An Educational Chasm

Faisal Bari

I WAS visiting government high schools for girls in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for some research work. At each school, I would ask the head teacher if I could have an opportunity to interact with the students of grades 9/10.

At a Peshawar school, I asked Grade 9 students what they wanted to be when they finished their education. Some wanted to be doctors or teachers, a few wanted to be engineers, and one student wanted to be a pilot. The girls had a fair idea of what they would have to do, beyond school education, to get where they wanted to be.

While we were having this conversation, their teacher, a young and fairly recently recruited science graduate, started talking: “All of these girls come from very poor economic and social backgrounds. Many of them are first-time Grade 9 students in their families, their mothers are mostly illiterate, and even the fathers of many are barely literate.” Then she started pointing to some of the girls — “her father is a daily wage earner, her father sells fruit in the local area and her father is unemployed these days”. I had to quickly find a polite and respectful way of stopping her from continuing.

It was clear from the way the teacher referred to the families and the economic and social background of the students that she felt the students came from a much ‘lower’ background than she did.

This experience, of social distance between teachers and students in government schools, was repeated at a number of schools as I travelled across five to six KP districts. A few months later, I had the same experience when I visited a number of government primary and secondary schools for boys in a couple of districts of Punjab.

Teachers and head teachers in government schools generally believe that their schools get the poorest of poor children, that these children come from households where parents are not likely to be very educated or do not have a good understanding or appreciation of the value of education. They feel the parents, as well as the children, have fairly limited ambitions.

Many teachers also said that their own children were not going to government schools and were enrolled in nearby private schools; some teachers openly stated that they did not want their own children to mix with the students enrolled in their schools.

Our data does show that enrolment in the type of school (public/private) and income levels is highly correlated, and among many people from poorer households it is the first generation that is going to school, especially in the case of women.

As the private provision of schooling has expanded, people who can afford it have chosen to send their children to private schools. The trend of withdrawal from public schools by the rich and middle classes continues and is now reaching the rural areas of Punjab, KP and some parts of Sindh as well.

All provincial governments have changed teacher-recruitment policies in recent times. Entry requirements for the teaching profession have been raised to at least Bachelor’s level instead of matriculation or intermediate, teacher salaries have seen significant increases over the last 10 to 15 years, and salary scales have also been revised.

We are getting more educated and trained teachers who are better compensated and have better career paths. All of this is positive. But there are unintended consequences of policy changes as well. As we get more educated people, the latter are more likely to come from the urban rather than the rural areas.

More educated people are also likely to come from households that had a higher income in the last generation than households with lower educational attainments today. Both these factors are likely to further increase the social distance between teachers and students.

The policy of recruiting more educated teachers and compensating them at a higher level is a good one and should not be abandoned. But the issue of social distance should be addressed. The best way to do this is through changing the content and style of pre-service and in-service teacher training.

The former refers to the Bachelor’s or Master’s level degrees — B. Ed./M. Ed. Courses relating to these degrees should have a lot more content on managing issues like social distance, the needs of children from different backgrounds and students with a diversity of abilities and potential. There should also be courses on pedagogy techniques that should be employed to manage diverse classrooms. These courses will provide teachers who are training some tools to help them relate better to students hailing from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds.

In-service training, provided by government teachers training departments in all provinces in the form of induction training (at the start of one’s career) and continuous professional development (throughout one’s teaching career), can further consolidate the introduction and ensure we have a way of imparting modern techniques to teachers for the management of diverse classrooms throughout their careers.

Improving the quality of education for our children will require us to get more educated and better trained teachers, to compensate them at higher levels, incentivise and motivate them, and help them manage their careers well. But this can, at the same time, result in an increase in the socioeconomic and cultural distance between teachers and students in public-sector schools, especially in the rural areas.

We have to address this issue as it can undermine, significantly, our ability to reach out to and retain children from diverse backgrounds, especially those from challenging backgrounds or those facing physical, mental or learning problems. While continuing to improve the condition of teachers, the problem of social distance and its consequences should be handled through better pre-service and in-service training.

From the Dawn, Pakistan, published Friday 30th June, 2017.

