APOLITICAL education has two flaws.

First, neutrality, as a term from natural science, is irrational; words such as unbiased or objective are more suitable for a social setting. Second, politics is not specific to political parties, movements and protests.

It is integral to daily life in the form of interpersonal negotiations over power, values and resources. Therefore, education, as a primary pillar of society, cannot be neutral as it is shaped by sociopolitical and economic forces.

While education being political is far from negative, it must keep well away from serving anyone`s political interests, including citizens` social mobility or the concerns of the ruling elite. The apoliticisation of education stems from the intent to politicise it. The aim is to silence academics and students, and allow the ruling classes to gain more space. One has mentioned in these pages before that the provision of poor education to the underprivileged is the common agenda of the political elite.

Moreover, covert apoliticisation is a global phenomenon. For instance, the Right to Education in India mandates that private schools reserve seats for children from low-income groups. But this leads to subsidised private education as opposed to strengthened public education.

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, the Benazir Kafalat Programme, through conditional cash transfers, boosts both political patronage and the private school system, while neglecting the public sector. For governments, it is a useful initiative to flaunt in order to distract collective attention from failing systems that deprive poor families of quality schooling. And to ensure that they remain dependent on stipends. It also shifts blame whereby parents, and not the state, are held responsible for poor attendance.

Educational reforms cannot be apolitical and must be analysed. For example, the Single National Curriculum introduced to bridge social divisions through standardised education was ill-thought-out as education equality needs access, quality, more schools,resources and teachers.Schoolsin remote areas of the country, without basic facilities and human capital, cannot be expected to deliver quality content and produce results that are at par with schools in cosmopolitan settings. The primary political objective of the SNC was to compromise the devolution of education to the provinces, and to produce homogeneous learners despite cognitive and sociocultural differences.

Sadly, the over 26m out-of-school children have become another political slogan, which is raised at inaugurations of schoolsand during ceremonies for new teachers.

This is despite current woes: absence of potable water, equipment and sanitation.

Structures and staffing as quantifiable features accumulate votes. Hence, parents` unwillingness to send their children to dilapidated facilities is overlooked, as is the fact that those who do graduate from these institutions rarely become a significant part of the labour force. Only prospects of a promising future and superior schooling will encourage enrolment.

Similarly, girls` enrolment, especially in rural areas of the country, is dismally low.

Among the many reasons for this is bracketing females with minorities, which leaves minimal space for equal growth. Secondly, social and religious pressures discourage some parents from educating their daughters. Our lawmakers must address these barriers with robust legislation that ascertains girls` schooling, equal employment opportunities and other constitutional guarantees.

The most prominent aspect of apoliticis-ing education is banning student politics, limiting the political engagements of undergraduates and reducing their learning to centralised content that is disconnected fromtheir context and life experiences. Consequently, their critical thinking is compromised, and we are left with passive political leaders. Critical thinking is the ability to identify the loss of objectivity in a debate as well as diversify one`s thought process for a viable conclusion. It also means awareness and pursuit of rights.

Any political move to discourage critical thinking will create a population that is susceptible to propaganda, fear-mongering, and simplistic narratives formulated to produce a submissive and gullible youth incapable of challenging the status quo.

When people begin to think independently, they demand accountability, and resist propaganda and the status quo. A biased education subdues the intellect, makes the learners vulnerable to exploitation, and inculcates an acceptance for the status quo.

Education should be political so that it empowers learners, teaches them to think critically, connects them with society, and inspires them to question authority and challenge injustice.

The wnter is an educationist.their context and life experiences. Consequently, their critical thinking is compromised, and we are left with passive political leaders. Critical thinking is the ability to identify the loss of objectivity in a debate as well as diversify one`s thought process for a viable conclusion. It also means awareness and pursuit of rights.

Any political move to discourage critical thinking will create a population that is susceptible to propaganda, fear-mongering, and simplistic narratives formulated to produce a submissive and gullible youth incapable of challenging the status quo.

When people begin to think independently, they demand accountability, and resist propaganda and the status quo. A biased education subdues the intellect, makes the learners vulnerable to exploitation, and inculcates an acceptance for the status quo.

Education should be political so that it empowers learners, teaches them to think critically, connects them with society, and inspires them to question authority and challenge injustice.

The wnter is an educationist.