- Joined
- Oct 13, 2015
- Messages
- 7,494
- Likes
- 17,198
Bhai married nahin hu Etna experience nahin ha abhi.
Pakistani Textbooks and Edu Sys: What went wrong with them?
- Thread starter Indx TechStyle
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2015
- Messages
- 7,950
- Likes
- 7,908
Lmfao man...you nailed him you nailed bloody whole pakistan....Dont be so brutal on this haramkhor porki who comes here to get info on his own country which his govt fails to share. HahahaFactually incorrect, be it social indicators to other statistics, Indians are far more innovative people than Pakistanis, be it at their home overseas.
In fact, Indians are okay at their place in per capita terms, its Pakistan which is brutally incompetent.
Blame international organizations publishing these stats not me.
Who told you Tamil Nadu is more developed? Ya, it may be ahead of Pakistan for sure but again states like UP & Bihar have higher literacy rate than Pakistani national average!
HDI of Chhattisgarh & Orissa possibly least developed states in India today is in order of 0.55. Pakistan lags at 0.538.
Good Luck Pakistan catching up with poorest States in India who are actually growing faster.
Now, let me tell you a secret;
Indian Stats are based on data collected from every Indian, it's way easier in India to get B.P.L. (below poverty line) Card for free stuff from government. Which people you actually call poor are supplied everything by government, even directly at their homes at such places!
Pakistan? It count it's people. Dependent on foreign organizations which do surveys (for only a section of population).
Even then, 22% of your documented people don't have enough food to eat (you call them above poverty line), call India poor,
45.5% urbans of them live in slums, you call them above poverty line & call India Poor,
You don't know about even lifestyle of your 70 million people, no shame in calling India (with complete data) a poor country based on your surveys.
Your life span is shorter than them, you are nowhere near in holding intellectual properties, you aren't strategically autonomous, still I can't understand why do these guys troll?
For surveys for "estimated stats"?
You know there is a difference between Winners & Whinners. You are the latter.
Seriously,
What if I tell you belong to same race as that of Indians so same genes and same penal size?
What if I tell you aren't in news because you don't even use them? A country with failed family planning program will troll India whose fertility rate is even lower than that of developed countries?
What if I tell you that your Chinese & East Asian friends have even smaller penal size than Indians?
Yes, they do have even smaller but Indians never fell to this low that troll Chinese for penal size!
It's genes issue. Otherwise, no one wants to be poor Africa just because they "top" the world in "d!ck measuring"?
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,277
- Likes
- 56,182
Well well, here is the real writer of @Zarvan 's article.
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...efense-news-babbling-vis-a-vis-ababeel.78470/
Its relevant here because it shows Pakistani level of education.
http://www.lhrtimes.com/2017/02/09/...e-pakistans-tectonic-leap-missile-technology/
24 years old paki kid new into journalism, I won't blame her,
I used to wonder sometimes that how Pakistani Army handles the Education System, this girl gave me an idea.
Apna @Zarvan
(Sale usey copyright toh pay kar deta, royegi bechari
)You know sometimes on internet, tracking trolling Pakistani girls and I used to.think that those are Pakistani boys hiding behind girls ID but here I did realize that there is no shortage of Pakistani fangirls as well as fanboys there.
She allowed Zarvan to copy paste her article here. I'm allowing you guys to copy paste my article there cuz I won't.
This article received two positive ratings which clearly shows to which lows that forum has fallen.
I am already aware of level of knowledge of their Think Tanks in past who used to fit turbofan engines inside space rockets.
And given what would they have become after reading this, I don't even wanna troll them.
Here is my response,
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...g-vis-a-vis-ababeel.78470/page-2#post-1270909
Nanhe mujahid sale
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 2,076
- Likes
- 4,006
Prabhu under which section is this treasure of a threadWell well, here is the real writer of @Zarvan 's article.
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...efense-news-babbling-vis-a-vis-ababeel.78470/
Its relevant here because it shows Pakistani level of education.
View attachment 14114Original Source
http://www.lhrtimes.com/2017/02/09/...e-pakistans-tectonic-leap-missile-technology/
24 years old paki kid new into journalism, I won't blame her,
I used to wonder sometimes that how Pakistani Army handles the Education System, this girl gave me an idea.
