EDUCATION is said to be the lifeblood of a nation and a teacher is the one who enjoys a pivotal role in terms of brightening the path of knowledge and wisdom by mitigating the gloom of ignorance. Moreover, a teacher fashions the immature ones of today into responsible and beneficial citizens of tomorrow. Such a high profile assignment requires the incumbent to be well conversant with his/her subject(s) concerned as well as be familiar with the latest pedagogical trends and techniques. It is painful to see just how many teachers lack these vital competencies. The reason for this state of affairs is the dearth of fountainheads from where these torch bearers of wisdom and insight can imbibe. Although the state does cater to this indispensable need of teachers, as there are good many teacher-training colleges and institutes, the quality of tutelage dished out there is dismally poor.
A teacher at a training college is supposed to be well versed in all subjects taught at B.Ed. or M.Ed. level, be it educational psychology, perspective of education or educational management. However, a teacher’s area of interest or expertise is not given any consideration while assigning them classes. This results in the shabby standard of their teaching method. With an exception of a few very good teachers, a large number of teachers rely on lectures based on books written decades ago. Their lectures lack the tinge of book leafing. The so-called outmoded lesson planning, which they teach their students to adopt, is non-existent in their own teaching. The would-be teachers are supposed to copy down their lectures without demur. If a daredevil tries to dissent from their ideas, he/she is severely scoffed. This is why their classes are devoid of liveliness and motivational value.
A crucial phase of any training programme is lesson observation of teachers-to-be by their trainers, which is technically called teaching practice. Unfortunately the process being adapted today is quite irrational. I have experienced this incomprehensible modus operandi for evaluation of the teachers under training. A group of trainees is sent to a government-run school with a trainer as observer. Here one fails to fathom how a single person can encompass the knowledge of different subjects taught at secondary level. On the contrary, the way of ascertaining a trainee’s grasp over the subject in advanced countries is reverse because only the trainer, who has specialised in a particular subject, for instance, English, is entitled to observe that particular lesson.
Trainee students do not have the liberty to select the optional subjects at volition. They are left with no option but to select the subject(s), which the college concerned offers. Unavailability of the subjects prescribed by the university to which the college is affiliated, is beyond comprehension. Some teachers advise students not to opt for the subject(s), which they do not assess in examination. They even go to the extent of intimidating the intended students of poor marks in case a teacher from outside the college is assigned to assess that subject.
A former federal minister for education once claimed the necessity of 50,000 English teachers. In spite of that I remember how a student at a government-run college of education was dissuaded from opting for Functional English by a senior lecturer of English simply because the ‘learned’ teacher was not teaching the mentioned subject. The student was de-motivated to the extent of horrifying her of ‘bad marks’ as any other teacher was likely to assess the exam script of that subject. Readers perhaps think that Functional English is too tough to do. As a matter of fact, if taught perfectly, a fairly above-average six-grader can easily solve more than 70 per cent of the paper. Incredible, it may seem. The syllabus of the subject in question is not very difficult to obtain.
At M.Ed. level, submission of a thesis is a mandatory task in the syllabi of almost all universities. Fulfillment of this essential assignment is, by and large, an absurd business; wherein a few researchers are assigned to a supervisor without ascertaining his competence over different domains of research as s/he is supposed to be well versed in different types and modus operandi of research. The myriad of predicaments awaits the researchers carrying out analytical research involving statistical interpretation of the collected data as these budding researchers are left unattended by their supervisor concerned under different pretexts. However, there are some ‘kind’ supervisors too, whose kindness sprouts up at this critical moment and they bring along the cure which is nothing but plagiarising the contents of the theses compiled five to 10 years before. Here the research gets changed into ‘churning others’ research.’
These aforementioned points are just the tip of the iceberg. If anyone is serious about teacher education, s/he should bear in mind that no angel will descend from the heavens to rectify this shoddy scenario nor will a magical wand do. In order to revamp the bleak position of teacher education, every stakeholder – the government, teachers, students, parents in particular and society in general — will have to play their due role. The mud-slinging attitude will further mar the fast declining standard of teacher education. Perhaps the Higher Education Commission will spare its extremely precious time to rescue this sinking ship without a further ado.
