Content uploaded by Vimala Ramachandran
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Vimala Ramachandran on Jan 30, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Economic and Political Weekly May 21, 2005 2141
level described a motivated teacher as one
who was regular, did what she or he was
told and was, by and large, compliant.
Children were nowhere in the picture, nor
were the teaching and learning processes.
Learning was incidental to the mountain
of data they gathered and fed into the
system. Enrolment, attendance, midday
meal distribution and participation in train-
ing programmes and workshops – cold
figures – had become the indices of
educa tion. Admi nistrators at higher
levels associated motivation with low
ab se nteeism, maintaining discipline,
proper record keeping, collection and
reporting of data, utilisation of funds al-
located for teaching and learning material
and giving exercises in the classroom and
correcting them.
It is worth noting that the notion of
‘quality’ is linked to efficient manage-
ment. As a result, obedience and predict-
ability become pervasive values sought in
the system. Actual transaction time, class-
room processes and learning outcomes of
children do not figure in their first res-
ponse. However the percentage of children
clearing the terminal examination is an
important indicator of quality.
Parents had a different view. For them
discipline in the school and regular teach-
ing served as clinchers. A teacher who
came regularly, stayed in the school for the
stipulated time, did not use excessive force
(beating, abusive language, shouting and
punishment) and taught with interest was,
for them, a motivated teacher. The ability
of their children to learn to read and write
and pass examinations was another impor-
tant indicator.
Educationists, on the other hand, argued
that a motivated teacher was one who
VIMALA RAMACHANDRAN
Reviewing the progress in the
elementary education sector on
February 21, 2005, the prime min-
ister of India said that he was pained to
note that “only 47 out of 100 children
enrolled in class I reach class VIII, putting
the dropout rate at 52.79 per cent.” This,
he said was “unacceptably high” and
attributed the high dropout rate to “lack
of adequate facilities, large-scale ab-
senteeism of teachers and inadequate su-
pervision by local authorities” (The Hindu,
New Delhi, February 22, 2005). This is
not the first time that teachers and local
authorities have been blamed for India’s
poor performance in elementary educa-
tion; civil society organisations and the
media have highlighted the issue of ac-
countability for over 20 years. Yet, it is
only in the last three to four years that
political leaders and administrators have
begun to openly admit that motivation
and accountability among teachers and
local administrators is a big problem and
that while data on enrolment is impres-
sive many children leave primary school
without learning the basic skills of reading
and writing.
In one district of north India I asked a
group of teachers who, according to them,
was a motivated teacher. After thinking for
a while, one of them said: “A ‘motivated’
teacher comes to school every day, does
what he is told and provides information
the higher-ups want!” I was puzzled with
the answer. I probed further. Almost all
teachers believed that daily attendance and
complying with orders and requests for
information were reasonable indicators of
motivation. Administrators at the district
Why School Teachers Are
Demotivated and
Disheartened
Increases in enrolment rates, attendance figures and midday meal
distribution do not convey the true picture of the state of the
education system in our country. Equally disturbing is the high
dropout rate from primary to upper-primary levels, the blame for
which lies partly with educators, especially teachers who in
government schools and in more rural areas appear demotivated
and disheartened.
Economic and Political Weekly May 21, 2005
2142
could communicate with children. He/she
drew energy from his/her interaction with
children, was concerned about what and
how much they were learning and his/her
ability to attract and retain children in the
school. They also believed that only a
motivated teacher could build a rapport
with the parents and the community and
go beyond the call of duty to ensure that
every single child attended regularly, even
if it meant visiting their homes and per-
suading the parents to send their children
to school.
Discussions on motivation, invariably,
led to comparisons with private schools.
Teachers, administrators and parents
quickly pointed out that private schools
attached great importance to discipline,
regularity and successful results in yearly
as well as public examinations (classes V,
VIII, X and XII). Almost all the teachers
I interacted with sent their own children
to private schools. They admitted that
irregular attendance of teachers was un-
common in private (aided and unaided)
schools and that teachers taught for the
stipulated hours/periods. But when asked
why government schools were different,
most could not give us any convincing
answers. They ended up blaming the sys-
tem where the dice is loaded against teach-
ers in primary schools.
