The Punjab government's decision to transfer management of selected government schools to private partners, civil-society organisations, and educated young licensees has sparked sharp debate. Critics call it privatisation, while supporters describe it as reorganising failing public schools.

Under the Public Schools Reorganisation Program (PSRP), school buildings remain public assets, education remains free for students, and the government pays operators against verified enrolment and other prescribed conditions. The model is therefore publicly financed and privately managed through partnership, rather than the outright sale of public education.

The province has a vast network of more than 52,000 public schools serving around 12 million enrolled children, yet it still has an estimated 9.5-9.7 million children aged five to sixteen out of school. This is the largest absolute number of out-of-school children in any of our provinces.

Any fair discussion must acknowledge many government schools which continue to serve their communities with dedication, and thousands of teachers perform honourably under difficult conditions. Yet the system has also carried deep-rooted weaknesses: thousands of schools with very low or zero enrolment, single-teacher institutions, buildings in disrepair, weak classroom management and children progressing through grades without mastering basic reading or arithmetic.

The programme's own terms identify weak enrolment, zero-teacher, single-teacher and two-teacher primary schools as requiring reorganisation. With all that, the learning crisis is particularly serious.

ASER Pakistan has repeatedly shown over the past decade that many children in Grade 5 cannot read a Grade 2-level story or complete basic division. The 2025 national findings still indicated that only about half of Grade 5 pupils in both government and private schools could hardly read the expected simple story text, meaning years of enrolment do not automatically produce foundational learning.

While Punjab has performed better than some other provinces on several education indicators, 'better than others' is not the same as good enough. A child who spends five years in school and remains unable to read fluently has been present in the system but has not truly received quality education.

Teacher absenteeism is another persistent concern, although it should not be exaggerated into the claim that every public-school teacher is absent or ineffective. Multiple studies have found that absenteeism, lenient supervision, transport, water and sanitation difficulties and the security attached to permanent employment can reduce teaching time.

Earlier reform and monitoring programmes improved attendance in many areas, demonstrating that the problem responds to accountability. An institutional culture of permanent employment-without-meaningful-appraisal has created a belief that salary progression is guaranteed regardless of classroom performance.

On top of it, some teachers remain disconnected from revised curricula, digital learning, modern assessment, inclusive education and activity-based teaching methods. When their salaries, benefits and pensions represent a major public investment, the return must also be measured in children's attendance, safety and learning, not merely in filled posts and completed registers.

While all this is true on teachers' part, they are not the only cause of a compounded failure. Officials must also acknowledge irrational transfers, political interference, and weak school leadership as critical factors that have hindered progress for decades.