0
Radicalization of Pakistan’s National Curriculum: Is the State Promoting its Ideology
through the Education System?
A Comparative Analysis of the Pakistan Studies Textbooks for Matriculation and O’Levels
Musharfa Shah
Ramisha Shehzad Butt
Sociology of Education
Dr. Tania Saeed
Lahore University of Management Sciences
11/26/2017
1
Introduction
One of the most significant investments that a state can make in furthering its interests is
ensuring a steady supply of ‘ideal’ citizens through education. Every nation state aims to provide
the best possible education to its people, depending upon factors such as demographics, culture,
and economy. Education working as a social institution is interconnected with other institutions,
such as, of social mobility, labor force market and economy. According to Freire education is
never a neutral process but rather a political process. Likewise, it is true, in most cases, that
nation states use the very tool of education to propagate their own political interests, which
results in generations growing up with a biased view of their history and flawed judgments of the
issues they face. Similarly in Pakistan’s case, it is known that Pakistan’s national curriculum and
textbooks developed by the government contain historical errors, omissions, biases, a flawed and
one-sided view of historical events, and forceful imposition of an Islamic ideology on nonMuslims (Hoodbhoy and Nayyer; Aziz). These issues are most evident in the official government
curriculum and textbooks of Pakistan Studies, a compulsory subject for secondary, college and
professional level education in Pakistan that covers several topics ranging from Pakistan’s
history to its politics, as well as the economy and geography.
Parallel to the government system, Pakistan also has an alternative education system for
the elite. Schools are now preparing students for the General Certificate of Secondary Education
(GCSE) exams run by the Cambridge board in the UK. Pakistan Studies is also a core course in
the O’Level curriculum.
In sociological terms, inexplicit identity formation as perpetuated by Pakistani state is an
outcome of hidden curriculum. Hidden curriculum is defined by transmission of certain set of
ideas that are unwritten and unofficial but are transmitted through imposed expectations. These
2
include norms, behaviors, social beliefs and culture (Alsubaie). According to the Functionalist
perspective the importance of hidden curriculum can be attributed to the maintenance of existing
societal structure while the Marxist view hidden curriculum as reinforcement of manipulative
and repressive social hierarchy that leaves the oppressed with no choice due to limited
information. This argumentative essay presents hidden curriculum as a problem that eventuate to
suppressed grievances and fragile nationalist identities. This paper compares the content of the
Cambridge O Level Pakistan Studies textbooks to the Matric textbooks from all four provinces
and analyses them considering sociological theories, especially those of Paulo Freire, as an
attempt to understand and explain the causes and effects of this state policy.
3
Literature Review
Education is a substantial tool in national identity formation fostered through the state.
The role of the government is central in determining ‘who belongs’; for this purpose,
governments ensure their ability to control and perpetuate curricula in schools which helps them
determine the national identity of its population (Adeney). It is a fact that should not be ignored:
a curriculum is always an integral part of the cultural and political zeitgeist of the society in
which it operates (Turunen). Policies regarding curriculum are contentious, they essentially
represent various decisions, specific values and self-serving purposes of the political elites. It can
be claimed that these values almost always find their expression in the educational curriculum
(Brennan).
According to Afzal (2015), the official education system of Pakistan does not prepare the
student body to counter the problematic and prevalent narratives in society and the media;
instead, the system creates and propagates these narratives. Afzal’s main findings indicate that
Pakistan Studies curriculum is centered on the ‘us versus them’ ideology in which ‘us’ indicates
the Muslims and Pakistanis (the good), and ‘them’ the Hindus, Indians and non-Muslims (the
bad). The United States is also mentioned sparingly and is portrayed as being a back-stabbing
friend who has betrayed Pakistan at many points in history, promoting a victimized self-image.
