FACULTY OBLIGATION IN MAINTAINING QUALITY IN TECHNICAL EDUCATION
Anil Chotmarada
The person who was addressed as the ‘Guru’ exists no longer. That person who was a paragon of selfless service to the field of teaching and learning has been replaced by a career minded teacher who takes the job of imparting education as a profession and not a divine vocation. The elevated rank of a ‘teacher’ in the society has been demeaned by disinterested and mediocre people to the extent that the profession is now seen with suspect. While the guru was a revered person the present day teacher seems to have lost all respect in the eyes of society. While the teachers themselves are a cause for the degradation of this respectable vocation the system and societal attitudes have been no less instrumental in bringing disrepute to teaching.
It would, however, be absolutely unfair to lay the blame of the present malaise on just the educational system or only the teaching professionals. It may be worthwhile to analyse objectively the reasons and causes behind the present state of affairs, where this class of the educated elite has to resort to a method as undignified as a strikes, dharnas, boycotts, slogan shouting and rumour mongering to highlight its discontentment.
There is no doubt that the malaise in all types of higher education is very serious with reasons and ramifications which are essentially common but may differ on peripheral issues because of local situations for different types of colleges. For the purpose of simplification and to avoid generalisation this paper would delve into the problems of only technical colleges which have problems of a nature a little different from other teaching institutions.
Quality in education is an intangible entity which nevertheless has to be concretised for effective checks and meaningful monitoring. Technical education, as a basic premise, must have not information transfer as its sole objective but must be geared towards total personality development and attitude building. The intent if directed towards making the product of these institutions a good citizen besides being an efficient technocrat will add a new dimension to the quality required in the educational programme.
Management of quality in technical education becomes a ponderous task not only because of the intangibility of the entity to be managed but also because of the bloated egos of its practitioners. Because of their capability of discussing everything under the sun the teachers are a very volatile commodity any control over whom has to be very sensitively designed.
TECHNICAL EDUCATION
Technical education is concerned with teaching of applied subjects and producing professionals proficient in their chosen field of study. Meaningful imparting of this education should be based on appropriate liaison of the institution with the field work and of this learning having the potential for actual application. There is the imperative need of efficient inputs from professionally experienced faculty and improvements based on feedback from the professional field. A product of this programme would be expected to independently run a production or service unit, if not immediately after, acquiring the first degree, then after a few years of apprenticeship with a practising professional.
THE FACULTY
It would be useful to know and understand the members of the technical teaching community to appreciate their problems. No surveys have been conducted to determine the exact makeup of this community and only a general categorisation can be made. Barring exceptional cases, these categories should be quite representational.
A staff member of a technical college teaching faculty is a trained technocrat with at least the basic qualifying degree of his profession if not additional degrees of some kind of specialisation and some professional experience. Such people are generally trained only in their branch of study and have no specialised training in teaching systems and methods. The types of technically trained professionals who opt for teaching can generally be classified as:
a) Dedicated and committed professionals seriously interested in research and academics.
b) Overly honest professionals incapable of reconciling with the unethical professional practices.
c) Mediocre professionals incapable of survival in the competitive professional world.
The first category is made up of people who take to teaching solely because they are interested in academics and research. Such people are generally not concerned about the meagre materialistic returns of teaching or the lure of practice and or the field. Their only aim is to honestly propagate the profession and enhance the theoretical aspects of the profession though research and publications.
The second category is made up of professionals who are good at the technical aspects of their profession but are unable to adopt themselves to the business applications of the profession. If the profession is seen as a business then the stress areas of the application tend to be different requiring an aptitude to compromise, cutting corners and at times running the risk of getting into unprofessional acts though these might be commonly used in ordinary business. The teaching profession, in spite of all its weaknesses, still permits people of integrity to live up to their standards with dignity, without weakening their basic level of honesty.
The third category does not suggest that all mediocre technical professionals end up teaching. Most of these indifferent professionals end up in state and public agencies where credence is given only to certificates and time spent in the profession besides other considerations which have no bearing with the persons merit or work capability. In the competitive private sector, which is also the most lucrative, only the fittest survive. An incompetent professional generally tries to get adjusted first in a public or state organisation failing which thinks about joining the teaching faculty. The reasons for the teaching profession to accept such people are generally the causes which necessitate accountability.
