Dr. Atique Ur Rehman

Section One — The Diagnosis: A System Without Purpose

Pakistan’s education system faces multiple serious challenges simultaneously — inadequate funding, crumbling infrastructure, a damaging language divide, under trained teachers and a research culture that produces credentials without knowledge.

These are real and documented problems.

But underneath all of them lies a more fundamental condition that makes each of these problems harder to solve and that persists even where funding and infrastructure are adequate.

The system does not know what human being it is trying to produce.

This is not a harsh judgment. It is an observation that any teacher, academic, employer or state functionary who has worked honestly within the system will recognise. The system moves children through classrooms, examinations and degree programmes without a coherent answer to the most basic question any education system must answer:

What should this person be able to think, do and contribute when they leave?

The Colonial Root

This purposelessness did not emerge randomly. It has a specific historical origin.

Pakistan inherited in 1947 an educational architecture designed not to develop human beings but to produce administrative functionaries for a colonial state. The British system in the subcontinent was explicitly designed to create a class capable of processing paperwork, following instructions and managing routine administration — not thinking independently, not questioning authority, not creating or innovating.

That system rewarded memorization over reasoning. Compliance over curiosity. Reproduction of established knowledge over generation of new knowledge.

Nearly eight decades after independence Pakistan has never fundamentally redesigned this inherited architecture. The buildings changed ownership. The curriculum gained new content. But the underlying purposelessness remained intact. Each generation of Pakistani educators was itself educated within this system. They taught what they were taught. In the way they were taught. The colonial design reproduced itself through every generation without requiring anyone to consciously choose it.

This is not a moral failure of individuals. It is a structural inheritance that was never honestly examined or deliberately replaced.

What Purposelessness Looks Like In Practice

A student passes twelve years of schooling and cannot construct a simple logical argument. A university graduate holds a degree in economics and cannot explain why inflation affects his family’s grocery bill. An engineering graduate cannot diagnose a basic mechanical problem without a textbook. A teacher teaches a subject she does not understand to students she does not know in a language neither of them thinks in.

These are not failures of individual intelligence. Pakistani children are not less capable than children anywhere else. The HEC repository containing over 21,000 PhD dissertations — largely unread and unutilised — demonstrates that the problem is not human capability. That repository represents enormous intellectual effort by Pakistani researchers. The fact that it sits largely unused is not a failure of the people who produced it. It is a failure of a system that trained them to produce research for credential purposes rather than to answer questions that matter.

The graduate emerges credentialed but not educated. Examined but not developed. Certified but not capable.

Why Purposelessness Persists

Pakistan’s education simultaneously serves several competing purposes — none clearly stated, none honestly pursued:

• A social credential system — the degree signals family status and employment eligibility regardless of what was actually learned.
• A political patronage system — teacher appointments, school construction contracts and textbook procurement distribute political benefit to those who control them.
• A narrative transmission system — curriculum as vehicle for ideological content rather than cognitive development.
• An international donor appeasement system — literacy statistics and policy documents produced to satisfy aid conditionalities rather than genuine development goals.

With so many competing masters the system serves none of them effectively. And the one purpose it should serve above all — the genuine cognitive and human development of the child sitting in the classroom — is the purpose nobody is specifically accountable for delivering.

The Execution Deficit

Pakistan does not lack education policies. It has produced national education policies, curriculum reform frameworks, HEC strategies and provincial education plans repeatedly across decades.

The problem is not policy. It is the will and capacity to implement policy. And that implementation failure is not random. It is structural. Every genuine education reform threatens specific interests — patronage networks, ideological gatekeepers, elite privilege embedded in the current system’s dysfunction.

This paper therefore does not propose a comprehensive education reform. It proposes the minimum viable cognitive intervention — the smallest honest change that begins building the human capacity that all other reforms depend on — and addresses directly what institutional conditions must exist for even this minimum intervention to survive.

Section Two — The Minimum Viable Solution: Two Variables

Where To Begin

Pakistan’s education crisis is deep and wide. A complete solution requires reforming teacher training, resolving the language medium question, rebuilding university research culture, connecting education to market demand and rebuilding physical infrastructure in remote areas.

All of this is necessary. None of it is the starting point.

Because all of it depends on one prior condition that currently does not exist at sufficient scale.

A mind capable of genuine thinking.

This paper therefore proposes two variables only — not because other things do not matter but because these two are foundational. Everything else becomes workable once these exist. Nothing else works properly without them.

Variable One — Thinking Over Memorization

What The Current System Actually Does

Pakistan’s examination system is almost entirely a measurement of memory. What did the teacher say. What does the textbook state. What answer does the examiner expect.

The student who memorizes most accurately receives the highest reward. Over twelve years of consistent reinforcement this produces a specific kind of mind — one that is practiced at receiving and reproducing information and unpracticed at questioning, connecting or applying it.

The AI Reality

In 2026 the argument for thinking over memorization is no longer purely pedagogical. It is practical and urgent.

Artificial intelligence already answers factual questions faster and more accurately than any memorizing student. A student who has spent twelve years perfecting memorization has spent twelve years perfecting a skill that is already being made redundant.

