and a book!...and pls pls pls, jerk your notion of `writing` a paper as `writing` in the literal sense away...
....and also take a closer look at the two degree, do you find any difference? even an Honorary PhD is different from a regular PhD...Abdus Salam had 20+ of these..
for heavens sake!

A book, a dissertation, or a paper every every 21.3 days???

Sorry Mr. Charlie, I never thought that panwala arithmatic done on the figures quoted from your post would make you so angry. As mentioned in my post, I took the figures from a post, in fact your post [Ref: #36 by Charlie on July 11, 2005 4:48am PT] in which you stated the year in which Dr. Ata did his PhD was 1987: I quote: “ Prof. Atta-ur-Rahman has also been awarded the prestigious degree of Doctor of Science (Sc.D.) by the University of Cambridge in 1987”

Now that you have mentioned in #61 by Charlie on July 14, 2005 3:12am PT
Re: # 60 that “He did his PhD in 1968 from cambridge. 37 years ago”.
Let’s rework the panwala mathematics again.
Don’t be angry; let’s plug in the figures for 37 years.
37 years = 444 months
Author of Books = 63
Research Papers = 479
Phd Dissertations = 56
Editor of Studies in Natural Chemistry: Volumes= 27
Total publications = 625 [Figures taken from Charlie’s post # 36]
Number of publications per month = 625/444= 1.4
Number of days for one publication = 30/1.4 = 21.3 days.

Ahm, it seems your are not getting my point. The new result is not substantially different. He manages to generate a new book, a new paper, and supervises a dissertation every 21.3 days!!!!
Am I missing some thing? Would you like to revise some of your other figures in your post #36?

By the time false objections of Hood Bhoy are revealing. Another example is 14th July statment of ``freesoul``. This is true that hood bhoy has only observed the HEC policies superfacially. He is not a practical person. But, he must think several times to whom he is criticizing. Prof. Atta-ur-Rahman is our national hero and his services are internationally recognized. But this un-lucky nation is thinking wrong about him. That`s pity!!!!!!!!
This is very hard time for our muslims Umha. We must go together and only unity will take us to the way of progress and development. Plz. try to understand this...otherwise every thing will be destroy.