The National Centre for Educational Development (NCED) was established under the Ministry of Education to serve the purpose of management training and teacher training needs of the education sector. In the past, its role was limited to training the primary school teachers alone. Now it has the mandate to train secondary school teachers after organisational changes were instituted a couple of years ago. Research has shown that NCED training has no effectiveness. Last year, the Department of Education funded around Rs 2 lakh to conduct a study on the effectiveness of primary teacher training. With that limited amount of money, an independent organisation carried out a study in four districts in a superficial manner and came up with the data of 50 per cent transfer of training. The findings of the study cannot be generalised as the coverage was limited and it was not an in-depth study.

Unfortunately, NCED is misusing the data and claiming that the training it provides has a 50 per cent transfer rate. This is a false statement made to hide the weaknesses of the teacher training programmes. The management of in-service teacher training under NCED is even more deplorable. It is strange that a Nepali subject expert can become a mathematics trainer in the Education Training Centres (ETCs). Each trainer is provided a 10-day training in all primary level subjects after which the trainers can conduct training programmes in the ETCs themselves. Trainers should be specialists and experts in a particular subject. Every trainer cannot be expected to acquire the expertise of all subjects. The evaluation of the trainees too does not guarantee their competence in all subjects that they are supposed to teach. Moreover, the trainees do not need to sit in examinations of all subjects. Nevertheless, in principle they are supposed to be competent in all primary level subjects. To add to that, regular trainers are often absent at the ETCs. Other people from outside the system are hired to substitute them, who cannot be held accountable for the results of the training.

The scenario of pre-service teacher training is no better. The NCED has given affiliation to private institutions for the purpose. Studies show that these private institutions enrol the candidates, provide them some hand-outs and conduct examinations at the end of the year without giving any sort of training. Surprisingly, NCED gives these candidates certificates of successful completion of training. And now NCED is talking about its equivalency to grade 11. Is this not a joke? What right does the NCED have to make such ineffective programme equivalent to grade 11? Prompted by NCED, the Higher Secondary Education Board (HSEB) has started working towards this direction. Can HSEB decide the equivalency by itself? Does it have the mandate to accredit training programmes as academic? Both NCED and HSEB are crossing their limits and helping worsen the education system. The Ministry of Education should intervene and stop this on time.

On the one hand, the government is planning to install a new education structure by 2009 under its sector-wide school approach and on the other, the NCED and HSEB are defying government rules. Moreover, at a time when the country is moving towards a federal structure, these institutions are trying to impose a centralised approach without any professional debate, which will, in turn, have a negative impact in the whole education establishment in the country. This is a clear example of the dearth of visionary leadership in key positions that are invariably filled with political appointments. The government has never given a serious thought about appointing capable persons to head these institutions.

The same is the case with higher education, with key posts vacant for the last 11 months.

In order to bring the country’s education at par with the education standards of other countries, both in the regional and global context, teacher education should be taken very seriously. Where in the world can we find the training of 15-16 year old children as teachers? How can one depend on them for the bright future of our children? NCED should recommend the government to abolish the system that appoints primary school teachers only to get the students through the SLC exams and train only those who have completed grade 12.

Similarly, the HSEB should abolish the ‘Education Stream’ in grades 11 and 12. Training programmes should be focused on those who have already completed certain academic level. The Tenth Plan envisaged this, but the Ministry of Education never thought about it in the last five years. If the aim of NCED is only providing academic certificates to its trainees, why doesn’t it convert all of its 34 ETCs into higher secondary schools? The purpose of NCED is not to provide equivalence certificates but rather to produce competent teachers. Please do not mix the two.

Dr Wagley is professor of Education, TU