Reforms! What Reforms?

Re: # 48

Scientists are very proud of their logic. Anything that seems logically true, I had listened that they accept it open heartedly. Wondering how and why two good researchers like Atta and Hoodbhoy can let their differences rise to a level that they expose them in front of the whole world.

I have a lot of respect for Dr Hoodbhoy. I don`t want that he involves in a publically declared war as it results in the degradation of his own image as well. While activism demands publicity, propoganda and media support, policy management for research institutes needs to be done silently and tactically. Dr Hoodbhoy, now being more of an activist than a ``research manager``, deals with the both situations the same way.

First it was Dr Daudpota who created differences with HEC, publicized them and lost his job. For people like him losing a job is really not a big thing. He can find a better work at any place he wants. But his loss of job resulted in the loss of HEC losing his talent which is loss of Pakistan in one way or other. Now it is Dr Hoodbhoy repeating it again. What I want from people like them is that they should try to correct the system while living inside it. Revolutionizing the system, destroying the exisiting thing and rebuilding whole from scratch, bringing changes within a night and changing the mindset of Pakistani Professors within a single day etc. look like immature and childish ideas. They should behave more maturely in dealing with the atrocities of existing faculty with a non-combatting manner. They need to find like-minded people (if there are any left in Pakistan) and strenghten their influence while remaining the senior members of the faculty or policy management organizations.

Re: # 49 [have a lot of respect for Dr Hoodbhoy. I don`t want that he involves in a publically declared war as it results in the degradation of his own image as well.]

Revolution eats it`s own children. ;)

#49 by Charlie

Hoodbhoy`s arguments r less about him and his activism and more about the HEC`s policies. If HEC and Ata are not beyond question, then one should not stop any Hoodbhoy or any Daudpota from criticising HEC or Ata.

You should more worry about why Daudpota was fired than why he ever objected publicly.

Instead of forcing compliance, we should encourage and tolerate dissent. What is happening b/w HEC and Hoodbhoy is really very good. If HEC feels forced to change the title of course this time, we might anticipate, next time, they might as well don`t fund souch ludicurous projects

A more scathing attack by the same Dr. Sohail Naqvi is here

http://satribune.com/archives/200507/P1_hec.htm

Looks like the News has toned down the original version.

Hmmm...there are 3 versions of Sohail Naqvi`s rebuttals :)

Actually, the original response is on HEC site:

http://www.hec.gov.pk/htmls/1HEC_HE.doc

The doc properties said, it is owned by ``Bhandari, Naqvi & Riaz``

....which leads you to http://bnrlaw.net/ a law firm.

I wonder if Dr. sahab got his response vetted by a law firm, where it got edited by 4-5 eminent lawyers, each sending different version to different channel !

I disagree with the author as Prof. Atta-ur-Rahman is a shining star of Pakistan and the best scintist. If he is working sincerely day and night for the promoting higher education then why he has been criticized. What ever he is doing for the country the outcome will be seen after five-ten years. But Hoodbhoy seems to be only crtical and his crticizm is only for criticizm not for any reform. Plz try to respect our national hero. Without any doubt he is the best of the bests.

I remember one parody poem from ex-chairman of chemistry department of QAU. Where he write some 15 yeras back about KOOD Bhoy. He wrote it about Prof. Hood Bhoy who always trys to poke his nose in each and every ones affair. I hope Prof. Atta-ur-Rahman wont mind this junk article about him and will keep doing his best for the country.

re #54.

``cute humna`` is living proof of what`s wrong with the HEC and the educational system of our country. we have university graduates/secondary school graduates who cannot even spell or form coherent sentences in English. It`s sad to say that even people with Masters` degrees cannot speak or write proper English. The point isnt about the English language; rather the implication this has on the future of this country and the people who are in charge of imparting education.

