Two months ago, the Supreme Court ruled that all primary and upper-primary school teachers with more than five years of service remaining until superannuation and who had not yet taken the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) must clear the test within two years in order to continue in service. This verdict has been opposed by several teacher associations in Tamil Nadu and West Bengal, as well as by the respective State governments, which have filed review petitions. They argue that it is unreasonable and unfair to require teachers appointed before the introduction of TET to clear the test at this stage of their careers.
I spoke to several teachers working in government, government-aided, and private schools regarding this verdict. Many feel that the ruling is unjust and poses a serious threat to their jobs. Indeed, making TET mandatory for those already in service is inequitable. It is the responsibility of teacher associations and State governments to safeguard the rights of in-service teachers who fear losing their jobs.
Why did the Supreme Court declare that clearing the TET is mandatory for all teachers, including those with more than two decades of experience? The likely reasoning is that the judges believed a uniform requirement would help improve the quality of school education in the country. No one would dispute that children’s right to quality education must not be compromised. However, the assumption that all teachers who clear TET are effective educators and that those who cannot clear it are incapable of excellence is short-sighted and, arguably, unfounded.
Experience counts
Becoming a great teacher is a continuous process. It involves far more than passing a qualifying examination. A teacher eligibility test can assess a candidate’s subject knowledge and understanding of pedagogical principles to some extent, but cannot measure their teaching skills, creativity, classroom management, or ability to connect with students. Passing a test does not guarantee teaching competence or practical classroom skills. A teacher’s professional experience often matters more than academic qualifications alone.
Teaching is not static, nor should teachers be. Every day, educators encounter new situations, for example, through interactions with colleagues, students, and various resources that encourage them to experiment with fresh approaches and refine their practice. Such experiences foster a sense of dynamism that enriches both teaching and learning.
At the heart of this dynamism is a commitment to growth. Effective teachers continually update their knowledge, reflect on their work, adapt their methods, and, in the process, learn, unlearn, and relearn. Professional growth is an ongoing journey, and its benefits extend directly to student learning and holistic development.
While the TET serves as a useful criterion for entry into the profession, it is only one indicator of a teacher’s potential. True effectiveness is shaped by many factors, including opportunities for in-service training programmes that strengthen the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of practising teachers and support their continued development.
Changing times
Some years ago, when talking to a schoolteacher about a professional development programme, I used terms such as Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and In-Service Education and Training (INSET). To my surprise, the teacher — who had nearly three decades of experience — said, “I have never attended any in-service training in my entire career. To be honest, terms and concepts like ‘CPD’ and ‘INSET’ are unfamiliar to me and to most of my colleagues.” On further probing, she added, “The institutions where I worked never encouraged teachers to attend such programmes…”
Fortunately, this is no longer the case. Today, I often meet teachers in both government and private schools who participate in multiple training programmes to update their knowledge and enhance their skills. As a teacher trainer, I have visited several private schools across the country to conduct professional development programmes and have interacted with school managements, administrators, and teachers. An increasing number of institutions have begun to recognise the value of such capacity-building initiatives, and many teachers now feel that in-service training is, in several respects, even more important than pre-service training.
What measures should be taken to improve the quality of school education in the country? The National Education Policy (NEP) emphasises that ongoing professional development is vital for all teachers. The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) also mandates in-service training and professional development for teachers and school administrators.
To ensure that teachers continually update their knowledge and develop new skills, school boards must cultivate a supportive and non-threatening environment that encourages active participation in in-service training programs. Taking this responsibility seriously will establish a strong foundation for quality education in the country. Enhancing teachers’ competence is more important than merely preparing them for competitions. After all, competition breeds stress, while competence sparks creativity. Educational leaders must choose wisely.
Views expressed are personal
The writer is an ELT resource person and education columnist. Email [email protected].