Undermining academia

Listen to article

The Sindh government's recent move to broaden the eligibility criteria for the appointment of vice chancellors at public universities has become a cause for concern among the academic community and stakeholders in higher education. Allowing non-academic professionals, bureaucrats and retired executives to assume what should be the most academically driven positions within our universities undermines the very essence of higher education and its commitment to research and scholarship.

While the government tries to frame the backlash as meritless, arguing that VCs are largely administrative positions, the evidence is overwhelming to the contrary. VCs are not only the administrative heads of universities, but are also pivotal in shaping academic policies and fostering an environment conducive to learning and research. They chair critical academic bodies that influence curriculum development, research agendas and the overall direction of academic institutions. Entrusting this role to individuals without a robust academic background compromises the integrity of these functions.

The Sindh government's argument that the change is aimed at expanding the pool of candidates and improving governance within institutions is heavily flawed. Education is a specialised field, as are many aspects of the bureaucracy. Just as an award-winning physicist would be out of their depth running the interior ministry, we cannot have an unqualified federal secretary, no matter how competent in their own field, imposed on academia. Candidates who lack experience in academia may inadvertently overlook the unique challenges that universities face, prioritising bureaucratic efficiency over educational excellence.

If the goal actually is only improving governance, rather than appointing loyalists, the government could just as easily improve compensation and other terms of employment to attract better-qualified prospects, instead of planting outsiders whose credentials will never live up to the job.