Let me first tell you Prof. Bhai, ``Jealousy is the crime which makes you blind``
Ok being a student of science, I can never reach your thoughts but how it matches your personality that you can think so cheap. If you remember our meeting at Peshawer during Chem-Con 2001 at the dinner in Khyber Hall, you said that we need a person who can find sources to develop scientific culture in this country, so why not you join this GREAT person Atta-ur-Rahman`s team with a positive attitude by forgetting your personal conflicts with him (which I feel only you have) and let`s try to get this nation on right track. Nations are built by team work not by this style of leg-pulling. If according you HEC is doing something wrong why not you talk to them and contribute a little for your nation. By just dilvering two lectures a week and then flying to US and UK is not service of nation on the same HEC`s expenses for who`s leader you have such thoughts. By just comparing very low levels and high levels is not the key to solution. I just mention you example of your own department at Quaid-e-Azam University, which clearly shows you have even personal conflicts with your department head, why didn`t you asked him not to buy such a useless instrument (Which I don`t think will be useless,as it is very obvious that things are never useful or useless but these are the minds make them so).
At the end once again I request your pleasure to be bold and positive to serve the nation and shake hand with this great person who needs intelectuals like you with positive attitude to serve this poor nation, who is paying you more than any one just for two or three lecture. Think again it is also coming from the pocket of a poor Pakistani.

