Social knowledge is relevant only if it relates to the society where it is used or generated. Pakistan’s social paradox can be resolved if social values and through them the rationale of education are changed. Unless we can determine the specific utility of the subjects we teach and identify the rationale for the course-content the question of motivation does not arise. We must be able to tell students what they can do with the subjects we teach before they decide whether they want to study them and then decide to what use they can be put. Each student will have a different idea of what use to make of a particular subject. Those who want to join the civil service for example, may want power and prestige that comes with the job, or a mercenary or altruistic motive to guard communal or national interests.
In the current world of mass production only a few things can be manufactured for use by individuals or distinct requirements; education is no exception. However, some custom-made education is needed for unique communal/social needs. Mass produced education must cater to social needs of a large workforce such as technicians, engineers or doctors. Einstein(s) cannot be produced in bulk; the world will probably not have use for more than one Leonardo de Vinci or Ibn-i-Sina nor would we know where they fit in with the modern world. While a score of history teachers may be required annually perhaps no more than one Ibn-i-Khaladun is required in one age, if that often. The process of history dictates the need for new kinds of extraordinary people at various levels in every era.
In pre-modern times this was a function performed by society and market forces. Modern governance has assumed planning of such social activities as a function of state but tends to mismanage it. Inadequate management is worse than instinctive responses and natural and ecological adjustment in human society. The primary concern of education planning must be to guide mass produced students and understand how custom-made intellectuals can be motivated. Each subject must be analyzed to determine the social functions that it is capable of performing. Then we must determine which of these functions we wish it to perform and how many people are required, say annually, for performance of each task. We may then see which task requires training on an individual basis (the specific nature of tasks and unique qualities of individuals under consideration) and which task requires mass produced workers. The relative importance attached to each function will vary over time; at one stage we may need more custom-made legal or political minds, at another we may want a large supply of custom-built physicists or chemists.
The structure of our education system lacks the ability to generate Motivation in teachers and students. Because most of us are unaware of the rationale behind it, we are convinced that any attempt to change the system will be futile. Unless we realize that there is a lack of cultural context in the existing structure, we will continue to rely on trial and error to find a suitable framework for our education system. A novice teacher as well as a veteran student has to generate motivation on his or her own, individually, and ab-initio. Many a potential intellectual has blundered about in our education institutions pursuing an elusive motivation. Thus a vacuum of commitment exists at the social level and is transmitted through intellectuals to students and regenerated in society there from.
The most potent Motivation for enrolment in Pakistani educational institutions is the view that a degree certifies a person as cultured and is a passport for white-collar jobs.
The “degree” in Social Sciences, euphemistically termed education, is often acquired as an ornament with no intrinsic value. The only value degrees have is that of opening job opportunities; a job in a bank requires the hall-mark of the economist, even if there is no aspect of practical banking in the knowledge imparted. The problem becomes acute when a degree [such as history] doesn’t increase employment prospects. It then only attract the idle and rich, or aspirants to white collar jobs which require no specialized knowledge.
For an employer, the degree denotes is a benchmark imposed by the state and must only be observed if enforced by a regulatory authority. Employers need three distinct qualities: competence/ability; willingness to work when required/as instructed; and trustworthiness.
Pakistani employers generally need a reliable guarantor of honesty for their employees. Often the same person also certifies that the person is a willing and intelligent worker.
If competence, skill or knowledge is lacking, the employer assesses if the employee can learn by training on the job. Employers may accept credentials for verifying competence but will often reassess employees on performance; giving greater importance to loyalty or willingness to learn-work than to skills. A competent but unwilling or disloyal worker is a liability not an asset, so a degree is the least important consideration. Formal education is liable to lose its relevance and degrees their worth if corrective measures are not taken. To coin a metaphor: if degrees are devalued education will experience inflation.
The primary function of social knowledge [designated as Social Sciences, Humanities or Arts] is to equip a society, community or nation with ideas and motivation for expression of its physical, emotional, intellectual or spiritual genius. Pakistan’s academic community currently relies on knowledge acquired from the West. It has surrendered its functions as arbiter of social needs; referee of national aspirations; and guardian of cultural heritage.
Moral high-ground is the most consistent source of motivation because it feeds on itself, if this is not available, a sense of importance or pride can ensure commitment. The effort needed to retain moral high-ground requires too much self-discipline for most people but a sense of pride may be generated through social recognition or cultural value structures.
Unfortunately, among Pakistani academia the lowest value is attached to understanding the working of our society. Instead, we assume that slogans of modernization, like health, education, and sanitation can provide a panacea for our national uplift. Perhaps we should seek local examples like Sialkot for guidance; which is an economic wonderland without adequate facilities of education, health and sanitation. A town on a volatile boarder, away from lines of communication, it rivals two gigantic industrial cities in close proximity?
This is only one of many questions that can be raised regarding our economic, political or social performance in various localities and our overall achievements as a nation. Having inherited a handful of industries and an inadequate network of single roads; and despite a series of recent setbacks, Pakistan still has a hundred industrial units for each one that it inherited. In comparison, India has only ten for the each one that it started with. A visitor to a Bazar in Pakistan will be struck with the variety of stuffs and the decoration of shops in comparison with our neighbor who started with a ‘great business tradition’ going back for centuries. And despite the litter in the market, it does not smell as bad as the country we most like to compare with for our political and economic performance.
It has often fascinated me that whenever I present such a comparison with India, Europe, America or Britain, a social scientist, a modernist member of bureaucracy or civil society retorts with either a counter claim of their achievement in comparison with us or of some other area where they can identify some failing of our state, society and nation. Certainly we have many failing; and of course I am grateful to each person who is irritated by them because they are the ones who can do something to remove the flaw. The problem is that those who identify the flaws do not have any solution except to tout modernism.