As the global economy undergoes rapid shifts driven by technological change, supply chain realignments, and new sustainability imperatives, Pakistan’s ability to modernize its industrial base has become a national priority. At the heart of this transformation lies a fundamental question: Can our engineering and technology education system produce the kind of human capital that enables industrial competitiveness, export growth, and import substitution?
To help answer this question, Technology & Management Integratix (TMI) organized a high-level focus group discussion (FGD) in May 2025. The consultation convened senior representatives from industry, academia, technical education institutions, government departments, and regulatory bodies. It aimed to identify the gaps in existing systems, validate programmatic priorities for engineering and technology education, and build consensus on the way forward.
The findings from this stakeholder dialogue provide critical inputs not only for institutional planning but also for broader technical education policy reform. This article presents a synthesis of those insights.
Context and Stakeholder Composition
The consultation was part of a structured initiative to realign engineering and technology education with Pakistan’s economic development objectives. It brought together participants from:
- Leading manufacturing sectors in textiles, leather, chemicals, dairy, food processing, energy, and construction
- Faculty and administrators from TEVTA institutions and technical universities
- Policymakers and accreditation bodies
Stakeholders were organized into six groups and guided through a series of structured activities covering systemic challenges, discipline prioritization, curriculum alignment strategies, and consensus building. The discussion was facilitated using group worksheets, dot voting, and thematic analysis.
Systemic Challenges in Engineering and Technology Education
The first activity focused on identifying the key obstacles impeding the effectiveness and relevance of engineering and technology education in Pakistan. Across the six groups, participants highlighted 20 unique challenges that were later organized into six thematic categories.
- Curriculum and Pedagogy Misalignment: Curricula are outdated, overly theoretical, and lack integration with modern industrial practices. There is insufficient benchmarking with international models, and ambiguity persists between engineering and engineering technology roles.
- Practical Training and Infrastructure Deficits: Labs are under-equipped, and simulation tools are lacking. As a result, students often graduate without hands-on experience with the technologies used in modern industry.
- Faculty and Institutional Capacity Gaps: Faculty often lack industrial exposure, and institutional governance structures do not involve employers or industry representatives in academic decision-making.
- Interdisciplinary and Innovation Deficiency: Engineering education remains siloed by discipline, limiting creativity, innovation, and problem-solving. There is minimal integration of entrepreneurship and design thinking.
- Digital and Technological Lag: Core digital skills such as cybersecurity, automation, and AI are largely absent from course content, despite their increasing relevance across industries.
- Industry-Academia and Policy Disconnect: There is weak engagement between educational institutions and employers. Policy coordination is fragmented, and soft skills are undervalued in formal curricula.
These challenges are structural and systemic. They reflect decades of underinvestment in applied technical education and limited institutional agility in adapting to labor market shifts.
Strategic Recommendations for Curriculum Reform
Participants also proposed strategies to reform technical curricula, improve graduate employability, and foster deeper linkages between education and industry. These were grouped into six strategy themes:
- Industry-Academia Linkages: Establish industrial advisory boards, enable joint supervision of capstone projects, and institutionalize year-long internships with performance feedback mechanisms.
- Curriculum Modernization: Embed AI, digital tools, sustainability, and global certifications across all engineering and technology programs.
- Research and Innovation Collaboration: Create structures for industry-sponsored research projects, industrial PhDs, and technology transfer partnerships.
- Soft and Entrepreneurial Skill Development: Include modules on negotiation, communication, socio-economic thinking, and emotional intelligence.
- Experiential Learning Models: Shift pedagogy from lecture-based to problem-based learning (PBL) supported by real-world challenges and project work.
- Strategic and Policy Frameworks: Develop long-term engineering visions and strengthen regulatory incentives for industry participation in curriculum governance.
These strategies are critical for moving from curriculum content to graduate capabilities.
Consensus on Educational Purpose
Each group’s summary statement was analyzed for underlying themes. Despite institutional and sectoral diversity, the consensus was remarkably aligned.
The most frequently mentioned priorities were:
- Curriculum relevance to local and international industry needs
- Hands-on, problem-solving-based pedagogy
- Integration of digital tools and emerging technologies
- A digital-first mindset embedded across disciplines
- Institutional structures that enable joint curriculum design and graduate placement
These are not superficial preferences but reflect a deep structural critique of the status quo, with a clear vision for reform.
From Dialogue to Design: Implications for Reform
This consultation was not a theoretical exercise. It was a step toward building an education system that serves national economic goals.
The findings point to a model of engineering and technology education that is:
- Regionally responsive to industrial needs
- Globally competitive in skills and standards
- Technically deep yet flexible and interdisciplinary
- Built on partnerships between government, industry, and academia
For policymakers, donors, and institutional planners, these insights offer a roadmap for creating institutions that do not just produce degrees, but develop human capital for national transformation.
As a consulting and research organization, TMI is committed to driving stakeholder-based reform in education and development. We believe that policy should be grounded in data, engagement, and regional specificity. This FGD reflects our approach—structured, inclusive, and impact-oriented.
For institutions, government bodies, or development partners seeking to align education with the future of work and industry, we welcome collaboration.