Corruption. Dishonesty. Incompetence. Cronyism. These are only a few of the very serious charges laid by Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy at Higher Education Commission. One would expect such charges to be fully substantiated, especially when made by a distinguished academic. Unfortunately, Professor Hoodbhoy does not seem to believe in research any more.
Let us start with Dr. Hoodbhoy’s dramatic announcement that HEC’s projects are riddled with “gross administrative incompetence.” As proof, Dr. Hoodbhoy refers to the “Best University Teacher” program. Please note that Dr. Hoodbhoy has no objection to the project itself, merely to the manner in which it is being implemented. But what is this highly objectionable course adopted by the HEC?
Admittedly, the HEC selects the “best” university teachers on the basis of nominations received
from university administrations. But those administrators are not supposed to make nominations based upon their personal whims. Instead, those nominations are required to be made on the basis of numerous factors, including student evaluations, a point which has been completely ignored by Dr. Hoodbhoy.
In any event, is the HEC’s approach really so unreasonable as to justify a charge of “gross incompetence?” Is Dr. Hoodbhoy really arguing that no factor other than student opinion can ever be important in determining who is a good teacher? Is he really saying that the opinion of one’s peers is irrelevant?
There are more than 250,000 university students in Pakistan. The HEC cannot interview those students itself. The HEC therefore has no option but to work with the existing administrations of universities to implement its programs. So, once the hype is stripped away, what we are left with is a program which Dr. Hoodbhoy admits is innovative and desirable, which the HEC is trying to implement in a self-evidently reasonable manner, and yet the program, according to Dr. Hoodbhoy, is conclusive proof of gross incompetence.
The real problem here is that Dr. Hoodbhoy sees the rest of Pakistan as a problem, not as an opportunity. The HEC, however, does not have the luxury of living in an ideal world. Instead, it has to make do with the human resources which exist today in Pakistan. Dr. Hoodbhoy is right when he says that the HEC sees existing faculty members as “part of the solution.” Unlike Dr. Hoodbhoy, the HEC feels no reason to be ashamed of that vision.
We come then to Dr. Hoodbhoy’s other example of “gross incompetence “– the Master Trainers in Physics program being run by Quaid e Azam University. Once again, we can safely assume that Dr. Hoodbhoy has no objection to the concept of the program itself since two years ago, when the project was first proposed, he demanded that he be placed in charge of it.
Once again, his only objection to the program is the manner in which the project is being implemented. But, the HEC is not in charge of the implementation of that project. That responsibility belongs entirely to the Physics department of Quaid e Azam University, of which Dr. Hoodbhoy is supposedly a very senior member.
Contrary to what Dr. Hoodbhoy says, HEC has not selected (let alone “hand-picked”) a single “master trainer.” Instead, each and every “master trainer” has been selected by the Physics Department at QAU. Dr. Hoodbhoy may be justified in his criticism of the master trainers but that is something for him, as a senior member of the QAU Physics Department, to raise first with that department.
Of course, Dr. Hoodbhoy chose to spend the last year on extraordinary leave so perhaps he was not in a position to offer his views. Dr. Hoodbhoy also alleges that the Master Trainers are being grossly overpaid. Perhaps Dr. Hoodbhoy has forgotten that he spent part of his extraordinary one-year leave giving lectures at Rs. 45,000 per hour. The Master Trainers are only paid a fraction of that amount; but then perhaps they lack Dr. Hoodbhoy’s facility with the truth.
It should be noted that the object of this article is not to unfairly malign Dr. Hoodbhoy. However, Dr. Hoodbhoy has not given a single name of a single Master Trainer whom he believes to be unqualified. Instead, he has simply slandered the entire lot of them without bothering to give any details whatsoever.
To the extent Dr. Hoodbhoy has specific and verifiable details regarding the Master Trainers he should first try to resolve his qualms at the departmental level and if that fails, then approach the HEC. If the HEC then refuses to listen to him, he can justifiably claim that the program is a disgrace. Till such time he bothers to substantiate his allegations though, it is only Dr. Hoodbhoy who can be considered a disgrace.
We come then to Dr. Hoodbhoy’s allegation that HEC is throwing “enormous sums ... at half-baked proposals.” Dr. Hoodbhoy’s first exhibit in this regard is the grant sanctioned by the HEC for the purchase of a Van de Graaf accelerator. Admittedly, a Van de Graaf accelerator’s use for “cutting-edge” research is limited but that was never its purpose. Instead, it was always intended to be used for teaching and general research for which purpose it was, and remains, a very useful machine. Cutting-edge particle accelerators cost billions of dollars which is why HEC has partnered with other developing nations to have access to the SESAME project in Jordan.
It should also be remembered that the proposal for the accelerator was submitted by the National Center for Physics, whose board is manned by the most eminent physicists in Pakistan. If Dr. Hoodbhoy is to be believed, those physicists are all either fools or criminals. The alternative does not leave Dr. Hoodbhoy in good company.
Similarly, Dr. Hoodbhoy pours much scorn on the grant to Dr. Saadia Chishti. But, Dr. Chishti holds a PhD in education from Cornell and has been a senior research fellow at both Oxford and the Divinity School at Harvard. Her project, like any other research grant proposal funded by HEC, was not examined by HEC itself.
Instead, as per standard procedures, the proposal was sent to be examined by the focal person in that subject (normally, the single most eminent and recognized scholar in that area in Pakistan) who then referred it to other competent scholars, who examined and reviewed the proposal. That internationally recognized method remains the standard method by which HEC reviews all grant proposals. Dr. Hoodbhoy asks “how true is this?”
The question which Dr. Hoodbhoy needs to be asked is, “where is your proof that this method is not being followed?” Dr. Hoodbhoy tries to gain much mileage from the fact that some of the research proposals he reviewed were dubious. But clearly, HEC is not responsible for the quality of research proposals sent to it, only for the quality of research proposals actually funded by it.
Assuming Dr. Hoodbhoy did indeed review a proposal containing a request for a $90,000 fridge, how is that proposal in any way represented of HEC’s performance?
Dr. Hoodbhoy drops dark hints about how his refusal to fund $90,000 refrigerators has resulted in his no longer reviewing research proposals. It is a routine matter for reviewers to reject unreasonable requests submitted by scientists, and Dr. Hoodbhoy`s rejection of such a request was a normal response. The item was thus never funded by the HEC. Dr. Hoodbhoy is here trying too hard for the halo of martyred sainthood. HEC has no control over who is selected by the focal person to review proposals, nor has it created any “black lists.”
If Dr. Hoodbhoy is not being selected to review proposals by the focal point in Physics, that would be the focal point’s decision, not that of HEC. It should further be noted that the focal point for Physics is Professor Dr. Riazuddin, one of 25 Distinguished National Professors in Pakistan, the Director of the National Center for Physics, and according to one internationally accepted method of ranking scholarly achievement (the “Impact Factor Assessment”), having an impact factor nearly eight times as that of Dr. Hoodbhoy.
