by Shiraz Paracha

Pakistan’s armchair pundits and commentators are famous for their knee-jerk reaction to issues that require serious analysis and cool heads. Many analysts speak from top of their heads or talk according to given scripts on TV screens. Such experts prefer to challenge and attack the weak. Education and educationists are, unfortunately, the weakest in Pakistan.

Following the recent release of university rankings by a British company Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), some Pakistani experts are criticizing the Pakistani higher education sector. Newspapers have carried sensational headlines saying Pakistan’s has fallen to number 124 in the list of 140 countries in the QS University Ranking list.

It is true that QS has ranked Pakistan among the lowest in the area of higher education but if the Pakistani media and so-called experts did a little research about the QS University Rankings, they wouldn’t be bashing Pakistani universities and the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan (HEC).

QS started ranking universities only about a decade ago. A few years later Times Higher Education (THE) and QS grouped together and issued world-wide university league tables. However, in 2009 THE parted ways saying it was not satisfied with QS ranking methodology.

One of our challenges is that we tend to accept Western information and data without questioning, particularly if it come from the English speaking world. On the surface Pakistanis criticize the West but in reality they seek Western approval and trust Western system, products and services. Many do not try to understand subtle Western propaganda, diplomacy or marketing techniques.

It is very important to understand that higher education is a lucrative business in the West. Like any other business, this sector, too, does everything to make more profit. Western universities are businesses and thus profit making machines. University rankings are used as PR and marketing tools for promoting a university’s business and prestige. Interestingly, Western rating and ranking agencies show higher education institutions of developing countries in negative or bad light but Western universities thrive and often survive because of students who come from developing countries. These ‘foreign’ students pay very high fees and it is here top ranking Western universities make profit.

The Pakistani higher education sector has weaknesses such as old-fashioned governance system and academic standards that need improvements. Pakistani universities and the Higher Education Commission (HEC) are working together for improving academic standards. Modernization of university governance and oversight mechanisms are also the focus of attention.

I have worked in the area of academic quality in Great Britain and Central Asia. Now I am working in the same field in Pakistan. From my own experience and observations, I can say that under the HEC guidance Pakistani universities are on the path of positive changes and modernization. The HEC has adopted a modern approach and it is applying robust methods for improving academic standards. A few months ago, I was part of an HEC academic review program and was extremely impressed by the HEC team’s professionalism and their determination to implement professional and academic standards at universities.

I work at Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, which the fastest growing university in Pakistan. I believe in terms of growth and modernization, Abdul Wali Khan University is ahead of many foreign universities. We have one of the best faculty in Pakistan. Many of us have obtained our degrees from Western universities. Our leadership is more dynamic than some British universities.

Similarly, a large number of experienced and skilled faculty and administrators work at other Pakistani universities. Hundreds and thousands of Pakistani teachers and administrators have foreign qualifications. Many Pakistani professionals and faculty have worked at foreign universities. They have an excellent understanding of international academic standards. Therefore ranking the Pakistani higher education sector as one of the lowest is wrong. The problem is with the ranking agency, not Pakistani universities or the HEC.

True, the Pakistan’s higher education system is not flawless but improvements are underway. Change is always slow and often it is painful.

Now coming back to the question of the QS University Ranking criteria, prominent education experts believe the QS university ranking methodology is flawed. The QS gives 40 percent weight to academic peer review in ranking universities. This is the most controversial part of the QS evaluation criteria.

Peer review is a subjective matter. People tend to give opinions on the basis of their personal liking and disliking of an institution. Business interests and marketing considerations also play a role in peer review. Often old data is rolled to next years.

QS also uses employer’s feedback as one of the method to assess universities. But QS uses Western tools and yardsticks to measure employability of university graduates around the world. Such systems are well established in the West but not in countries such as Pakistan. Any problem or error in QS data gathering method means Pakistan would not get the mark percentage it should consequently, the Pakistani universities would receive lower rankings.

I am copying below opinions of different international experts on the QS University Rankings.

British Labour Party expert David Blanchflower wrote an article for the New Statesman magazine. In the article entitled “The QS World University Rankings are a load of old baloney”, David said: “The QS is ranking is complete rubbish and nobody should place any credence in it. The results are based on an entirely flawed methodology that underweights the quality of research and overweights fluff… The QS is a flawed index and should be ignored.”

Simon Marginson, professor of higher education at University of Melbourne and a member of the Time Higher Education editorial board, in the article “Improving Latin American universities’ global ranking” for University World News on 10 June 2012, said: “I will not discuss the QS ranking because the methodology is not sufficiently robust to provide data valid as social science.

In an article titled The Globalisation of College and University Rankings and appearing in the January/February 2012 issue of Change magazine, Philip Altbach, professor of higher education at Boston College and also a member of the Time Higher Education editorial board, said: “The QS World University Rankings are the most problematical. From the beginning, the QS has relied on reputation indicators for half of its analysis … it probably accounts for the significant variability in the QS rankings over the years. In addition, QS queries employers, introducing even more variability and unreliability into the mix. Whether the QS rankings should be taken seriously by the higher education community is questionable.”

The number of international staff and students has 10 percent weight in the QS ranking criteria. Pakistani universities have the capacity and facilities to host international students but due to security concerns the number of international staff and student is low at Pakistani universities. Western media and politicians portray Pakistan as hub of terrorism and discourage their citizens from traveling to Pakistan. In these circumstances Pakistani universities can’t compete against international universities.

In fact, QS ranking are unreliable and do not necessarily reflect the true standards of education in a country. In other words, QS university rankings show how some people perceive higher education in a country. At the same, developing such a perception is not a simple process and is influenced by several factors, some of which could be deceptive and misleading.

The people or ‘experts,’ who negatively perceive the condition of a country may not have access to accurate information or may be simply biased towards that country due to political or cultural reasons. The media, too, plays a key role in developing such a negative public perception about a country and its people and institutions.