Moreover, it has also been observed that with regards to minorities (religious, linguistic,
ethnic), the exclusion from textbooks is brazen and explicit. General overview of the text gives
an impression that there exist no minorities in Pakistan, highlighting exploitative mechanisms
that empower one community at the expense of others. In this case, a Punjabi Sunni Muslim. For
example, in the chapters on population in social studies, the population statistics and
explanations are provided in whole numbers; no breakdown is provided of the minority
4
population. In the explanations, the Christian community might seldom get a mention, but the
Hindu community never shows up. Other minorities such as Parsis, Khojas, Bohras, Memons,
and others only appear in context of their backing for the Pakistan Movement. The text cleverly
skip the part that Jinnah himself belonged to the Parsi community. Sections on prominent figures
skip important figures in Pakistan’s history, such as Jutices Cornelius and Dorab Patel, Dr.
Abdul Salam, and Sir Zafarullah Khan. Similarly, other sects of Islam such as the Shias or
Ismailis also occupy a very small, almost non-existent portion of the texts. An overall
homogenous image of the population is painted (Naseem).
Hoodbhoy and Nayyer (1985) also explored the exclusion of Bengalis from the texts on
Pakistan Movement and the history of Pakistan until 1971. This exclusionary articulation clearly
wiped out Bengalis from the national consciousness. Research by Naseem (2010) also proved
that students’ knowledge of Benagalis and Bengal was quite limited; their articulation of pre1971 era was that of Indian aggression and betrayal of Bengal. Interestingly, he also found out
that texts from social studies and Urdu textbooks paint the role of ulema in the Pakistan
movement in a very positive light. It is an accepted fact that ulema were against the movement
pre-partition believing that this was an evil plan to divide the Muslims of India; however, the
textbooks fail to mention this anywhere. Instead, they blatantly claim that ulemas were in full
support of the movement, which is a clear example of distortion of facts.
In context of GCSE curriculum for Pakistan Studies, Rehman (2004) found out that
O’Levels students demonstrate more tolerance and acceptance for minorities compared to matric
students, “…with 66 per cent of ‘O’ levels students versus 47 per cent of Matric students
supporting equal rights for Ahmadis, 78 per cent versus 47 per cent for Hindus, and 84 per cent
versus 66 per cent for Christians.”
5
6
Content Analysis of textbooks from Matric (Punjab) and O’Levels (GCSE)
Topics on pre-partition, partition, and post-partition: The matriculation book gives a very
short view of history prior to 1947 and does not discuss the events before 1857 Independence
war (Pakistan Studies, Class 10). On the other hand, the main textbook for history for O’Levels
Pakistan Studies (Kelly) starts at the era of Mughal rule and also goes in detail about the
prominent Islamic thinkers of the 18th and 19th centuries. Additional readings also talk about
Indus Valley Civilization, the Persian and Greek invaders of the sub-continent, as well as Hindu
empires while maintaining focus on Muslim rulers. The textbooks, hence, show the history
through a wider lens. This wider focus brings in different perspectives into the discussion and
promotes critical thinking. The Matric textbooks present a very skewed and narrow view on our
history, a view of the time of Hindu-Muslim aggressions. No accounts of Hindu Muslims coexisting before that are presented. Instead, the two-nation theory has been asserted from the very
beginning, for example, using statements such as “two major nations, the Muslims and the
Hindus, were settled there (in the sub-continent). The two nations were entirely different from
each other in their religious ideas, their way of living and collective thinking. Their basic
principles and the way of living are so different that despite living together for centuries, they
could not intermingle with each other” (Pakistan Studies, 9). This presents history in a one-sided
account which often causes the student to be limited by it.
On account of partition violence, the GCSE textbook gives a fair view of the violence
carried out by all parties as opposed to matriculation books, for instance, in addition to accounts
of violence by Hindus and Sikhs, the Kelly textbook says it is “also true that atrocities were
carried out by Muslims as a tide of communal hatred swept across the subcontinent in late 1947”
(Kelly, 118). Even though this is not discussed in sufficient detail in Kelly textbook, it is still
7
better when compared with Matric Pakistan Studies textbook where no such incidence is
mentioned. Omission of certain essential facts is part of hidden curriculum as it diverts attention
from the different possible perspectives.
The Matric textbooks also fail to mention crucial facts about post-partition history, for
example, the fact that Pakistan began the 1965 war with India. The events of 1971 are also
presented in a way that the onus of blame falls on United States’ betrayal and India’s treachery.
