While states have the right to develop their strategies and policies on teachers’ promotions, stakeholders have stated that it is also important to align it with career paths and other criteria than the consideration of their students’ performance, VICTORIA AMADI reports.
THE assertion by Chairman of State Universal Basic Education Board (SUBEB), Ondo State, Victor Olabimtan, that teachers in the state would no longer enjoy automatic promotion from next session has elicited reactions from educational stakeholders.
Some described the development as inhumane and out of tune with the profession. Others have lauded the move.
Olabimtan, at an interactive session with education secretaries from the 18 local government areas, also stated that teachers’ promotion would be determined by the pupils’ performances.
He added that starting from next year, no teacher would be promoted to the next grade level, especially from 13 and above, without evidence that the pupils under him or her perform very well in their examinations.
The state government also announced stiffer penalties for teachers, who abscond from duties, as there would be improved monitoring and supervision of academic activities in schools.
This measure was put in place by the SUBEB boss to enhance better performance of pupils, as the level of their performances was alarming despite provision of an enabling environment for good performance.
He said: “Consequently from next year, no teacher will be promoted to the next grade level, especially from 13 and above without empirical evidence that the pupils under him or her perform very well in their examinations.”
However, President, Association for Formidable Education Development (AFED), Mr. Emmanuel Orji, called on the SUBEB boss to think through his actions.
His words: “I call on the SUBEB boss to think through his actions as you can’t say exactly that performance can be evaluated for the purpose of promotion, as no student is the sole effort of one teacher. It is rather, the effort of many teachers put together.
“It’s also important to mention that some persons have no business in the education or teacher profession. Some lack the empathy, passion, pastoral care and the requisite knowledge required and so, are easily demotivated.
“It’s also important to mention that some persons have no business in the education or teaching profession, some lack the empathy, passion, pastoral care and the requisite knowledge required and so are easily demotivated.
“Teachers all over the world are categorised as special people and are treated same way.
“Government in Africa and Nigeria especially must learn not to treat teachers like beggars. We are not. When anyone gets a new appointment, it is either he tries out his power on teachers or on the private schools.
“I do not support indolence as no one can actually lead learners as a teacher if such a person is lazy, but it’s important that government take seriously what ought to be considered important.”
Chairman, Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) Lagos wing, Mr. Akintoye Hassan, noted that he does not condemn nor recommend the new strategy, simply because the process of evaluation or assessment of performance with a view to promoting workers can take different procedure or criterion.
According to Hassan, the intention of the government is to enhance productivity and efficiency. He added that the grading system has to be reasonable, achievable and realistic.
He noted that it is an indirect form of assessment whereby teachers’ performance is determined on the number of students who scaled through creditably.
He said: “If the range for good performance is between 45 to 50 per cent minimally, that could be said to be reasonable, achievable and realistic but if because of aiming for best, employer raised the grade for being successful to be promoted to a percentage as high as 65 and above minimally, I may consider it as not reasonable and realistic though achievable.
“However, those who come to equity must come with clean hands. As an employer of Labour, the government reserves the right to determine his strategy of promoting her workers. But how well have they performed in their responsibility too? Is it a government that pays workers?
He said inconsistent and non-definite amounts of salary on monthly basis have no moral justification to adopt a tough and unreasonable strategy of assessment of workers for promotion.
Another educationist Dr. Mikailu Barau noted that if students’ performance is to constitute small component of teachers’ promotion, it is acceptable. “But, if it constitutes the major component of their promotion, then that is unfair,” Barau said.
According to him, there are other factors beyond the picture that determines students’ performance. “There is the student. The teacher could have done his or her best to take the student, but the students have certain conditions, maybe mental, social, or whatever, that makes it difficult for them to perform,” he said.
He noted that there are also systemic challenges affecting the learning environment. He highlighted “lack of adequate facilities, lack of power, when students are in very hot or cold condition” as some of the factors affect students’ performance.
“So, it is equally important for them to reflect on all these other factors.”
An educationist, who craved anonymity, noted that the development is not a smart practice as the teachers could resolve to sharp practices.
He advised that educational bodies should track basic indicators that would lead to performance. “To track these indicators over time on digital platforms, I am sure this would correlate well with student’s performance. This could be collected through routines school quality assurance activities,” he added.