The same shoddy approach can also be seen in Dr. Hoodbhoy’s discussion of the grant to the Allama Iqbal Open University. He notes that according to the project summary, “this work aims to correct the mistakes made in this area by a Nobel Prize winner in chemistry” and that “such grand notions of challenging Nobel Prize winners are highly suspect.”
What the abstract of the proposal actually states is that, “In our earlier investigations . . . we had found the earlier work of the Nobel Laureate Sir Ropert Robinson and two of his eminent colleagues Sir W. H. Perkins and R.H.F. Manske . . . to be incorrect.” The project abstract clearly states that the initial work was done in 1972 by Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman, that the resultant research did in fact show the work of the Nobel Laureate in Chemistry to have been incorrect, and that the current work is only an extension of that research.
In fact, the 1972 article by Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman was one of the works specifically cited by the United Nations when it awarded him the UNESCO Science Prize. Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman remains, till date, the only Muslim scientist to have received this honor. It is tempting to believe that that Dr. Hoodbhoy simply misread the project abstract. Unfortunately, it appears more likely that he has deliberately misrepresented its contents.
Dr. Hoodbhoy’s allegations with respect to HEC’s efforts to increase the number of PhDs in Pakistan is one of the few instances in his article where he actually substantiates his allegations with concrete facts. Unfortunately, those facts are all wrong.
Dr. Hoodbhoy specifically alleges that in the Physics department of QAU, as many as 15 PhD students are registered with one supervisor while in the Biology Department at QAU, there are as many as 40 students with one supervisor. The Quaid-e-Azam University has confirmed that these allegations are incorrect. It should first be noted that as per HEC rules, the maximum number of PhD fellowship holders allowed to be registered with any one supervisor is eight.
Furthermore, so far as the Biology department at QAU is concerned, HEC has not approved even a total of 40 PhD fellowships, let alone 40 for one supervisor. Instead, HEC has only approved a total of 20 PhD fellowships at the QAU biology department, which are being supervised by 10 HEC approved supervisors. Similarly, so far as the QAU physics department is concerned, HEC has only approved a total of 33 fellowships which are in turn being supervised by 11 professors. It should also be noted that none of those 33 students are enrolled with Dr. Hoodbhoy. In fact, Dr. Hoodbhoy has not published any work with a Pakistani student for almost a decade now.
It is unfortunate that the HEC’s efforts continue to be greeted with scorn and suspicion. Dr. Hoodbhoy, like many other education reformers in Pakistan, has called for more funding of the sciences on numerous occasions. Now that funding is being provided, it is necessary for Dr. Hoodbhoy to remove the blinkers of the past and give the HEC a fair hearing. For example, Dr. Hoodbhoy says that the PhDs which will be produced locally as a result of the HEC’s efforts will be worthless.
What Dr. Hoodbhoy fails to mention is that the HEC has stipulated that it will not recognize any local PhD unless the thesis has been approved by at least two eminent academics from industrially advanced countries, and the work has been published in an international journal. In fact, the quality control system that has been introduced includes the introduction of an international subject GRE before a student is allowed to be enrolled into the Ph.D. program and extensive course work both at M. Phil. and PhD levels. Dr. Hoodbhoy is well aware of these steps but has conveniently ignored these, and many other measures, taken by the HEC to raise the quality of higher education in Pakistan.
What is most unfortunate is that Prof. Hoodbhoy has ignored the largest programs of the Commission. These include programs relating to sending students on scholarships to foreign universities, post-doctoral training programs, and the foreign faculty hiring program under which hundreds of eminent expatriate and foreign scientists have joined Pakistani universities.
These are the programs that have begun to change the landscape of our universities, uplifting them from their current mediocre status. Professor Hoodbhoy claims that the GRE-type administered by HEC is worthless. But if that is the case, why are professors from Austria, Germany, France and other countries clamoring for these students? Last week alone, 92 students left for France to do post-graduate studies. Till date, foreign supervisors have expressed complete satisfaction with the quality of the students sent to them.
The Higher Education Commission is aiming to be one of the first public sector institutions to implement a fully computerized financial management system in accordance with the New Accounting Model (NAM) adopted by Project for Improvement of Financial Reporting and Auditing (PIFRA).
Already, almost all the financial record of the HEC for the previous financial year has been entered into the computer, and record of every transaction is available at fingertip. The HEC has also implemented a wide-ranging project monitoring system under which every project in every university has been physically visited, and its performance assessed against standard measures.
These reports are subsequently sent to the Finance Division, and the Planning Division. HEC also maintains the most widely accessed web site of any government department in Pakistan in which every single program is listed in detail along with results of all examinations and details regarding the award of research grants. For the record, HEC would welcome any financial or performance audit by any agency. We have nothing to hide.
It must also be realized that the entire amount of Government funds available to nearly sixty public sector universities in Pakistan do not match the funds available to a single reasonable size university in Malaysia. Advanced countries spend an average of about Rs. 6 million per student per year while Pakistan only spends Rs. 35,000 per student per year. Today, out of an eligible pool of more than 20 million people in Pakistan between the ages of 18 – 23, only about 250,000 students are physically studying at universities and degree granting institutions. This is one of the lowest percentages in the world. Is it not time that Pakistan improved this percentage?
Today, as a consequence of the HEC’s efforts and the enhanced funds provided by the government, every public sector university in Pakistan has computers, an internal computer network, high speed connectivity to the Internet, access to more than 15,000 journals and access to state-of-the-art instrumentation. Enrolment in our universities is rising at an excellent rate, four-year undergraduate programs are being introduced from Malakand to Khairpur, faculty members are writing research proposals, collaborating with leading foreign universities, going on sabbaticals and post-doctoral fellowships, and presenting their research work to the world.
Some 500 students have been sent abroad for PhD studies, Australia has offered 500 fully paid scholarships to Pakistan and over a billion rupees scholarship program has been initiated for poor and deserving students to study in private and public institutions which were previously beyond their financial means.
Over the last two years, there has been a 44 per cent increase in the number of papers by Pakistani academics appearing in internationally reputed scientific journals. For the first time, Pakistan is making its presence felt in the international academic world. Is this not progress?
To conclude then, Dr. Hoodbhoy’s diatribe against the HEC is completely unfair and unjustified. The HEC is doing its best to reform and serve higher education in Pakistan with both honesty and integrity. Unfortunately, that statement cannot be made with respect to Dr. Hoodbhoy’s efforts.