An Uncertain Career Path


ZUBAIR has been working as a salesperson at an upscale cosmetic and general supplies store in Islamabad for the last three years. His monthly salary, at Rs15,000, though above the minimum wage level set by the state, does not, by most recent calculations of living wage, constitute enough to provide even a basic standard of living for a family in an expensive city such as Islamabad.

Zubair manages to survive as he is still single and shares his living space with three other young men. He keeps his expenses at a minimum and sends whatever he saves to his parents who live in a village near Multan.

Zubair did his graduation from Bahauddin Zakariya University in Multan. He could not study more as he needed to support his family. His quest for a job brought him to Islamabad and the only job he has been able to find has been at this store.

I met Zubair at the store. After we had interacted a few times he asked me what I did, and when he found out that I was a teacher he started having longer conversations with me.

Though Zubair is a graduate, is very street-smart, has a keen mind and a good intellect, he has been very poorly educated and trained. His language skills, both Urdu and English, are quite poor and even though he studied economics for his Bachelor’s degree, his understanding of the subject is at best rudimentary. His knowledge is based almost totally on memorisation. Over the last three years since his graduation he has forgotten a lot of what he had memorised.

At one point in our conversations he asked for my help to find a better job. I told him that I, a teacher, was one of the least connected people in this society, but would do whatever was possible. I shared his resumé with many potential employers. I have not been able to find a better job for him thus far.

At some point, Zubair paid Rs40,000 out of his savings to someone who promised to get him a job in the UAE. The guy disappeared with the money. We have been trying to locate the guy and see if we can get the money back. But it does not look as if we will succeed.

Zubair wants to earn more. He wants a more satisfying career path. Eventually, he wants to get married and raise his own family, and wants his children to have a better life than him. These are all things that most of us want. He does not see a path that will allow him to do any of this.

Zubair’s predicament is not unique. Unemployment rates amongst young people in Pakistan are quite high and even higher amongst graduates. Government jobs have all but disappeared as we have liberalised, privatised, decentralised and right-sized enterprises. The pace of job creation has not been very high in the private sector either. Manufacturing has not been doing very well over the last decade or so and though the services sector has seen some expansion, most of the jobs in this sector, such as Zubair’s, do not offer decent wage and opportunities for an attractive career path. What can young people do?

There is a very strong inequity story embedded here too. Had Zubair’s parents been able to send Zubair to an elite, high-fee, private school and a better university here or abroad, had they been richer or more connected, Zubair would be working at a management-level job at a multinational or a local firm.

His education, especially his language skills, would have been much better. So would have been his confidence level. Clearly, intelligence endowment is not enough.

We did a small study earlier this year on career paths and returning to education. The fragmentation of our education system did not surprise us — we knew that already. But what did surprise us were the extent of the fragmentation and the dependence of returning to this fragmented system. The initial salary differential, on average, if one had studied at an elite English-medium school as opposed to a low-fee private or government school was more than 100 per cent. The career trajectories of people from these streams are very different — children from elite schools rise much faster in their respective organisations.

Where there is no doubt that the private provision of education has increased choices for parents and has expanded access as well, it has further fragmented an already fragmented and class-ridden society.

The lack of connections shows up in other ways too. Once when he was going home after work, around midnight, Zubair was stopped at a police picket and then detained. He was roughed up by a couple of police constables and taken to the thana. Luckily, he had his phone with him and he was able to make a call. He still had to spend four hours at the thana.

The state has a role to play in creating a more equitable society. It seems that the state in Pakistan has given up on this role almost completely. Social protection programmes such as BISP can play a role in ameliorating some of the worst forms of poverty; they cannot address or reverse the increasing fragmentation and inequity.

Can we offer any hope to young people in Pakistan? We talk a lot about the ‘demographic dividend’ and how the large number of young people in the country should be seen as an asset and not a liability. But given the right-wing economic ideologies of all political parties and government expenditure priorities, should the majority of young people have any hope? The honest answer seems to be an emphatic ‘no’.

From the Dawn, Pakistan, published Friday 16th December, 2016.

Managing Diversity


ONE hundred and seventy-odd children, four teachers, and two old and dingy rooms. We visited a government boy’s primary school in a village just outside Sargodha. The two rooms had been built quite some time back and were not really fit for classes. Most of the classes were held in the open with children sitting on the ground. The weather was pleasant at the time, but what must children go through in the summer or the height of winter?