The unwritten consequence of this is cementation of the victimized self-image without taking
responsibility. Kelly’s book gives a fair account of events, for example, the book acknowledges
West Pakistan’s errors in the wake of the 1970 cyclone, citing that East Pakistan accused West
Pakistan of “gross neglect, callous indifference and utter indifference” (Kelly, 136).
Pakistan’s Ideology, Islam, and Jihad: The current textbooks of Pakistan Studies for
matriculation attempt to forge an identity that is essentially and exclusively based on Islam and
derived in opposition to our neighbors, India (Afzal). The focal point is the ‘Pakistani ideology’
which states that the basis of the country is Islam; however, this ideology was not born with
Pakistan. It was coined two decades after the independence of Pakistan by the Islamist party,
Jamaat-e-Islami, and inserted into Pakistani textbooks in 1970s and 1980s. This was the
aftermath of the 1971 partition; it caused an identity crisis because the loss of the Eastern Wing
effectively nullified the Two Nation Theory upon which the Islamic Republic of Pakistan was
declared during the struggles of independence. Consequent, the state sought to rid itself of the
traumatic loss by intensifying the use of education as a political tool (Hoodbhoy and Nayyer;
Ullah). According to Afzal (2015),
“All Pakistan studies textbooks begin with a chapter on the Pakistan ideology, which is
equated entirely with Islam and is considered all-important, something that needs to be defended
8
and held on to at all costs. Most textbooks mention the pillars of Islam in that first chapter, which
is problematic because it excludes non-Muslims from the Pakistani identity and forces them to
study Islam.” This selection of content signifies the subjectivity associated with the subject
matter. The values propagated are vividly understood but indirectly.
In contrast, the term ‘Pakistan Ideology’ is not mentioned in Kelly’s textbook; it does
discuss the two-nation theory but does not state Islam to be the unifying force for the people,
instead, it mentions Urdu (national language) in that context. Importance placed on Urdu can still
be classified as a means to impose a national identity as part of hidden curriculum but to a lesser
extreme than religion. Moreover, Kelly’s textbook also discusses the concessions given to
religious pressure groups in Pakistan’s political, economic, and social realm, and how it has
resulted in Pakistan becoming a politically and legally Islamic country. Zia’s self-serving
Islamization policies and their repercussions on women and minorities are also discussed (Kelly,
151). No such discussion is present in the matric textbooks.
Minorities and sectarianism: In the Matric textbooks, the process of merging the Pakistani and
Muslim identity is quite evident. Religious minorities are portrayed as inferior citizens who have
been granted (limited) privileges and rights by generous ‘Pakistani Muslims’ for which they
should be eternally grateful to the government in form of being subservient. Their contributions
to the formation, development, and protection of Pakistan are largely ignored and missing from
the curriculum (Mir). This builds upon the already existing class structure and promotes a sense
of superiority or inferiority depending on the social class you belong to. In contrast, the issues
faced by minorities are discussed well in Kelly’s book. The role of ulemas in spreading hatred
against Ahmedis, Zia’s Islamization policies against minorities, and Jinnah’s distaste for ethnic
and provincial divisions are well documented (Kelly, 97, 117).
9
Discussion
One of the major objections of promoting a national narrative through curriculum comes
from Paulo Freire. Freire problematized humanity by placing the condition of perceiving reality
for ascendency. Thus, establishing basis for human agency. This human agency is curtailed
through the promotion of state propaganda through curriculum. For instance, presenting a
victimized past has developed a paranoia among Pakistanis against Hindus and West (Jalal). He
calls this ‘’the culture of silence’’ whereby subjugation is maintained through cementation of
certain set of beliefs. This culture effectively silences the oppressed to the point they are unable
to recognize that they are being oppressed. Majority of Pakistani population devote immense
resources and manpower to teaching and learning English languages at the expense of their
mother tongue without realizing that this hampers their learning.
Freire developed his theory of pedagogy of oppressed where he divides society into
oppressed and the oppressors. The national narrative confines the students by giving them
incomplete information and transmitting a preconceived bias about the country they’re born in.