This is in response to ``RUMPUS`` who seems to have some personal grievances with HEC. As, I am not birth of HEC . So our previous system was having pits and fall to give less attention towards english. If RUMPUS is so critical about just English that`s not our native language. Mind it!!!!!!!!

Re: # 50
A book, a dissertation, or a paper every 10.3 days?
The list of Dr Ata’s publications is extremely impressive bordering on unbelievable. As the following mathematics show, he has generated a book, a dissertation or a paper after every 10.3 days during the last 18 years. Dr Ata is indeed a genius unparalleled if the following mathematics is true. Let’s see. He was awarded a PhD in 1987 and this is 2005 i.e. 18 years or 216 months have passed since his PhD. During this time(?), his output is as follows (from one of the postings):
Author of Books: 63
Research Papers 479
PhD Dissertations 56
Edited Volumes of Studies in Natural Chemistry: 27
Total: 625

This indicates that:
Number of book/dissertation/paper per month 2.89 (625 publications /218 months)
Days for one book/dissertation/paper every 10.368 days (30 days/2.89)

This is astounding output, especially considering the fact that he has been coordinator to COMSTECH dealing with 57 Ministries of OIC countries, chairman of HEC and looking after 50+ Universities, and a federal minister since 2000. He is also the chairman of HEJ Institute with all its PhD students and administrative issues. He is also regularly a
chairperson for inaugurations, conferences, workshops, institutes and other events. At an average of 3 such events/week during the last 5years, this figure alone would be 750 such participations. He is also an Executive Editor of six journals and magazines:
Natural Product Letters (Switzerland), Current Medicinal Chemistry (U.S.A), Current Pharmaceutical Design (U.S.A.), Current Organic Chemistry (U.S.A.), Combinatorial Chemistry and High Throughput Screening (U.S.A.) and Mini-Reviews in Medicinal Chemistry (Netherlands). How many articles is he editing in these journals and when does he get the time to read them.

Now some one should also factor in the time that he spends with his family. Also, the time that he spends with his own business.

Now the issue is with such frequency of output, what is their quality and long term utility.

P.S.
I think I read about one fiction writer, Edgar Wallace, who used to write a book every day. Also, Earl Stanley Gardner (Perry Mason series) was also a prolific writer. But, they were all generating fiction not research papers and academic books.

Re: # 60

Sorry for being harsh on you. But it is really difficult to stop you after reading a confident post from a totally illiterate person.