Most children clearly came from very poor households: many did not have uniforms, proper clothing or even shoes. I could not spot a single overweight kid among the150-odd children that I could see — you would expect some in any sample of children. In fact, most of the kids were very thin, some looked emaciated and many appeared to have an unhealthy hair and skin tone. Some were clearly malnourished and stunted. Quite a few must have come to school without having had their breakfast.

But there was a silver lining. Even in these trying circumstances the four teachers were doing their best to educate these children. The system could help them more and the results could get even better.

Any group of children would have a certain diversity of abilities among them: some would be quick learners, others would take longer, some would be more coordinated than others, some would have a better memory, some would be good at physical activities, and so on. Teachers have to be not only aware of this, they have to make sure all children learn despite the diversity and, more importantly, they have to ensure that the diversity works to the advantage of the class they teach.

The diversity in children is not confined to ability differentials only. Household and community circumstances and differences also add to the diversity that children bring to classes and schools. Wealth and income level, level of parental education, gender of the child and occupation of the parents make a difference in shaping and determining what a child brings to class. A class in a rural area is likely to be quite different, in at least the background knowledge and preoccupations of children, than one in an urban area.

Household characteristics impact child ability issues at a deeper level too. If a child was not provided enough nutrition in the early years of her life, her mental or physical development might have been hampered by that deprivation. If a child is coming hungry to school, she is not likely to learn a lot in class. And our national level surveys are pointing out alarmingly high numbers for child malnutrition, even stunting.

Teachers have a responsibility to ensure all children in their class learn, and learn to the best of every child’s potential. But the job gets a lot harder if children are coming hungry to classes and/or are coming from more marginalised backgrounds.

One of our ongoing research projects is looking at the various forms of marginalisation that children encounter. Poverty, gender, geographic location and child health (including disability) are important in this regard. We are also looking at ways in which children, their families and teachers can cope with these challenges.

We find that teachers are not only aware of these challenges and issues of diversity, they, despite the constrained circumstances they work in, have some coping mechanisms for dealing with these issues. Teachers, on average, know the students who need extra help with their school work: in some schools we found that teachers had identified ‘slow learners’ in every class so that they could be singled out for extra attention. Giving extra time and/or attention to students who need help is the most common coping strategy. In some cases we found teachers experimenting with peer group mechanisms to ensure help for children with more challenges: classmates helping classmates through in-class interaction.

But, all these practices are happening at an individual teacher or school level. Student diversity is, as of now, not acknowledged as a concern by the education department and/or teacher-training department. Student diversity is a fact and we also know that given the economic and social circumstances of most Pakistanis, a large number of our children, especially in public schools, will come from marginalised backgrounds. We need to purposefully and explicitly train our teachers to deal with the needs of marginalised children.

Furthermore, teachers can only do so much to manage some issues of marginalisation. The coping mechanisms they offer in class or in school cannot level the playing field for all, nor can they address all concerns stemming from marginalisation issues.

Teachers cannot provide food to hungry children, and they cannot give uniforms and school supplies to children out of their pockets. Teachers cannot undo what malnutrition and deprivation in early childhood might have done to some of our children. For this, the government needs to step in with options like school-feeding programmes, cash-transfer programmes for poor families, nutrition programmes for young women of childbearing age, and early childhood programmes. If these are not offered, teacher efforts at ensuring that all children can learn, and explore their potential, will always be stymied.

Do we want all of our children to learn? Do we want education to level the playing field for all, give opportunities to all and allow each child to develop to his/her full potential? If so, a ‘same size fits all’ approach to managing classes and education will not do.

Children come from diverse backgrounds and bring a diversity of abilities to classes. This is especially the case for children coming from marginalised backgrounds. They need a lot more support and attention. Given the large number of children coming from such backgrounds, especially in government schools, the imperative to focus on both in-school and out-of-school interventions cannot be overemphasised.

From the Dawn, Pakistan, published Friday 2nd December, 2016.

A Flawed Development Model

EACH time we have had a growth spurt in Pakistan, it has been based on investments in physical infrastructure or investments in physical capital. Expansion in the 1960s was based on gains in industrial and agricultural production. There were gains from increased agricultural productivity but these were based on research that had mostly been done elsewhere.