India is a large country. It is possible
that the gap between the educationist’s
perception of motivation and that of
teachers, administrators and the larger
community may be lower in education-
ally advanced states like Kerala, Tamil
Nadu and Himachal Pradesh. Yet, admin-
istrators and the general public agree that
there is a definite problem with the edu-
cation system as a whole. Lay persons and
the media squarely blame the teachers –
ci ti ng absenteeism, ba d behaviour,
politicisation of teachers’ unions and, most
importantly, lack of professional ethics.
Teachers, on the other hand, argue that
the system has pushed them to a point
where they have to cultivate politicians
to avoid frequent transfers or pay huge
bribes to get a job. Administrators,
sympathetic to teachers, argue that the
obsession of the system with data and
targets pertaining to enrolment and re-
tention has deflected attention away from
the children. The more sensitive among
them admit that no one is really inter-
ested in government schools that cater
essentially to poor children. Poor parents
and communities do not have a voice.
Those who have an option and th e
resources to exercise it, simply send their
children to private schools.
Complexities of the Education
System
The answer to the question of poor
motivation lies buried, perhaps, in the
labyrinth of a complex education system.
The issue of teacher motivation is framed
in an intricate matrix of cause and effect
where one cannot really discern a clear,
one-to-one linear correlation.
First, the education system has expanded
rapidly and enrolment rates have shot up.
But growth rate in the number of teachers
has not kept pace with this rise in enrolment.
The classroom has become very complex.
Children from extremely poor families and
first generation school-goers account for
an overwhelming majority of students in
government schools. Most rural schools
are multi-grade with one, or, at most two,
teachers managing five classes. Teacher-
pupil ratios are also high in such schools.
Second, the social distance between
teachers and children is wide in govern-
ment schools (which cater to the very poor).
Social attitudes and community prejudices
play an important role in determining the
ability and willingness of teachers to
empathise with children. Recent press
reports (especially in the last six months)
reveal cases of sexual exploitation of girls
in rural as well as urban (municipal) schools.
For instance, on February 18,
2005, a head-
master and three teachers were arrested in
New Delhi for raping a 14-year-old girl
and another teacher was arrested for sexual
abuse of young boys. Senior police offi-
cials said teachers used abusive language
when they talked to children from very
poor or socially disadvantaged communi-
ties. It was as though they were doing a
big favour by teaching children from erst-
while ‘untouchable’ communities or very
poor migrant communities from other parts
of India and Bangladesh. Studies on class-
room processes done under the aegis of
the District Primary Education Project
(DPEP) also confirmed the prevalence of
caste and community prejudices.
Third, teachers lack the skills to manage
so much diversity in the classroom. Train-
ing programmes for teachers are designed
keeping in view the situation in large urban
schools where one teacher manages one
class. The problems faced by teachers in
multi-grade situations, where teacher-
pupil ratios are high, are rarely covered in
training programmes. Labels like joyful
learning and child-centred learning do not
mean anything to teachers who have to
deal with social diversity, different levels
of students and most importantly, children
who are undernourished, hungry and fre-
quently ill. Focus group discussion with
teachers in several states in the last few
years revealed that teachers wanted sub-
ject-specific training for multi-grade situ-
ations. But most training programmes focus
on generic skills. The mismatch between
the problems faced by teachers inside the
classroom and training programmes de-
signed by administrators and teacher
educators (who have very little idea of a
multi-grade class) is stark.
Fourth, systemic issues dealing with
corruption (payment for transfers/prevent-
ing transfers, deputations, appointments,
promotions and special assignments) have
vitiated the larger teaching environment in
the country. Teachers say this has politicised
the environment and actual teaching is
rarely monitored. Building networks with
patrons and supporters is more important.
Teachers, who are in leadership positions
in trade unions or affiliated to political
parties in power, rarely attend school.
Continuation in the job and/or in preferred
posts depends on the teacher’s ability to
strike the right chord with the people in
power. As a result, a highly motivated and
honest teacher is one who is transferred
to difficult areas. He/she is saddled with
a number of non-teaching duties and made
a scapegoat when the need arises. So even
though there may be no incentives for
performing better, it certainly pays to build
networks and cultivate godfathers.
Non-teaching Tasks
Fifth, teachers’ unions and block and
district-level administrators claim they are
asked to do a range of non-teaching tasks
which take them away from the classroom.