This is the worst example of how personal grieviences can make a person to come to a level of blind criticism. rv! If you are a scientist or slighjtest idea of how research is done in the world, I am sure you couldn`t write such funny lines. I find it a disgrace to respond to your basic points which clearly show that either you are not a researcher or you are opposing him to get personal gains.

Here are some facts:

Hid did his PhD in 1968 from cambridge. 37 years ago. No my kid, go and recalculae all of your hi fi stuff. As a matter of fact, his best research work was presented before 87 which according to your knowledge in the year of his PhD.

Do you know how we guage the standard of research? What is the impact factor? What are citations/paper? If you had slightest idea, you might have never written the post.

63 students completed their PhDs under his supervision during last 37 years. Do you know, how senior researchers like him work in the while world? There is a word called ``ADVISOR`` who guides his students and his students publish. His hundreds of paper were written by his students and he was a guide for them in this process. Do you believe that it is impossible to write that much. Sheer ignorance can make you believe so. Just an example from my own field. I know a world wide famous scietist in telecom. IEEE Transactions are the most renowned jouranls in this field. During last six months, he have published six transactions. An ordinary scientists only dreams of publishing a transaction. And Six transactions in six months means, atleast 30 research papers presented in conferences. Understood anything?

I know you are very good in basic mathematics. After all you divided and multiplied. Count the number of months. I will not wonder if yoo own a Paan Shop and learn this type of calculations from there. Oh yes, you know Edgar Wallace. That means you learnt a little bit of Angraizee. And you are trying to quote Wallace to show your intellect. Well! Seriously, Your interest tells you are a guy into literature. Then why the hell are you talking about science...

I finally got a response from Dr. Saadi Chisti on her Quranisation project. Here it is:

``Let me tell you that the amount 50 lacs is the estimate of HEC for a project of three years duration. You better verify this fact from HEC and also whether Dr Chishti accepted the money or refused to accept the amount. Also verify how much she has contributed personally to this project also if she accepeted a single paisa for herself. Kindly let us know your verified facts for otherwise fear Allah`s punishment if you beleive in him.

A believer in Allah and Al-Qur`aan is the message of Allah.

Also share this email with your friend hoodbhoy whoi has said goodbye to Allah and Al-Qur`aan. ``


Is this really true, that Hoodbhoy has said goodbye to Allah? :)

By the time false objections of Hood Bhoy are revealing. Another example is 14th July statment of ``freesoul``. This is true that hood bhoy has only observed the HEC policies superfacially. He is not a practical person. But, he must think several times to whom he is criticizing. Prof. Atta-ur-Rahman is our national hero and his services are internationally recognized. But this un-lucky nation is thinking wrong about him. That`s pity!!!!!!!!
This is very hard time for our muslims Umha. We must go together and only unity will take us to the way of progress and development. Plz. try to understand this...otherwise every thing will be destroy.

A book, a dissertation, or a paper every every 21.3 days???

Sorry Mr. Charlie, I never thought that panwala arithmatic done on the figures quoted from your post would make you so angry. As mentioned in my post, I took the figures from a post, in fact your post [Ref: #36 by Charlie on July 11, 2005 4:48am PT] in which you stated the year in which Dr. Ata did his PhD was 1987: I quote: “ Prof. Atta-ur-Rahman has also been awarded the prestigious degree of Doctor of Science (Sc.D.) by the University of Cambridge in 1987”

Now that you have mentioned in #61 by Charlie on July 14, 2005 3:12am PT
Re: # 60 that “He did his PhD in 1968 from cambridge. 37 years ago”.
Let’s rework the panwala mathematics again.
Don’t be angry; let’s plug in the figures for 37 years.
37 years = 444 months
Author of Books = 63
Research Papers = 479
Phd Dissertations = 56
Editor of Studies in Natural Chemistry: Volumes= 27
Total publications = 625 [Figures taken from Charlie’s post # 36]
Number of publications per month = 625/444= 1.4
Number of days for one publication = 30/1.4 = 21.3 days.

Ahm, it seems your are not getting my point. The new result is not substantially different. He manages to generate a new book, a new paper, and supervises a dissertation every 21.3 days!!!!
Am I missing some thing? Would you like to revise some of your other figures in your post #36?