STUDENTS are the primary stakeholders in higher education and the entire higher education system exists mainly to serve their educational needs.
Universities establish a comprehensive infrastructure that includes classrooms, laboratories, libraries and other facilities for co-curricular activities. They are taught by highly qualified faculty who ensure that quality education is accessible and relevant to students’ academic and professional development.
Within the higher education sector, discussions predominantly focus on faculty qualifications, curriculum development, research output and other academic priorities. Students and their inclusion in the whole system are not visible, although students, during their stay at the university, observe and experience various activities like academic, co-curricular, administrative and financial matters. As there is no systematically institutionalized mechanism for communicating their perspectives to those engaged in governance and policy decisions, therefore, a valuable contribution is lost. There is a provision in the act or charter of certain universities that mandates student representation in decision-making bodies like Syndicate or the Board of Governors (BoG), but these provisions are not implemented in true letter and spirit, thereby limiting meaningful student participation in institutional governance.
If their experiences are considered, then it will provide critical insights for enhancing teaching quality, co-curricular engagement and campus services in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). Therefore, it is important to capture the student voice regularly through structured feedback e.g. at entry, mid-level and after graduation. It can align institutional facilities for students and help to track student expectations continuously. It will complement other feedback mechanisms, ensuring the institution remains on track. Resultantly, program outcomes are achieved. Currently, Quality Enhancement Cells (QECs) gather end-of-semester course and teacher evaluations.
The effort is made to improve the teaching and learning ecosystem at the Universities, which is not complete without considering student course evaluations, graduating student surveys, alumni surveys and employer surveys. Such feedback encourages student and faculty consultative committees, which help in improving teaching & learning. There are standardized proformas that every program is expected to run. The Quality Assurance Manual requires that each department analyze the survey data, include it in assessment reports and document how results are used to improve the programs. However, the absence of a national-level student survey limits the ability to standardize and help reform the relevant national-level policy provisions. Establishing such a standardized mechanism would enable policymakers to set clear quality standards.
The annual university portfolio reports are regularly collected at HEC and these comprise a complete picture of the University’s performance in predefined standards mentioned in the Self-Assessment Manual. Such program-level surveys provide depth at only the institutional level; there is a need to have a similar national survey that may help HEC and other stakeholders to adjust policies and provisions accordingly.
The United Kingdom and other countries carry out the National Student Survey, which shows how a national instrument can inform student choice, drive institutional improvement and support public accountability. The Office for Students describes it as an annual, sector-wide check on course quality. In 2024, it achieved a 72.3 percent response rate; in 2025, the results showed higher positivity on “teaching on my course” and “student voice.” These are strong participation and policy-relevant outcomes. Pakistan can adapt this idea.
There is another similar instrument in place that is called the Graduate Outcome Survey, which is a concise instrument for graduating students. It reflects on students’ experience in the real world after getting the qualification and how he is performing in the market. The graduates can speak more openly when it is safe to do so. Surveys must be anonymous and administered independently. Institutions should communicate clearly how the data will be used and share what has changed as a result. Student representatives should be met formally through consultative committees and the outcomes of those meetings should be made public.
A system that hears its students is a system ready to grow, adapt and deliver education that truly prepares graduates for life and work. The question is not whether we should listen to students. It is a time to adopt these good practices in Pakistan for aligning our programs with the market demand and meeting the global standards. The compatibility with international policies will help Pakistani graduates to move around the world for further education or employment. (Views shared above are the author’s own and do not reflect institutional policies or opinions.)
— The writer is Director, Higher Education Commission, Islamabad.