View attachment 14115
Apna @Zarvan
View attachment 14116
(Sale usey copyright toh pay kar deta, royegi bechari
View attachment 14117
You know sometimes on internet, tracking trolling Pakistani girls and I used to.think that those are Pakistani boys hiding behind girls ID but here I did realize that there is no shortage of Pakistani fangirls as well as fanboys there.
She allowed Zarvan to copy paste her article here. I'm allowing you guys to copy paste my article there cuz I won't.
This article received two positive ratings which clearly shows to which lows that forum has fallen.
I am already aware of level of knowledge of their Think Tanks in past who used to fit turbofan engines inside space rockets.
And given what would they have become after reading this, I don't even wanna troll them.
Here is my response,
http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...g-vis-a-vis-ababeel.78470/page-2#post-1270909
Nanhe mujahid sale
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,277
- Likes
- 56,182
For DFI, I provided direct link.
For PDF, use search button.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 2,076
- Likes
- 4,006
I did go to that cesspit called PDF but i just codnt take it
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,277
- Likes
- 56,182
Enjoy
https://**********/pdf/threads/response-to-indian-defense-news-babbling-vis-a-vis-ababeel.477653/
I hope you know that what you'll have to place inside censored words.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2016
- Messages
- 2,076
- Likes
- 4,006
I did go to that cesspit called PDF but i just codnt take it
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,277
- Likes
- 56,182
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,277
- Likes
- 56,182
History in service
Illustration by Abro
In August 1947 when Pakistan came into being, its founders almost immediately rushed to describe the new country as an entity which was different from India and had its own history dating back to antiquity.
Pakistan was the result of a political movement by Jinnah’s All India Muslim League (AIML) that had lobbied for a separate Muslim-majority country. The Pakistani sociologist (late) Hamza Alavi argued that the Hindu-Muslim political tensions which preceded the creation of Pakistan were the outcome of economic competition between Hindu and Muslim “salaried classes” in undivided India.
In fact, in his 1946 book Modern Islam in India: A Social Analysis, well-known British historian W.C. Smith wrote that even though many members of the Muslim middle-classes in India had done well to become bureaucrats, judges, lawyers, traders and teachers as a community, they had struggled to expand their economic status due to what they believed were hindrances being created by the Hindu majority.
In a 1987 essay, Alavi further elaborated his thesis by suggesting that the Muslim salaried classes believed that the overwhelming competition posed by the Hindu salaried classes would evaporate once the AIML was able to carve out a Muslim-majority country in the region.
Indeed, the overriding reasons for Pakistan’s creation were economic and political. But the new state found it necessary to create what Ali Usman Qasmi, in a recent essay for Modern Asian Studies, calls a “master narrative”. This narrative was to explain and justify Pakistan’s creation through an overarching account which was more “historic” in nature.
This was easier said than done. Pakistan shares centuries-old histories with aregion Ancient India that has become the republic of India. What’s more, a good part of this history was dominated by ancient Hindu and Buddhist rulers. Also, if the region that had become India needed to be completely divorced from Pakistan’s historical narrative, then this also meant divorcing the long Muslim rule whose epicentre was Delhi.
The challenge to carefully navigate around such complexities and yet be able to weave together a historical narrative inspired by a new country’s distinct nationalist impulses was taken by historian I. H. Qureshi. Usmani writes that Qureshi was not shy about using history for the purpose of nation-building.
In his 1962 book The Muslim Community of Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent, Qureshi — perturbed that the Pakistani nationalist narrative had not been able to detach itself from the histories that the country as a region shared with India — claimed that the Muslims of India were always outsiders. He wrote that they had their own cultures and traditions and happened to rule India without being entirely absorbed by the region’s ancient social and religious currents. Therefore, according to Qureshi, the Muslims of the region were “Muslims in India” and not “Indian Muslims.”