Thereby, the state and its propaganda to utilize curriculum to develop and maintain a national
narrative of an Islamized and unified Pakistan becomes the oppressors while the students who
accept this incomplete and biased information in the form of education are the oppressed. This
limitation can be overcome by the very same institution that propagates it i.e. progressive
education, such as the GCSE O’Levels curriculum discussed above. Freire saw education as an
enabler of agency (conscientization), the agency to perceive critically what is being taught.
According to Freire the basis of this transmission cannot be politically neutral, but it should be
democratic, so the teacher engages with student in such a way that both learn, a pedagogy with,
not for the people. The liberation of oppressed will be the result of pedagogy with the people,
10
unlike for the people. The oppressed should not mimic the oppressors but rather develop a
situation without the division between oppressed and oppressors. Consequently, realization and
liberation of this victimized self-image should not result in reassessment of curriculum to present
Pakistan as a powerful oppressive actor since that will lead to further oppression but to represent
the facts as they occurred and allowing the students to critically analyses them.
According to Afzal (2015), there is an incessant need to reform the national curriculum
for Pakistan Studies, to improve its content and methods. However, she admits that “…reconceptualizing and rewriting curricula is difficult and time consuming. In Pakistan, reform has
been opposed by various key elements in the process: the curriculum reform committees, the
textbook writers, the textbook reviewers, and religious political parties. An effective curriculum
reform has thus proved to be a non-starter and politically infeasible”. Instead, she proposes that
an excellent alternative to the flawed and biased matric textbooks already exists in the form of
O’Levels textbooks.
Freire’s theory on banking model of education can also be used to explain current
education system in Pakistan. The student viewed as an object and an empty account while the
teacher is the subject that deposits information in this account. Lecture based style and testing
methods focused on reproduction of that information results in minimal interaction between the
student and the teacher. This practice becomes a practice of domination whereby presenting
certain facts with a preconceived bias and concealing others maintains hierarchy of power and
inequality (the oppressors) on the silenced (the oppressed). The minorities are given minimal
attention that presents them as outsiders and maintains social class (Rais). This presents a Sunni
Muslim Punjabi as being on top of the hierarchy. No mention of Ahmadis, Hindus and Christians
were observed in the Pakistan studies textbook. The demands for separation that the Baloch are
11
making and the causes for that demand are also non-existent in both matric and O’Level’s
curriculum for Pakistan Studies. Marxist perspective overlaps with Freire’s theory in this regard
as the status quo and social class hierarchy is reinforced by those with authority to suppress any
differences. In Pakistani context this suppression only leads to grievances.
Freire despite highlighting the oppressive nature of education system also emphasized
humans as beings of praxis. Praxis for him meant humans constructively developing their social
reality through their actions and critical reflection. This reflection leads to conscientization. He
states that dominant ideology is enforced on every member of society but the needs and
problems concerning those dominant can only be realized through a critical process of reflection
that he calls conscientization. Supplementing Freire’s theory of praxis is the Frankfurt school
which states that mediations that exist between the fact and the society function to provide
meaning to those facts. The mediations in this case can be said to be teachers and textbooks
which mold facts to fit a non-existent narrative to support state propaganda.
One of the objectives of grade 9 Pakistan Studies textbook included “making students
aware of sources of ideology and their link with Islam” (5). The term Pakistani ideology was
coined 20 years after formation of Pakistan, which now has a permanent space on state
sponsored textbooks and unequivocally linked to Islam. Freire emphasized engaging in essential
dialogue combined with action. Similarly, Giroux’s concept of dialectical thought necessitated
historical analysis in a manner that discloses the link between knowledge, power and domination
as a means of revealing the limitations and “inner history” (Giroux 43). The immense importance
given to Islam in Pakistani ideology hinders formation of that link and leaves no space for
critical inquiry. In contradiction, the term Pakistani ideology is not mentioned anywhere in
O’Level Pakistan Studies books.
12
Purpose of education for Freire then can be said to be conscientization and as an enabler
of agency. This is hindered in Pakistan context through deep ideological influences. Durkheim
(Functionalist) talks about Jesuits and their realignment of education to form harmony with their
religious objectives. This realignment stemmed from a deep insecurity about deviation from
religion (Durkheim 30). Compared with Pakistani narrative, this need to promote a national
narrative through education curriculum stemmed from a deep insecurity about inability to unify
its diverse population. The curriculum rather than mitigating differences only suppressed them.