For example, the Rajasthan government
had asked teachers to motivate couples for
terminal family planning methods. This
led to a series of protests by teachers in
February 2005. In 2001-03, the state govern-
ment directed them to maintain the books
of women’s self-help groups and also
monitor if loan repayments were made on
time. District magistrates rely on teachers to
distribute drought or flood relief supplies,
and identify beneficiaries for government
welfare schemes. Discussions with teach-
ers revealed that while the task of meeting
family planning targets may be given to
all the teachers, the more difficult and
Economic and Political Weekly May 21, 2005 2143
time-consuming non-teaching duties go to
teachers seen as dedicated. Teachers with
political links or the ones active in trade
unions are not given additional duties.
Both central and state governments
contest this. Senior administrators in the
government of India point out that less
than 5 per cent of the teaching days are
taken up by non-teaching duties. Recent
DISE data collected information on non-
teaching duties and the days spent therein.
While statewise data has not been made
public, a recent presentation made by Arun
Mehta (NIEPA, January 2005) indicates
that non-teaching duties accounted for only
1.6 per cent of working days. Teachers’
unions and local administrators disagree.
They argue that the government may expect
teachers to do such work after school hours,
but invariably the teachers spend teaching
time performing non-teaching assignments.
The problem gets particularly severe dur-
ing January-March when annual targets
(especially, family planning) are reviewed
by the district administration.
Sixth, teacher training has picked up
since 1994 with almost all teachers ex-
pected to attend a range of training
programmes every year. Many of these
workshops are held during the academic
session. Teachers are eligible for compen-
satory leave if they attend these workshops
during vacations. This reduces teaching
days. While the training programmes are
intended to improve knowledge levels as
well as skills – especially in child-centred
teaching processes – teachers claim that
these programmes add little value when
the overall teaching environment, the ex-
amination system and other aspects of the
school remain unchanged. Nearly all the
teachers I interacted with in several states
said training was a burden – it was neither
planned well nor did it cater to their needs.
Another disturbing issue came to the fore.
Teachers in several states revealed that
training is a ritual – often they reach a
training venue by 11 am and leave by 3
pm – after attending two or three lectures.
In some remote districts, where the state
government is not able to monitor if the
training programme actually happened –
teachers reach the venue, collect their travel
allowance and asked to disappear for three to
four days – ticking off the activity as done.
Seventh, teachers and administrators are
continuously embroiled in court cases to
do with promotions and placements,
claiming arrears due to them and disciplin-
ary action-related issues. Administrators
explain that a lot of their time is spent
attending to court cases filed by teachers.
Teachers argue that they have no option
but to go to court for justice. Teacher cadre
management is highly politicised – both
administrators and ordinary teachers are
caught in a web of allegations and counter-
allegations. This has affected recruitment
of new teachers in several states.
The silver lining is that in the course of
my research work I came across teachers
who loved children and were highly
motivated regardless of where they were
posted. These were exceptional people. It
was, indeed, humbling to meet teachers
who worked hard despite all odds. I came
across situations where good teachers
received tremendous community support
that led to improvement in their teaching
and overall results. The reverse was also
true. There were villages that had a won-
derful teacher in the past but could do little
to motivate/support a new teacher who just
refused to teach.
The issue flagged by our prime minister
is indeed important and timely. Political
will at the highest levels can indeed make
Economic and Political Weekly May 21, 2005
2144
a difference. India cannot hope to make
a critical breakthrough in enhancing the
capabilities of its people without concerted
efforts to address the issue of teachers –
who are the cornerstone of India’s educa-
tion system. A coordinated effort is needed
if we are serious about addressing the
complex issue of quality education. A demo-
ralised, unmotivated and burdened teacher
cannot turn the system around.
Email: rvimala@vsnl.com
[This commentary is based on research studies
done by the author in elementary education
during the last five years, but more particularly
is based on a recent study on teacher motivation
in India, which is part of an international research
project covering 12 countries in south Asia and
Africa. The project coordinator is Paul Bennell,
senior partner, Knowledge and Skills for
Development, Brighton, UK. It is being funded
by the United Kingdom Department for
International Development (DFID) as part of its
support for policies, programmes and projects to
promote international development. The view and
opinions ex-pressed are those of the author alone
and not of DFID.]
!"#
