BY MICHAEL TUMWESGIGYE
In 2019, Uganda launched the National Teacher Policy (NTP), a bold step towards the development of the teaching profession. By requiring all teachers to have Bachelor degrees, the program aimed to improve education, raise ethical standards and create and
experience a well-structured career path for teachers.
Unfortunately, the closure of Teacher Training Colleges (TTCs) in anticipation of bachelor degrees created challenges, as universities could not recruit some teachers due to delays in approving degree schemes by the National Higher Education Council (NCHE). This lack of clarity has left many educators concerned, questioning whether this policy is truly the right step forward.
While the desire to improve the teaching profession is clear, the situation on the ground is far more complicated. Teachers have expressed concern that this top-down approach to planning ignored the real challenges they face. Primary school teachers’ salaries in Uganda vary according to the salary scale, which includes: U4, U5, U6, and U7. The average salary of a primary school teacher is about UGX 4,750,000 per annum, which translates to about UGX 395,833 per month, barely enough to support a family. How can they enroll in a degree program? Where will they find funds besides time to study when they are expected to be in class all the time?
It seems unrealistic to ask teachers to enhance their qualifications without any form of financial support or a clear path. Additionally, some teachers with a master’s degree continue to receive the same salary as those with basic qualifications. This raises an important question: If teachers are to advance their education, will their salaries reflect their qualifications, or will the status quo remain? Considering the educational needs of Ugandan legislators (MPs), the discrepancies are even more striking.
While there is a push for teacher qualifications, MPs, who are responsible for making the very laws that govern the country, are only required to have an Advanced Level (A-level) certificate. An MP’s job is unique, requiring a deep understanding of the constitution, public policy and economics, among others. Shouldn’t those entrusted with such responsibilities have a higher education requirement for their position? If teachers responsible for shaping future generations must hold degrees, it seems reasonable that legislators should meet the same, if not higher levels.
PUSH FOR TEACHER QUALIFICATIONS, MPS, WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THE VERY LAWS THAT GOVERN THE COUNTRY,
ARE ONLY REQUIRED TO HAVE AN ADVANCED LEVEL (A-LEVEL) CERTIFICATE…”
The current policy sends a different message, the education of a nation’s leaders is not as important as the education of its teachers. This imbalance creates frustration among teachers, looking at the higher status, political power and better pay obtained by members of parliament. Teachers who return to the university face numerous challenges; their low salaries barely cover their daily needs, and they must invest in further studies. Additionally, it is unclear whether the government will provide the necessary support in the form of increased salaries or subsidies, reduced workloads, or scholarships to help them earn their degrees. Without this support system, many teachers fear the impossibility of implementing the new policy.
Furthermore, some teachers may not remain in their profession, especially if they feel that the return on investment, in terms of salary and career advancement, is not commensurate with the effort and cost of obtaining a degree. The lack of clarity surrounding policy implementation adds to the growing frustration. The closure of primary teacher training colleges and the unclear role of Shimon PTC, which was declared a university, have raised questions about the readiness of the education system to deal with the changes.
Critics have also criticized the planning process for being excessively top-down, with minimal interaction with teachers or other important stakeholders. Many teachers believe that the system has imposed itself on them without taking into account the real challenges they face. The lack of implementation of some existing teacher development programs, such as the 2010 service plan, further complicates the situation. The system has not yet implemented the promotion of teachers based on merit. The government must first address these foundational issues if it is serious about improving the teaching profession. Without a clear plan for career advancement and a reward system, many teachers seem reluctant to invest time and money in new courses.
The disconnect between the educational needs and requirements of teachers and members of Parliament highlights a deeper issue in the Ugandan planning process. This discrepancy paints a significant undervaluation of education in leadership roles. In conclusion, although the aim of the National Teacher Policy to raise teacher qualifications is laudable, its implementation has been marred by confusion, a lack of support and unclear outcomes over time. Uganda needs to take a more holistic approach, address the systemic challenges teachers face, and rethink the requirements for its legislatures and other professions. Only then can the nation build an equitable and effective system that truly values education and leadership.