NEED FOR QUALITY CONTROL
The teaching profession in the institutions of higher learning has drawn a lot of criticism because of unethical practices being adopted by some members of this profession. There are apparently many reasons for discontentment with the profession which lead such people into adopting methods which makes accountability a necessity in a profession which should otherwise be a model for society.
Low financial remuneration in the midterm of the career compared to other professions is one grouse the teachers have against the national policy planners.
Lack of motivation to do well is another cause of discontentment. There is no tangible measure of success and in any case there is neither any stick nor carrot for the teachers.
Lack of mobility in terms of changing the working environment is another cause. Once a person joins the faculty of an institution, it generally becomes a lifetime relationship. This is caused more because of our social systems than institutional policies. This results in a lot of frustration.
Lack of research facilities can be cited as another cause for a good technical officer to either look for other professional options or wallow in frustration.
Another reason why these controls have become necessary is the lack of effective procedure for the selection of the faculty. It appears that the only issue of concern is the paper degree possessed by an applicant. There is no effort to judge the teaching capability of an individual. Given the pliable age at which the students join technical schools the faculty needs to be not only well informed but also mature enough to guide the students and be the role models for the students to emulate.
Last but certainly not the least is the fundamental issue of human honesty, integrity and weakness. In a societal system where corruption is an accepted norm of life it cannot be expected that teachers would be able to fight the temptation of being unethical, especially when there is no punishment for the corrupt and the unethical.
These unethical practices could be in the form of paying less attention to their assigned duties than to projects of professional consultancy; or taking their teaching assignment as a part-time job on a full time pay and attending to some other business which has no bearing to teaching; or pandering to students and authorities because of lack of teaching ability; or politicising to make any headway in teaching; or misuse of institutional facilities for personal gains.
While for the honest and the diligent there is no need for any accountability, it is for these mediocre and weak people that there must be accountability so that there is no further degradation of the profession and it can be raised to the level of respectability it deserves.
CONTROL METHODS
Having seen that accountability is a necessary evil exploring methods for implementing it becomes imperative.
Ideologically students would be the best gauge to measure a teacher and that is who a teacher should be answerable to; but given the character of student community that we have at present this may lead to uncalled for pandering on the one hand and victimisation caused by vested interests on the other.
Analysing examination results could by another method of making teachers answerable. This system should be used only if the examination system is totally honest and the grading absolutely unbiased. Comparative analysis of results can be done only of situations which are akin in teaching facilities and methods. This could be used as a local system for intra-institutional evaluation provided the first condition is met.
The academic and administrative head of the institution could be empowered to punish and reward his staff members based on their performance. This has the danger of victimisation or partisanship where the head of department is not a strong person. In this case the head would become totally and individually accountable for all that is happening in the institution. Managing an institution is not a one man’s job but requires teamwork under a dedicated and hones leader.
A most balanced way of evaluating teacher’s performance and making them accountable may be possible by compiling the reports of three independent, unbiased jurors who are acquainted with the institution and the person under consideration. These jurors should decide a gradation system and must evaluate all aspects of teaching. It would be preferable if teachers are not aware of the identity of their jurors. The jury could be made up of members within the faculty so that each faculty member is accountable to another.
The teachers have a great obligation and a major role to play in maintaining quality in technical education. This obligation can be met if the teachers accept that they are accountable to the social order. In an overview the best method of control is through self accountability. Let each teacher be honest to himself and follow the dictates of his conscience; for this it is necessary that society makes the teacher a contended person. When the teacher is given his due there may be no need for accountability. The profession should be so lucrative in materialistic and other terms that it becomes any technocrat’s first choice. It will by itself draw the best personnel and only the most efficient will be able to stay. High quality in technical education will automatically follow.
Anil Chotmarada is a Faculty & Director in Gateway College of Architecture & Design, Sonipat-131001, India.