Usmani writes that Qureshi saw the entire history of Muslims in India as a gradual process towards the creation of Pakistan. Qureshi dialed up the notion that the region’s Muslims insisted on exhibiting their separateness. He was thus critical of the inclusive policies of the third Mughal emperor, Akbar. He was also not very forgiving of the role the Sufi saints played during Muslim rule in India because theirs was not a theological creed and was thus, according to Qureshi, absorbed by the region’s non-Muslim currents.
Originally published in 1967, A Short History of Pakistan — a compilation of essays edited by Qureshi — attempted a clean break from shared histories by concentrating on the ancient histories of only those regions that had become Pakistan. This did not mean not discussing non-Muslim pasts but just non-Muslim pasts which only existed in West and East Pakistan.
In this respect, things became even more complex when, in 1971, East Pakistan broke away to become Bangladesh. Qureshi responded by lamenting that Pakistan’s “historical raison d’etre” had not been adequately communicated in school textbooks. He now offered a narrative which transcended geography. In a lecture, the historian said that countries come and go, but religions, such as Islam, stay. Thus, from 1971 onward, not only did the “ideology of Pakistan” became a compulsory subject, it was during this period that Pakistan began being referred to as a “bastion of Islam.”
When Qureshi’s metanarrative became the basis of textbooks in the 1970s and 1980s, K.K. Aziz, a former admirer and collaborator of Qureshi decided to systematically dismantle his mentor’s work. Like Qureshi, Aziz too had been a passionate Pakistani nationalist. But in the mid-1980s, distraught by the “faulty” contents of textbooks, Aziz bemoaned that Qureshi, in his enthusiasm to use history to build a nationalist ideology, had corrupted the whole process of history writing in Pakistan.
Aziz had left the country in 1978, a year after Gen Zia’s reactionary military coup. He returned in 1985 and published Murder of History in which he painstakingly pointed out the many historical inaccuracies present in textbooks being taught to students. A 2009 editorial in Daily Times says that this book had come about after Aziz “felt his growing alienation with the Pakistan nationalist narrative” — a narrative he confessed he had helped Qureshi build.
Aziz’s work flung open the opportunity for many other scholars and historians to emerge and challenge the accuracy of what was being taught as historical fact.
In Textbooks, Nationalism and History Writing, A. Muhammad Tariq writes that, by the late 1970s and 1980s, “The historical legacy of the pre-Muslim period was disowned and the physical geography of the region became irrelevant. Pakistan was no longer to seek its historical roots and traditions in the subcontinent.”
(I don't think that basis of creation of pakistan was history either, it was pure Islam which failed in 1971.:biggrin2
It was as if, after the 1971 East Pakistan debacle, the state had become afraid of the history that it shared with arch-enemy India. Even though this process of divorcing oneself from a shared history of a hated foe has now become prominent in BJP-ruled India as well, many post-Aziz revisionist historians in Pakistan have warned that, instead of making a nation feel secure, tinkering with history only makes it myopic, rootless and distrustful — the opposite of everything progressive.
Illustration by Abro
In August 1947 when Pakistan came into being, its founders almost immediately rushed to describe the new country as an entity which was different from India and had its own history dating back to antiquity.
Pakistan was the result of a political movement by Jinnah’s All India Muslim League (AIML) that had lobbied for a separate Muslim-majority country. The Pakistani sociologist (late) Hamza Alavi argued that the Hindu-Muslim political tensions which preceded the creation of Pakistan were the outcome of economic competition between Hindu and Muslim “salaried classes” in undivided India.
In fact, in his 1946 book Modern Islam in India: A Social Analysis, well-known British historian W.C. Smith wrote that even though many members of the Muslim middle-classes in India had done well to become bureaucrats, judges, lawyers, traders and teachers as a community, they had struggled to expand their economic status due to what they believed were hindrances being created by the Hindu majority.
Doctoring history does not help to build nations but only makes it myopic and distrustful
In a 1987 essay, Alavi further elaborated his thesis by suggesting that the Muslim salaried classes believed that the overwhelming competition posed by the Hindu salaried classes would evaporate once the AIML was able to carve out a Muslim-majority country in the region.
Indeed, the overriding reasons for Pakistan’s creation were economic and political. But the new state found it necessary to create what Ali Usman Qasmi, in a recent essay for Modern Asian Studies, calls a “master narrative”. This narrative was to explain and justify Pakistan’s creation through an overarching account which was more “historic” in nature.