The expansion in the 1980s was again a similar combination. We did get some benefits from opening up the economy in the early 2000s but most of the gains even then were consumption-led. Now we are again hoping investments in the energy sector, roads and other infrastructure projects, through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) or otherwise, will get us the economic growth we need.

In all previous instances, reasonable or high growth rates vanished fairly quickly. The last years of reasonable growth were almost a decade ago. Recently, we have even been struggling to reach growth rates of five to six per cent. Low growth rates of the economy limit our ability both to tackle poverty and offer good employment opportunities to the millions who join the working-age population every year.

There might be a number of hypotheses that could, quite reasonably, be created to explain why we have not been able to sustain high or reasonable growth rates. Corruption, overregulation, weak institutions, poor infrastructure, state incompetence and institutional inefficiencies could all provide alternative explanations. But I want to focus on another candidate: the poor state of our human capital. I feel this, more than anything else, explains where we stand today.

Many experts have commented on the human development gap in Pakistan over the last two to three decades. They have pointed out that for our growth rates and level of income Pakistan’s achievements in the area of human development has been much lower when we compare them to other countries in similar situations. We could and should have been doing much better in terms of education, health and other human development indicators.

Going further, my contention is that the reason we have not been able to sustain high growth rates, even when various events have afforded us a few years of higher growth is that we just do not have the human capital: we do not have enough creative, educated, trained and healthy people who can sustain growth.

Historically, we have never invested very much in our people. And you can see the difference in countries that have. When East Asian states started to invest in their people they were not very different from where we were at that time. Today, the comparison appears unwarranted and decades of investments have created the difference. But the conditions back in the 1950s were not terribly different.

We have good examples closer to home too. Sri Lanka is an excellent example of a country that invested heavily in its people and that is now reaping the benefits. Despite decades of civil strife, Sri Lanka’s life expectancy today is 77.9 years, its infant mortality rate is 8.5 per 1,000 births and maternal mortality 0.39 per 1,000 births. Its overall literacy rate is 92.5pc, while the youth literacy rate is 98pc. In addition, 87.3pc of the population has access to safe drinking water. All of the above statistics are comparable to developed countries and are several orders of magnitude better than where we stand today.

The numbers mentioned here are indubitable. But some experts have been arguing that Sri Lanka’s higher achievements in the area of human development in that country have been achieved at the cost of GDP growth: by diverting resources to health, education and other human development sectors, Sri Lanka has had to live with lower growth rates of GDP.

There are two responses to this. One, this story might have been a good reading of Sri Lanka until a decade or so ago, but it is no longer the case. Sri Lanka has doubled its per capita income since 2005. Poverty levels stand at 7.6pc only and the current unemployment rate is 4.9pc.

But secondly, and far more importantly, so what? If growth has been a little slower, so what? Is the quality of life of the people there not the metric by which to judge the success or failure of the policies of a country? If the people are educated and healthy, and have a reasonable standard of living, why should it matter if growth rates do not match those of China or East Asia?

Sri Lanka offered free education, for nine years of schooling, for all children, in 1945. Their motorways were built only recently. And even now the motorway they built is a four-lane one (we have a six-lane one). We announced free and compulsory education only six years ago. And we have not been able to implement this responsibility to date.

Visit Sri Lanka. Talk to ordinary Sri Lankans and see the impact education has had on their approach to work and life and their aspirations. You will immediately see the point of having a human development-focused development model or policy.

Will CPEC give us high growth rates? Maybe it will. If the volumes of investment that are being talked about do come through, higher growth rates will be the result. But will we be able to sustain these growth rates given the human development levels we are at currently? It seems impossible. Will CPEC and other infrastructure investments be able to transform us into a developed society and allow our people to be a lot more educated and healthy? Not likely. Our model of growth and development is a deeply flawed one. It might deliver some elections for the government, it is unlikely to lead to sustainable growth and development.

From the Dawn, Pakistan, Friday September 23rd, 2016

Goal 2 of SDGs: Inequality and impact on Hunger Issues

Pakistan’s challenges: Sustainable Development Goals 2015-2030
Agenda 2030 comprises 17 SDGs with 169 targets.