This belief in religious objectives will be synonymous to a myth for Freire and its discovery the
purpose of education.
13
Conclusion
It can be concluded that the state sponsored textbooks of Matric are immensely
influenced to fit a specific state narrative for political objectives while the O’Level curricula
comes from a body that has no immediate interests to be gained by altering the facts and hence,
presents them in a relatively unbiased manner acknowledging the different perspectives that feed
into it. Although sufficient research has already been done in this regard but its link to
sociological roots elaborates the impact this has on Pakistani education system and the students.
Freire’s theories of pedagogy of oppressed, praxis and conscientization can be applied in this
context to explain the role that state and hidden curriculum play in the instigation of an unreal
national narrative which results in suppressed differences, grievances and a shaky basis for
national identity.
14
References
Adeney, Katharine, and Marie Lall. "Adeney, Katharine, and Marie Lall. "InstitutiNational”
Identity in India: Internal and External Dimensions." India Review 4.3-4 (2005): 258-286.
Afzal, Madiha. "Education and Attitudes in Pakistan: Understanding Perceptions of Terrorism.
Special Report 367." United States Institute of Peace (2015).
Alsubaie, Merfat (2015). Hidden Curriculum as One of the Current Issue of Curriculum. Journal
of Education and Practice. Vol.6.No.33.
Aziz, K.K. (2010). The Road to Ruin. The Murder of History. A Critique of History textbooks
used in Pakistan. Lahore: Sang-e-Meel Publications, 210-277.
Brennan, Marie. "National curriculum: A political-educational tangle." Australian Journal of
Education 55.3 (2011): 259-280.
Durkheim, E. (2007) On Education and Society. In A.R Sadovnik (ed.) Sociology of Education:
A critical reader. New York Routledge, pp. 28-35.
Freire, P. (1974) Society in Transition. Education for Critical Consciousness. London:
Continuum, pp 3-17.
Freire, P. (1994/1970). Preface and Chapter One. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. (revised 20th
Anniversary Edition). New York: Continuum.
Giroux, H (1997) Culture and Rationality in Frankfurt School Thought: Ideological Foundations
for a Theory of Social Education. Pedagogy and the politcis of Hope. Theory, Culture
and Schooling. A Critical eader, USA: Westview Presspp, pp. 35-42
15
Hoodbhoy, Pervez and Abdul Hameed Nayyer. "Rewriting the history of Pakistan." Islam,
politics and the state (1985): 164-177.
Jalal, Ayesha. (2011 “The past as present’’. In M.Lodhi’s (ed.) Pakistan beyond the crisis state.
Pakistan. OUP, pp. 7-20.
Kelly, Nigel. The History and Culture of Pakistan. London, UK: Peak Publishing, 2015.
Lall, Marie. (2008) Educate to hate: the use of education in the creation of antagonistic national
identities in India and Pakistan. Compare: A journal of comparative and international
education, 38:1, 109-119
Mir, Amir. "How Pakistan pumps in hatred through textbooks." 16 November 2011. Rediff News.
Naseem, M Ayaz. "Education and gendered citizenship in Pakistan." New York : Palgrave
Macmillan, 2010. 103-118.
Pakistan Studies, Class 10. Lahore, Pakistan: Gohar Publishers, 2013.
Rais, R, B. (2005) Islamic radicalism and minorities in Pakistan. In S.P Limay, M.Malik and R.G
Wirsing. Religious radicalism and security in south Asia. Honululu. Asia Pacific centre
for Security Studies.pp-447-467
Rehman, Tariq. "Denizens of alien worlds: A study of education, inequality and polarization in
Pakistan." OUP, Pakistan (2004).
Turunen, Tuija A., Kaarina Määttä, and Satu Uusiautti. "Forty years of Finnish pre-school
education: the development of curricula between 1972 and 2000." Curriculum Journal
23.4 (2012): 585-599.
16
Ullah, Haroon K. "Vying for Allah's Vote: Understanding Islamic Parties, Political Violence, and
Extremism in Pakistan." Georgetown University Press (2013).