This was easier said than done. Pakistan shares centuries-old histories with a
that has become the republic of India. What’s more, a good part of this history was dominated by ancient Hindu and Buddhist rulers. Also, if the region that had become India needed to be completely divorced from Pakistan’s historical narrative, then this also meant divorcing the long Muslim rule whose epicentre was Delhi.The challenge to carefully navigate around such complexities and yet be able to weave together a historical narrative inspired by a new country’s distinct nationalist impulses was taken by historian I. H. Qureshi. Usmani writes that Qureshi was not shy about using history for the purpose of nation-building.
In his 1962 book The Muslim Community of Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent, Qureshi — perturbed that the Pakistani nationalist narrative had not been able to detach itself from the histories that the country as a region shared with India — claimed that the Muslims of India were always outsiders. He wrote that they had their own cultures and traditions and happened to rule India without being entirely absorbed by the region’s ancient social and religious currents. Therefore, according to Qureshi, the Muslims of the region were “Muslims in India” and not “Indian Muslims.”
Usmani writes that Qureshi saw the entire history of Muslims in India as a gradual process towards the creation of Pakistan. Qureshi dialed up the notion that the region’s Muslims insisted on exhibiting their separateness. He was thus critical of the inclusive policies of the third Mughal emperor, Akbar. He was also not very forgiving of the role the Sufi saints played during Muslim rule in India because theirs was not a theological creed and was thus, according to Qureshi, absorbed by the region’s non-Muslim currents.
Originally published in 1967, A Short History of Pakistan — a compilation of essays edited by Qureshi — attempted a clean break from shared histories by concentrating on the ancient histories of only those regions that had become Pakistan. This did not mean not discussing non-Muslim pasts but just non-Muslim pasts which only existed in West and East Pakistan.
In this respect, things became even more complex when, in 1971, East Pakistan broke away to become Bangladesh. Qureshi responded by lamenting that Pakistan’s “historical raison d’etre” had not been adequately communicated in school textbooks. He now offered a narrative which transcended geography. In a lecture, the historian said that countries come and go, but religions, such as Islam, stay. Thus, from 1971 onward, not only did the “ideology of Pakistan” became a compulsory subject, it was during this period that Pakistan began being referred to as a “bastion of Islam.”
When Qureshi’s metanarrative became the basis of textbooks in the 1970s and 1980s, K.K. Aziz, a former admirer and collaborator of Qureshi decided to systematically dismantle his mentor’s work. Like Qureshi, Aziz too had been a passionate Pakistani nationalist. But in the mid-1980s, distraught by the “faulty” contents of textbooks, Aziz bemoaned that Qureshi, in his enthusiasm to use history to build a nationalist ideology, had corrupted the whole process of history writing in Pakistan.
Aziz had left the country in 1978, a year after Gen Zia’s reactionary military coup. He returned in 1985 and published Murder of History in which he painstakingly pointed out the many historical inaccuracies present in textbooks being taught to students. A 2009 editorial in Daily Times says that this book had come about after Aziz “felt his growing alienation with the Pakistan nationalist narrative” — a narrative he confessed he had helped Qureshi build.
Aziz’s work flung open the opportunity for many other scholars and historians to emerge and challenge the accuracy of what was being taught as historical fact.
In Textbooks, Nationalism and History Writing, A. Muhammad Tariq writes that, by the late 1970s and 1980s, “The historical legacy of the pre-Muslim period was disowned and the physical geography of the region became irrelevant. Pakistan was no longer to seek its historical roots and traditions in the subcontinent.”
(I don't think that basis of creation of pakistan was history either, it was pure Islam which failed in 1971.:biggrin2
It was as if, after the 1971 East Pakistan debacle, the state had become afraid of the history that it shared with arch-enemy India. Even though this process of divorcing oneself from a shared history of a hated foe has now become prominent in BJP-ruled India as well, many post-Aziz revisionist historians in Pakistan have warned that, instead of making a nation feel secure, tinkering with history only makes it myopic, rootless and distrustful — the opposite of everything progressive.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,277
- Likes
- 56,182
by Dawn
Curricula reform
The writer is a freelance journalist.
