Skip to content

Shaping Education

The argument, not the advert.

Research, advocacy and commentary on what education in Pakistan should look like next. Published because we think it matters — including the submissions that were not adopted and the findings that went against us.

Current

One lead conversation, two supporting

Research · 29 July 2026

Simulator-first STEAM: a cost and outcome comparison

What happens to cost per learner, and to assessed outcomes, when a programme stops buying a hardware seat for every child. Includes the fidelity trade-off, which is real and which most simulator advocates do not mention.

Methodology and limitations published alongside · Author and peer review required before publication

Position · 15 July 2026

Teacher capacity, not hardware, is the binding constraint

Why provincial STEAM plans built around specialist hiring stall in year two, and what a workable alternative requires.

Commentary · 02 July 2026

What a national STEAM curriculum would need to get right

Submitted to the curriculum consultation and published here in full, including the recommendations that were not taken up.

Four strands

What we publish, and why

Future

Future of Education

Long-form positions on where schooling is heading and what that actually requires of a system with our constraints.

Advocacy

Advocacy & conversations

Submissions to curriculum consultations and public policy discussion, published whether or not they were adopted.

Research

Research

Our own studies, with methodology, sample size and limitations stated in the piece rather than in an appendix nobody opens.

Media

Media mentions

Coverage and contributed commentary. Selective here; the complete archive lives on its own page.

Standards

What we hold ourselves to here

Thought leadership is easy to fake and expensive to lose. These are the rules that make the difference visible.

Every claim is dated and attributed

Author, date and role on every piece. An undated position paper is a marketing asset pretending to be a position.

Limitations are in the piece

Sample size, scope and what the study cannot show, stated where a reader will actually see them.

We publish what went against us

Including consultation submissions that were rejected and findings that undercut our own model.

No gated research

Nothing here sits behind an email capture. If it is worth publishing it is worth reading without a transaction.

Content cadence is weekly under the Future of Education content engine. A thought-leadership section that goes quiet for a quarter does more reputational damage than never starting one.

Working on the same problem?

If you are researching, legislating or delivering in this space, the data and the working papers are open to you.