Contract teacher system must end

Teacher motivation and efficacy are paramount for better learning, and so key to any discourse on quality in education. Among the most critical factors connected to motivation are the terms of service. However, in India, a large proportion of teachers are recruited on short-term contracts (often for 120 days) at substantially low salaries, to do the same work as regular teachers but with none of the benefits the latter are entitled to.

The practice of appointing contract teachers has become normalised since the late 1980s, when many states decided to appoint contract teachers (also known as para teachers, guest teachers, ad hoc teachers, etc.) in response to the demand for teachers due to increasing student enrollment without commensurate increase in investment. This was seen as a means of addressing the problem of non-availability of teachers in rural/remote areas as well as enabling local governments to recruit teachers on annual or short-term contracts, even if their qualifications were less than that required by the state’s policies.

The study ‘Contract Teachers in India -- Recent Trends and Current Status’ conducted by Vimala Ramachandran, Deepa Das, Ganesh Nigam and Anjali Shandilya, supported by the Azim Premji University, in 2020, reveals that 12.7% of the total number of teachers in government schools were on various forms of such contracts in India in 2017-18. The number has steadily increased from 5,62,504 to 6,32,316 between 2012 and 2018. Three states (Meghalaya, Jharkhand, Arunachal Pradesh) have over 50% of their teachers on contract; two states (Odisha, Sikkim) have over 35% of teachers on contract, and another four states (Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi, West Bengal) have more than 20% teachers on contract.

The study also found significant issues related to teacher qualifications and deployment. A sizeable proportion of contract teachers do not fulfil required norms for being a teacher. Specifically, around 30% of contract teachers do not even have an undergraduate degree while 29.5% do not have professional training. It was also found that contract teachers are disproportionately deployed in schools catering to the most disadvantaged. To elaborate, the number of contract teachers is the highest in smaller primary schools and in small schools with low enrolments; typically catering to the poorest sections of the population situated in rural areas. Over 2.2 million children are enrolled in schools with a single or two contract teachers; thus no regular teachers are involved in the education of these children. Alarmingly, schools meant for the most deprived, that is, those managed by the Ministry of Labour and the Social Welfare Department, have a large proportion of contract teachers – 41.6% and 22.5%, respectively.

Further, the presence of contract teachers has not alleviated the issue of teacher vacancies. Each year, teacher vacancies are calculated at the state level. In 2018-19, there were 11.7% vacancies against the sanctioned posts of teachers. Four states, namely Bihar (35.7% vacancies), Jharkhand (37.6%), Madhya Pradesh (20.5%) and Uttar Pradesh (31.2%) have the largest numbers of teacher vacancies. Another issue that gets hidden is of vacancies related to teachers qualified to teach specific subjects. For example, 16 states do not have the required three subject teachers as mandated by the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act (RTE), 2009, in many of their upper primary schools (ranging from 15% to 90%). Despite this, seven states have a surplus of teachers at the primary and upper primary stage, indicating mismanagement of teacher vacancies.

Over time, the persistent practice of contract teachers has led to litigation and pressure from teacher unions, symptomatic of the deep discontent, stress and lack of motivation. Contract teachers receive a consolidated salary ranging from Rs 6,000 to Rs 20,000, much lower than the entry-level salary of regular cadre teachers, with no benefits or opportunities of professional development. To make thing worse, salaries are often delayed. Irregularities in the process of recruitment and payment of honorarium, and instances of arbitrary dismissal and harassment have also been reported. While questions on contract teachers have been raised in Parliament a few times, they have hardly ever been discussed.

The practice of contract teachers has led to having different types of teachers within the same system, and very often in the same school, being compensated differently for the same work. This is damaging to the morale of teachers – both those on contract and those in standard employment. This practice also harms the image of the teaching profession and leads to dysfunctional dynamics in schools and affects school culture and thus learning. It must end to enable a just and equitable, comprehensively designed teacher recruitment and tenure system.

(The writers are Associate Professors at Azim Premji University)