Inequality: detrimental to food security

• Pakistan is ranked 79th out of 109 countries on the Global Food Security Index

• 60pc of Pakistanis are food insecure

• 50pc of women and children under five are malnourished

• Poor nutrition causes an estimated 45pc of deaths in children under the age of five
By Faisal Bari

It was a late evening in Islamabad, a few months after the 2005 earthquake, when I spotted an old man standing by a road. I pulled up beside him, assuming he needed a ride. When I asked if I could take him somewhere, he pulled a young boy from behind him to his side and said, “If you want to help, take him with you and give him a decent life. This is my grandson and I cannot feed him anymore. His parents are no more and I am too old to work. And I cannot see him hungry.” A decade later, I still get teary-eyed when recalling this moment.

One would want to believe, as popular myth goes, that people do not go to bed hungry in Pakistan. In 2016, Pakistan ranks 79th out of 109 countries according to the Global Food Security Index. Approximately 40pc of children under the age of five are underweight according to a World Health Organisation (WHO) survey. Iodine, iron and protein deficiencies result in an annual loss of 3 to 4pc of the GDP. And with millions of children compelled to attend schools hungry, the situation couldn’t get worse. It is impossible for a hungry child to focus on learning when adequate nutrition is needed for optimal mental and physical development. The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) estimates 37.5mn people in Pakistan are not adequately nourished. To add, an estimated 45pc of deaths in children under the age of five are caused by poor nutrition. If pregnant and lactating women are malnourished and if children do not get adequate nutrition in the first few years of their life, mental and physical deficiencies become endemic.

The Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) of the UN defines hunger as the daily consumption of fewer than 1,800 kcal by an individual.
Adequate nutrition is a basic right as Goal 2 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) relates to ending hunger, achieving food security and improving nutrition with the objective to promote sustainable agriculture. By 2030, Pakistan is supposed to “end hunger and ensure access for all, especially for the poor and vulnerable, to nutritious and sufficient food the year round.” By signing on the SDGs, the government has committed to ending all forms of malnutrition. However, independent of these commitments, if the country wants to achieve high growth rates and sustain the latter to ensure development, hunger and food insecurity need to end. The tragedy is that it is not the case that Pakistan is not producing enough food. It can easily afford to provide adequate nutrition for all citizens. It is a question about asymmetric income and wealth distribution which, in turn, results in iniquitous access to food. Poverty is one reason for insufficient access – the vast majority of the world’s hungry people live in developing countriess where 12.9pc of the population is undernourished. Overall economic deprivation is the reason for a certain percentage of people with poor nourishment in Pakistan. However, by almost all measures of poverty, the latter has decreased significantly over the last three decades. Nonetheless, at the same time, food insecurity still remains high, thereby stagnating maternal and infant mortality rates. About 50pc of women and children under the age of five are malnourished, according to WFP.
It is incomprehensible, then, that larger numbers of adults are malnourished and choose to keep their children poorly nourished even when poverty has decreased over the past few decades. The reason is a lack of investment in public services, such as access to portable water, sanitation, public, and preventive and curative healthcare. Wealthier segments of society have access to better quality, privately provided social services whereas the underprivileged and vulnerable rely on the state’s provision of public services. So, even if ‘poor’ families – from low-to-middle-income segments – have an income above a minimum threshold, they stile have access only to poor quality drinking water, limited access to quality liquid and solid waste management services, and no decent healthcare services – implying poor health outcomes. An unhealthy individual is likely to have reduced nutrition absorption as well.
Another factor imperative to ending hunger is climate and environmental changes, predicted to play havoc with future agricultural output. If, with adequate food availability and a fairly robust agricultural sector, the country is presently beset with severe malnutrition challenges – almost 60pc of Pakistanis are food insecure – what is the possibility for a future with acute food and water shortages? Agriculture also supplies a large percentage of jobs and income opportunities in rural areas. If it becomes more unpredictable, such shifts are likely to impact job and income opportunities. If increased inequalities remain unchecked and there is minimal investment in public services, then it is hard to imagine how the government will even come close to its target of eliminating hunger and ensuring access to adequate nourishment for all by 2030. Current inequality trends are, in fact, detrimental to eliminating hunger. To add, if climate change is even half as disruptive as predicted, then ensuring adequate nutrition will become more elusive. Reorienting policies to include greater social sector investment in health, education, water, sanitation, employment and income guarantees, and food and nutrition programmes in schools are required urgently. Despite the adverse socio-economic impact of poor development policies, social sector development – especially mandated to the provinces under the 18th Amendment – is not even under discussion at policy tables in Pakistan today.