WHAT is a Pakistani? Prime Minister Imran Khan stoked this thorny question with his order last week to establish a National Curriculum Council to generate uniform educational standards that will “produce Pakistanis”.
Any effort to improve education should be applauded. Few will deny the need for urgent curriculum reform. The prime minister should also be commended for expanding the discussion beyond access to education to quality of education.
But one must strike a note of caution. What does the ‘production’ of Pakistanis entail, educationally speaking? Previous dictators and governments have used the curriculum as a way to produce Pakistanis defined as pro-Islam and anti-India. Pakistan is divided along ethnic, linguistic, sectarian and social lines, and many of its citizens are marginalised and excluded. Earlier attempts at forging a national identity, imposing a common language, or concocting a shared history have had horrible consequences. Surely, this pattern is not to be replicated?
Education should be framed as a way to empower citizens.
Previous efforts to impose a religio-national identity through education have seen our textbooks littered with conspiracy theories, hateful messages and fabrications. They have contributed to misplaced national paranoia and left a young population without the knowledge and skills to survive in a competitive world. Any meaningful curriculum reform should seek to correct this.
But questions about what should be included in a national curriculum will be divisive and emotive. The state was recently held to ransom by religious right-wing groups who are likely to have strong opinions about what should be taught nationwide. Private schools offering progressive curricula have been subject to threats of violence and social media campaigns questioning their national loyalties. Academics involved in revising textbooks or developing curricula have also faced threats. In this climate, the government cannot enter the thicket of curriculum reform without adequate preparation to ensure that the project will not be hijacked through street agitation or worse.
The government should also avoid the temptation of quick fixes. We have seen these at the provincial level: teach Arabic to counter radicalisation; teach Chinese to increase students’ access to our ally’s knowledge economy. Such interventions that dodge the deep flaws of current curricula only further burden the system.
Academician Madiha Afzal has argued that one reason the 2006 curriculum reform effort failed was the lack of buy-in at all levels, from textbook authors to review committees and politicians. No doubt, the PTI’s first challenge will be securing buy-in for a meaningful reform process. This is tricky. Given how Pakistan is evolving, and that those tasked to produce a reformed curricula are themselves products of the existing system, we are in danger of entering a cycle of regression. The PTI also has to consider which stakeholders it will include in this process (recall that the PTI in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa included seminaries under the education department’s purview).
The way to avoid ideological and pedagogical traps is to focus not on national identity but on creating citizens. Education should be framed as a way to prepare empowered citizens — who demand their rights and resources due from the state, and hold the state accountable — and informed voters. This means a focus on facts, literacy and critical thinking.
Separately, there is danger that a national curriculum would betray the spirit of the 18th Amendment, which devolved education to the provinces. That devolution process acknowledged that national curricula can be coercive and alienating.
But it is difficult to be a purist. There is no intrinsic merit in allowing curriculum content to be dictated by the whims of provincial governments. In recent years, we have seen one province seek to introduce Jinnah’s Aug 11 speech on inclusion and minority rights in textbooks, while another has introduced the concept of jihad. Provinces focused on school enrolment and infrastructure may also lack the resources to ensure the best experts are feeding into the curriculum design process. A scenario in which Pakistanis have different interpretations of key values or events would certainly perpetuate internal strife.
A middle ground may be the best way forward. The national curriculum should guide which subjects are taught, with which methodology. The shift from rote memorisation to critical thinking and problem solving can be facilitated at the national level. Federal bodies can provide a content review function, ensuring that curricula developed by provinces are not inaccurate, radicalising, divisive, etc. But the provinces should have the freedom of input in local language, culture, history and more.
Getting curriculum reform right — or starting off by building consensus on the way forward — could be the PTI’s most transformative intervention. Let’s hope it works.
Curricula reform
The writer is a freelance journalist.
WHAT is a Pakistani? Prime Minister Imran Khan stoked this thorny question with his order last week to establish a National Curriculum Council to generate uniform educational standards that will “produce Pakistanis”.
