The challenge

Across the world, 22.8 million children remain out-of-school. Pakistan ranks second globally for the highest number of out-of-school children. In the southeastern province of Sindh, a staggering 44 per cent of children aged 5–16 are not attending school (Rind, 2024). The reasons behind this huge number of students being out-of-school in Pakistan is similar to global issues of poverty and conflict and further compounded by additional geographical hurdles, disability, inadequate infrastructure and sociocultural impediments especially affecting girls in rural areas (Aslam & Kingdon, 2021; Siddiqui & Channa, 2021). The introduction of public–private partnerships (PPPs) has shown promise in addressing these challenges through innovative leadership strategies and flexible governance models (Rind & Shah, 2022).

How do school heads operating under different systems – government-run, Education Management Organisations (EMOs) and Sindh Education Foundation (SEF) schools – navigate educational challenges? My recent qualitative comparative case study in three different types of schools sheds light on effective leadership strategies that make a real difference (see Rind, 2024).

‘Tackling Pakistan’s out-of-school-children crisis requires more than infrastructure – it demands visionary leadership supported by flexible governance structures.’

Leadership in three school models

Government schools: A centralised system

Government school heads operate within a rigid, bureaucratic structure where decision-making is centralised. This command-and-control system hinders democratic practices (Gulzar et al., 2025). While intrinsically motivated to make a difference, their external incentives are limited. One school head described the constraints:

‘We want to transform our schools, but centralized decision-making leaves us with little room for change.’ (Rind, 2024, p. 8)

Despite their motivation, government school heads often focus on administrative tasks rather than proactively tackling the out-of-school-children issue due to bureaucratic roadblocks (Chingara & Heystek, 2019).

EMO schools: A semi-flexible PPP model

Education Management Organisations (EMOs), introduced as part of Sindh’s PPP initiative in 2015, offer greater autonomy to school heads while holding them accountable for results. Leadership in EMO schools is ‘performance-driven’, with key performance indicators (KPIs) – such as student enrollment and retention – tied to their success (Aslam & Kingdon, 2021).

One EMO school head adopted creative strategies, from community outreach campaigns to leveraging technology for parent engagement:

‘We use every tool – from banners to social media – to bring children back to school and keep them there.’ (Rind, 2024, p. 10)

This semi-flexible governance structure allows EMO school leaders to innovate, bridging the gap between government oversight and private operational efficiency.

SEF schools: Community-centred leadership

Sindh Education Foundation (SEF) schools take decentralisation a step further, empowering school heads to act as ‘chief executives’ with autonomy. Their salaries are directly linked to enrollment, creating strong external incentives alongside intrinsic passion for education (Siddiqui & Channa, 2021). One SEF school head emphasised personalised outreach to counsel families:

‘We speak to parents in their language, using religious and social references to highlight the value of education. It works.’ (Rind, 2024, p. 11)

This community-driven leadership reflects global best practices in achieving equity in education (Roberston & Verger, 2012).

Conclusion: A path forward

Tackling the out-of-school-children crisis requires more than infrastructure – it demands visionary leadership supported by flexible governance structures. Sindh’s experience shows that empowering school heads, particularly through community-centred models like SEF, offers scalable solutions for regions grappling with similar challenges. These findings call for further investigation: How do similar issues manifest in other provinces such as Balochistan or Khyber Pakhtunkhwa? Future studies could also explore effectiveness of models and whether successful international strategies have potential to tailor solutions across Pakistan.

Declaration of generative AI in scientific writing: During the preparation of this blog post the authors used ChatGPT 4.0 in order to rephrase some of the sections from my previous publication on the same topic. After using this tool, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the accuracy of the content, proper referencing and adherence to academic integrity standards.

References

Aslam, M., & Kingdon, G. G. (2021). Public–private partnerships in education: Do they offer an equitable solution to education in India and Pakistan? In Reforming Education and Challenging Inequalities in Southern Contexts (pp. 79–97). Routledge.

Chingara, R., & Heystek, J. (2019). Leadership as agency in the context of structure. International Journal of Educational Management, 33(7), 1596–1609.

Gulzar, S., Ladino, J. F., Mahmood, M. Z., & Rogger, D. (2025). Command and can’t control: Assessing centralized accountability in the public sector. The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.60572/77j5-c673

Rind, G. M., & Shah, D. B. (2022). Public–private partnerships in education: Evaluating the Education Management Organisations Programme in Sindh, Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review, 61(2), 185–211. https://doi.org/10.30541/v61i2pp.185-212

Rind, I. A. (2024). Leadership strategies in addressing out-of-school children: A comparative study of heads of government and public–private-managed schools in Sindh, Pakistan. Education Sciences, 14(11), 1230. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111230

Robertson, S. L., & Verger, A. (2012). Governing education through public private partnerships. In S. L. Robertson, K. Mundy, A. Verger, & F. Menashy (eds.), Public private partnerships in education. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Siddiqui, A., & Channa, S. (2021). Public–private partnership in education: A case study on Sindh Education Foundation. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4309745