The HEC: turning ‘scholars’ into ‘slaves’

I have been on several foreign scholarships, like the Charles Wallace Visiting Fellowship, a World Bank Graduate scholarship, a DfID scholarship, as well as a scholarship awarded by the East West Centre in Hawaii, among others. However, pursuing a PhD funded by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) turned out to be a nightmare, leading me to feel more like a slave than a scholar. I was first offered a PhD scholarship on merit by the HEC. Later, the HEC failed to pay for my studies, while I was in the middle of pursuing my degree, which caused delays in me receiving my degree while I was also continuously threatened with cancellation of my scholarship. My university, supervisors and guarantor were served notices and sent unnecessary emails, hurting my reputation, while keeping me under constant pressure and mental stress throughout the period of study. Now I am scared that I may end up in a court of law.

This is what the HEC does with a scholar, who is neither a poor performer nor an absconder. Indeed, despite continuous setbacks faced because of the HEC, I am proud to have completed my PhD from England and am now serving Pakistan. But my battle with the HEC continues. There are some serious issues with its foreign scholarship programme, making it an uphill task for scholarship recipients to achieve their goals.

Much has been already written about the miseries of Pakistani students studying abroad on HEC scholarships. Pakistani scholars hardly ever receive their monthly stipends in time, creating huge problems for them. As it is, the HEC offers a much lower stipend than other international scholarship agencies, on which one can barely survive, and that too is paid late. I was receiving a scholarship of £750 per month, whereas students sponsored by other countries are paid a stipend of around £1,000-1,200 per month. On top of this, my first stipend was paid after three months of my arrival in the UK. Needless to say, the HEC must increase this monthly stipend and also ensure timely payment.

Many scholars have also been badly affected by the HEC’s new PhD fieldwork policy. It was shocking to know that after sending scholars abroad, the HEC frequently changes terms and conditions initially agreed between itself and the scholars. The HEC had initially committed financial resources for fieldwork at the rate of £750 per month in the UK for the entire period of study (three years). Just a few months later, it changed the rate of stipend for fieldwork in Pakistan, and started paying Rs13,000 per month only. The HEC modified its policy further by paying in pounds for any fieldwork undertaken in Pakistan for a period of three months only, while for any fieldwork lasting a longer period, scholars were paid in rupees. It is important to understand that scholars in the middle of their PhD study cannot afford such frequent changes in the financial resources provided to them. Students are strictly advised by their universities/supervisors for designing PhD research projects by taking into account the resources available to them. Changing the fieldwork policy in such an unfavourable manner for scholars in their second or third year of PhD studies has severe consequences. Students can neither revive their approved PhD projects by foreign universities, nor leave Pakistan without completing their fieldwork. Most scholarship providers worldwide generally offer additional resources, especially for PhD fieldwork, but in the case of the HEC, it is the opposite. On the basis of this new fieldwork policy, the HEC did not pay me the final-year stipend that I was due to receive. In fact, it is now demanding that I return the stipend paid to me in the second year. Any changes to the fieldwork policy should only apply to prospective scholars, and not to those already studying or having completed their study abroad.

Another issue worth pointing out is that it takes the HEC days, in fact, sometimes weeks and months, to resolve or respond to scholars’ queries. The authoritarian bureaucratic style of this organisation is problematic. It does not even ensure that any important information or change in policy or in the basic terms and conditions of the scholarship is communicated to the scholars in a timely manner. I first got to know of the new fieldwork policy after completing my second year of fieldwork in Pakistan. Moreover, many important policies, like how penalties are imposed in case of minor breaches of agreement, are kept confidential, although such information should be made available on the HEC’s website.

The agreement signed between the HEC and scholars is not scholar-friendly. It seems that its only purpose is to penalise scholars. There remains an assumption that the HEC is always right, and it is always the scholar, who is guilty. The agreement is mute on what happens if the HEC fails to deliver: when it pays scholars late, does not communicate policy changes in a timely manner, changes the mutually agreed-upon resources, and modifies terms and conditions after sending scholars abroad. In fact, the newly drafted agreement available on the HEC’s website for prospective scholars is even worse, stating that its decision “will not be challenged in any court of law or forum”.

My experience with several international scholarship donors suggests that they make every effort to facilitate scholars during their study, and pay special attention to specific circumstances of individual students. Apart from providing financial resources, what is also important is the scholar’s peace of mind and a conducive environment. The HEC needs to treat scholars as its ambassadors and stop penalising them unnecessarily. Otherwise, scholars may find it difficult to play any post-PhD role or feel any pride in representing the HEC.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 22^nd, 2014.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.