ETHNICITY, SOCIAL STRATIFICATION AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AT PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES IN PAKISTAN: A CROSS-SECTIONAL SURVEY AT PMAS-ARID AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY RAWALPINDI

Abstract

Background: Higher education is widely expected to be meritocratic, yet evidence from several countries shows that ethnicity and social class shape who succeeds. Little is known about this in Pakistan’s agricultural universities. Methods: We analysed a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of students at PMAS-Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi (PMAS-AAUR) collected in two batches (193 returned questionnaires). After data-quality screening and applying the inclusion criteria, 152 students with a valid cumulative GPA (CGPA) were analysed (148 with known ethnicity: 92 Punjabi, 26 Saraiki, 14 Pashtun, 16 other). We compared ethnic groups on CGPA, socioeconomic status (SES), academic resources, cultural and linguistic capital, perceived ethnic discrimination, campus inclusion and social support, and fitted hierarchical regression models with heteroskedasticity-robust standard errors. Results: CGPA did not differ by ethnicity (Punjabi 3.42, other groups 3.40; difference −0.02, 95% CI −0.16 to 0.12), and ethnicity remained unrelated to CGPA after adjustment for SES, rural background, prior attainment, English-language capital and the other social factors. Ethnic groups also did not differ on SES, resources, cultural or linguistic capital, or perceived discrimination; Punjabi students were more often from rural backgrounds. Higher prior attainment predicted higher CGPA. Perceived discrimination was endorsed widely (91% reported at least one experience “sometimes” or more often) and correlated negatively with CGPA (r = −.29; batch-adjusted r = −.20), whereas English-language capital was the strongest correlate of feeling included (b = 0.49). Interactions between ethnicity and SES, rurality or language were not significant. An unplanned pattern, a lower CGPA for non-Punjabi students in the second collection batch only (−0.17 points), is reported as exploratory. Conclusions: We find no evidence of a sizeable ethnic gap in CGPA at PMAS-AAUR, and can rule out gaps larger than about 0.16 grade points. Perceived unfair treatment and weak English-language capital are nonetheless associated with lower performance and belonging, which points to inclusion and language support rather than ethnicity as such. Limitations include self-reported GPA, small minority groups and non-equivalent collection batches.