What AI cannot reliably replicate is genuine thinking — connecting knowledge to unfamiliar real situations, generating truly original approaches, navigating complexity that requires judgment built from lived experience. These capacities are now the only educational outputs with genuine and durable value.

The Reading Foundation

Thinking capacity is not built in classrooms alone. It is sustained and deepened through reading — serious, daily, cumulative engagement with ideas beyond the immediate curriculum.

Societies with genuine thinking cultures are reading cultures. The teacher who does not read cannot model intellectual curiosity for students. The institution that does not expect, measure or reward reading among its faculty and researchers should not be surprised when it produces no genuine knowledge.

Reading is not an exceptional personal discipline. It is the minimum daily practice of a thinking professional. Building it as an institutional expectation — not just an individual virtue — is part of what this variable requires.

What Thinking Education Means In Practice

Thinking education means a student habitually does five things:

• Asks why — not just what is the answer but why is this the answer and under what conditions might it change.
• Connects — links new knowledge to existing understanding and to observable reality outside the classroom.
• Questions — examines assumptions including those embedded in the textbook and the examination question itself.
• Tolerates uncertainty — treats not yet knowing as the beginning of inquiry rather than a failure to be hidden.
• Applies — takes knowledge into unfamiliar situations and attempts to use it where it was not explicitly taught to apply.

Variable Two — How Will This Help Others

The second variable is deliberately framed as a positive generative question rather than a cautionary one.

Not — what harm might this cause — but — how will this help others.

The distinction is not cosmetic. A cautionary frame produces hesitation and defence. A generative frame produces engagement and contribution. The cognitive habit being built is one of active consideration of others — not passive avoidance of harm.

This variable is not a subject. It is a lens applied to every subject from the earliest years:

• A mathematics lesson on calculation includes — how does accurate accounting help the people who depend on these numbers.
• A science lesson on water includes — how does understanding this resource help the community that depends on it.
• A history lesson includes — how did the decisions of this period help or fail the people who lived through it.
• A language lesson includes — how does clear honest expression help the person receiving this communication.

Over twelve years of asking this question across every subject it becomes a cognitive habit — an internalized way of engaging with knowledge that connects learning to living and individual capacity to collective benefit.

Why These Two Variables Together

Thinking capacity without consideration of others produces capable people who use that capacity entirely for personal advancement. Consideration of others without thinking capacity produces genuine concern without the analytical tools to act on it effectively.

Together they produce the cognitive profile Pakistan’s institutions most need — a person who thinks clearly enough to understand complex reality and considers others genuinely enough to want to contribute to improving it.

Section Three — Implementation: Roadmap, Responsibility and Resources

The Complacency Problem

Every education reform Pakistan has attempted has encountered the same primary obstacle before it encountered funding constraints, infrastructure gaps or curriculum resistance.

Complacency.

Not the complacency of indifference but the complacency of an institutional environment that has never consistently rewarded genuine effort or penalised genuine failure. When a teacher who performs exceptionally and a teacher who performs minimally receive identical treatment — exceptional performance becomes irrational. When success and failure are evaluated by the same absent accountability mechanism — they become equivalent.

Complacency is not a character flaw to be addressed through motivation. It is a rational institutional behaviour to be addressed through accountability architecture.

What Generic Advice Cannot Do

Most education policy documents end with recommendations that tell institutions what destination to reach without specifying the vehicle, the fuel, the driver or the road. Generic advice produces one reliable outcome — another document on a shelf alongside the previous documents that contained the same generic advice.

This section therefore makes only specific recommendations — each with a named institutional responsibility, a realistic timeline, a resource requirement and a measurable indicator.

The Minimum Viable Entry Point

Given Pakistan’s specific constraints a comprehensive simultaneous reform is not realistic. What is realistic is a minimum viable entry point — small enough to be genuinely implementable, significant enough to demonstrate results, visible enough to build the constituency for expansion.

Pakistan’s minimum viable entry point is the teacher.

Because every other reform reaches the child only through this single human filter. A changed curriculum delivered by an unchanged teacher produces unchanged outcomes. The teacher is not just the delivery mechanism. The teacher is the environment in which a young mind either develops the capacity to think and consider others — or does not.

The Roadmap

Phase One — Years One and Two: Build the Nucleus

What: Select one hundred teachers across five districts — representing urban, semi-urban and rural contexts — for a genuine twelve month transformation programme.

Selection: Through open competitive examination assessing reasoning capacity and communication ability — not subject knowledge alone. Merit only. Published criteria, published results, published appointments.

Incentive: Those selected receive a significantly enhanced pay scale — sufficient to make this the most financially attractive teaching appointment in the government system. This is not generosity. It is honest economics.

Who: Federal Ministry of Education in partnership with credible non-government organisations with demonstrated track records in genuine educational transformation.

Resource Requirement: Fifty to seventy million rupees for the first cohort — achievable within current allocations if political will to prioritise exists.

Measured By: Observable classroom behaviour change — teachers asking different questions, students demonstrating reasoning rather than reproduction, reading habits developing among faculty. Independent evaluation. Published results.