From the Dawn, Pakistan, published Wednesday 21st September, 2016

Picking Up Where They Left Off


ALBER dropped out of Grade 8 about six years ago. His family circumstances were such that he could not have continued in school. He had to get a job, as a helper at a photocopying shop, to be able to contribute to the family income. He found himself without work three years later when the shop closed down. He has been out of a job since then.

Alber wants to go back to school and continue studying until he completes his Intermediate. But he does not have any opportunity to do so. With no job, little money at home and almost no support from any other source, he does not see how he can re-enter the education stream.

Alber has tried to enrol in vocational training programmes provided by the government. It has not worked so far. He was not accepted in some of the programmes as he had not passed his middle school examinations when he was forced to leave. He felt that many of the courses he could get into did not offer good job prospects so he decided not to spend his time, money and energy in acquiring non-marketable skills.

Where should Alber go? What can he do? It seems that, like millions of youth in the country, Alber’s only choice is to continue looking for jobs in the informal sector of the economy and spend his working life there. If he is lucky he will be able to find some stability of job and income. If he is not, he will end up with the millions of unemployed and frustrated people that Pakistan has been producing for quite sometime.

Millions of children in Pakistan, even today, never see the inside of a school. But equally, if not more tragically, of the ones who enrol in Grade 1, millions drop out of school before they reach matriculation level. Out of 100 children who enrol in the first grade, it is estimated that only four to six children reach institutions of higher learning.

Many among our youth who have dropped out of school, for whatever reason, want a second chance at education later in life. Data from one youth survey shows that more than 60 per cent of young people who had dropped out of school before reaching the level they aspired to wanted another chance to get educated. Given our population base, this means millions of young people.

Where we have been making efforts at increasing enrolment rates through various reform efforts in the education sector, we have not yet concentrated deeply on the issue of children who have dropped out of schools and now want to re-enter the education space. There are a few non-formal education models that allow children to come back, but these programmes are very small and do not have substantial government support.

What should a 15-year-old who dropped out of Grade 4 a few years back do now? Should he or she try to enrol in a regular school and interact with students who are 10 years old? Most schools will not allow that. But even if they did, this would not be the solution to the problem. It will create disruptions in regular classes and will not be good for the child either. More importantly, if the child could come to a regular school, he or she might not have dropped out in the first place.

Zaheer is a peon in an academic institution, Bashir works in a motorcycle repair shop, John is currently unemployed and looking for a job, Amna volunteers as a teacher’s assistant in a low-fee private school, and Latif makes and serves tea in an NGO office. All of them are young, energetic and intelligent. All of them had to leave off studying. All of them want to go back. None of them sees a way of being able to do that. Becoming private candidates for higher examinations is not a viable option for any of them: they cannot afford the cost of books and coaching lessons, and those who have jobs cannot afford to take time off from their work.

The Punjab government launched the Punjab Education Endowment Fund (PEEF) a few years ago to ensure that students who do well in at the matriculation/intermediate level but do not have the resources to continue their education further get scholarships to continue. PEEF, by most accounts, has been quite successful and has provided scholarships to thousands of deserving students so far.

Could provincial governments come up with a similar programme for youth who are looking for a second chance in life? Instead of spending money distributing laptops or setting up expensive Daanish schools or even giving five chickens to each female student in school (to teach kitchen skills), a support programme that allows second chances to youth could have significant benefits for the millions looking for such opportunities. These opportunities could consist of pathways that allow the youth to complete their education and/or acquire vocational training after attaining some minimum level of education.

One-time errors of omission or even commission should not have consequences that can never be reversed or addressed, especially for young people. Whether circumstances have led to dropping out or it is the young people’s personal choice to do so, if they learn better later, it should be possible for them to find pathways that allow them opportunities to address the deficiencies in their education or vocational training.

But they cannot do this on their own. They need government support to be able to break out of the usually vicious cycles they are caught in: unemployment or poorly paying jobs that have no future prospects leading to low incomes, leading to no opportunities for growth. A major rethink is also needed by our educational and vocational training institutions and programmes to be able to come up with ways that could cater to this category of youth.

From the Dawn, Karachi, published Friday September 9th, 2016.