Any effort to improve education should be applauded. Few will deny the need for urgent curriculum reform. The prime minister should also be commended for expanding the discussion beyond access to education to quality of education.
But one must strike a note of caution. What does the ‘production’ of Pakistanis entail, educationally speaking? Previous dictators and governments have used the curriculum as a way to produce Pakistanis defined as pro-Islam and anti-India. Pakistan is divided along ethnic, linguistic, sectarian and social lines, and many of its citizens are marginalised and excluded. Earlier attempts at forging a national identity, imposing a common language, or concocting a shared history have had horrible consequences. Surely, this pattern is not to be replicated?
Education should be framed as a way to empower citizens.
Previous efforts to impose a religio-national identity through education have seen our textbooks littered with conspiracy theories, hateful messages and fabrications. They have contributed to misplaced national paranoia and left a young population without the knowledge and skills to survive in a competitive world. Any meaningful curriculum reform should seek to correct this.
But questions about what should be included in a national curriculum will be divisive and emotive. The state was recently held to ransom by religious right-wing groups who are likely to have strong opinions about what should be taught nationwide. Private schools offering progressive curricula have been subject to threats of violence and social media campaigns questioning their national loyalties. Academics involved in revising textbooks or developing curricula have also faced threats. In this climate, the government cannot enter the thicket of curriculum reform without adequate preparation to ensure that the project will not be hijacked through street agitation or worse.
The government should also avoid the temptation of quick fixes. We have seen these at the provincial level: teach Arabic to counter radicalisation; teach Chinese to increase students’ access to our ally’s knowledge economy. Such interventions that dodge the deep flaws of current curricula only further burden the system.
Academician Madiha Afzal has argued that one reason the 2006 curriculum reform effort failed was the lack of buy-in at all levels, from textbook authors to review committees and politicians. No doubt, the PTI’s first challenge will be securing buy-in for a meaningful reform process. This is tricky. Given how Pakistan is evolving, and that those tasked to produce a reformed curricula are themselves products of the existing system, we are in danger of entering a cycle of regression. The PTI also has to consider which stakeholders it will include in this process (recall that the PTI in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa included seminaries under the education department’s purview).
The way to avoid ideological and pedagogical traps is to focus not on national identity but on creating citizens. Education should be framed as a way to prepare empowered citizens — who demand their rights and resources due from the state, and hold the state accountable — and informed voters. This means a focus on facts, literacy and critical thinking.
Separately, there is danger that a national curriculum would betray the spirit of the 18th Amendment, which devolved education to the provinces. That devolution process acknowledged that national curricula can be coercive and alienating.
But it is difficult to be a purist. There is no intrinsic merit in allowing curriculum content to be dictated by the whims of provincial governments. In recent years, we have seen one province seek to introduce Jinnah’s Aug 11 speech on inclusion and minority rights in textbooks, while another has introduced the concept of jihad. Provinces focused on school enrolment and infrastructure may also lack the resources to ensure the best experts are feeding into the curriculum design process. A scenario in which Pakistanis have different interpretations of key values or events would certainly perpetuate internal strife.
A middle ground may be the best way forward. The national curriculum should guide which subjects are taught, with which methodology. The shift from rote memorisation to critical thinking and problem solving can be facilitated at the national level. Federal bodies can provide a content review function, ensuring that curricula developed by provinces are not inaccurate, radicalising, divisive, etc. But the provinces should have the freedom of input in local language, culture, history and more.
Getting curriculum reform right — or starting off by building consensus on the way forward — could be the PTI’s most transformative intervention. Let’s hope it works.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Messages
- 18,277
- Likes
- 56,182
If children in Pakistan aren't manipulated ideologically, made rational and even after that complete history is taught to them without manipulation, Pakistan, having its foundation on ideologies, will cease to exist.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Propaganda and the education of Pakistani youth: a textbook case | Pakistan | 9 | |
|
What is in textbook of pakistani school? | Pakistan | 4 | |
| Z | An Indian Admiral and a pakistani Air Commodore | Defence & Strategy | 0 | |
|
When a Pakistani took an Indian to the Top University in China | China | 44 |