Phase Two — Years Three and Four: Demonstrate and Document

What: Rigorous independent documentation of what changed and what did not. Simultaneously begin integrating the two variables into teacher education programmes at five selected universities — as a lens applied across existing curriculum, not as additional subjects.

Who: HEC takes responsibility for university integration with specific vice chancellors held to named accountability. Independent research organisations conduct documentation.

Resource Requirement: Documentation and research — thirty million rupees. University integration — forty million rupees across five institutions.

Phase Three — Years Five through Ten: Institutionalise and Expand

What: Scale what worked honestly. Integrate the two variables into national curriculum framework as non-negotiable foundational requirements. Revise teacher appointment criteria to include demonstrated thinking capacity and genuine reading habit.

Who: This phase requires genuine political will at federal and provincial level. State functionaries reading this document are the people who must decide whether Phase Three happens.

Measured By: Graduate employment in roles requiring genuine thinking capacity. Employer satisfaction surveys. Reduction in gap between university output and market demand. International recognition of Pakistani research in genuine journals.

Teacher Remuneration — A Structural Requirement

Teachers from Class One through college level represent the largest single point of contact between the state and the next generation of Pakistani citizens. They are simultaneously the most important professionals in the national development enterprise and among the most financially neglected.

This contradiction is not sustainable. It produces exactly what it should logically produce — the most capable graduates avoiding teaching, the least financially mobile accepting it by necessity, and a profession whose social status reflects its financial treatment.

Progressive revision of teacher pay scales from primary through college level — tied to demonstrated performance rather than seniority alone — is not a luxury of a wealthier future Pakistan. It is a prerequisite for the Pakistan this paper is trying to help build.

Section Four — The Institutional Conditions For Survival

The Honest Problem

A well designed intervention entering a hostile institutional environment will not survive. Pakistan’s history of education reform is largely a history of reasonable interventions absorbed and neutralised by institutional environments that were never addressed.

Four Resistances To Address

Resistance One — Examination System Misalignment

If the national examination system continues measuring memorization while classrooms attempt to build thinking — the examination wins every time. Even introducing one section in existing examinations that rewards reasoning over reproduction begins aligning incentives with the intervention.

Resistance Two — Institutional Complacency

Each institution participating in the programme must have a named individual accountable for implementation outcomes. Not a committee. Not a department. A named person whose professional evaluation includes measurable progress on the two variables.

Resistance Three — Interference In Selection

The examination and selection process must be administered by an independent body with published criteria, published results and published appointments. Transparency is the structural defence against patronage pressure. What is visible is harder to compromise than what is hidden.

Resistance Four — Short Term Political Cycle

Genuine education reform produces results over ten to fifteen years. This tension cannot be fully resolved but can be partially managed by identifying and publicising early indicators that are honest proxies for longer term change — teacher behaviour in classrooms, student engagement patterns, reading culture development.

Four Minimum Institutional Conditions

• Protected budget allocation — ring fenced from fiscal crisis cuts with a specific budget line and legislative visibility.
• Independent evaluation — results evaluated by genuinely independent bodies with published findings.
• Cross party political agreement — sufficient consensus that the programme’s basic architecture survives electoral cycles.
• Civil society visibility — independent media and civil society able to observe, report and publicly evaluate programme implementation.

Conclusion — What This Paper Honestly Claims And Does Not Claim

This paper makes a modest and specific claim.

Not that the two variables proposed will transform Pakistan’s education system. Not that implementation will be straightforward. Not that the obstacles identified are easily overcome.

If Pakistan can implement genuinely — in even a small number of institutions, with even a modest cohort of properly selected and fairly compensated teachers — a shift from memorization to thinking and from self-focused to other-considering cognition — it will have created observable proof that different is possible within Pakistan’s own context with Pakistan’s own people.

That proof matters more than its initial scale suggests.

Because Pakistan’s education crisis is sustained partly by a quiet institutional fatalism — a belief among many who work within the system that nothing genuinely different is achievable here. Demonstrated proof — however small initially — that thinking education produces measurably different human outcomes in Pakistani classrooms with Pakistani teachers and Pakistani children breaks that fatalism more effectively than any policy document can.

This is not a rapid transformation. It is a generational project. The children who experience genuinely thinking education in Phase One will be adults contributing to Pakistani institutions in Phase Three. Their contribution will be the document’s most honest measure of success.

Pakistan does not need another education policy.

It needs one honest beginning — small enough to be genuine, visible enough to be seen, successful enough to be undeniable.

The Final Honest Statement

Teachers are the foundation of everything this paper argues for. They are also the most financially neglected professionals in Pakistan’s public service.

A state that asks its teachers to build thinking citizens while paying them wages that do not cover dignified living has not yet decided to be serious about education.

The first evidence that this paper’s proposals are being genuinely rather than performatively adopted will not be a new policy announcement.

It will be a pay raise for the teacher standing in a government classroom tomorrow morning.

Dr. Atique Ur Rehman

PhD International Relations, Quaid-i-Azam University

CEO, Digital and AI Solutions (DAIS)

daisolutions.org  |  nuktaourcheeni.com  |  atiquesheikh2000@gmail.com

The Nation  |  Daily Times