Don’t let Knut reverse 52 years of TSC progress
What you need to know:
Knut has advocated for the TSC to be brought under the direct control of the State Department of Basic Education.
This is a surprise turnaround from the position Knut has held since the establishment of the TSC.
If, indeed, Knut would like to have all matters to do with teaching and learning under the State Department of Basic Education, then it should have recommended the dissolution of the respective councils.
The two major activities in a school are teaching and learning. For this to take place, there has to be a curriculum.
For this reason, three specialised institutions have been set up to facilitate the delivery of the curriculum. These are the Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD) for curriculum development, the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) for curriculum implementation and the Kenya National Examination Council (Knec) for curriculum evaluation, examination and certification.
AGITATION
These institutions form the tripod upon which formal basic education stands. The ministry headquarters is in place to facilitate these three institutions through policy formulation, coordination, funding, quality assurance and auditing.
Each of the three institutions have a history of challenges in their formative stages. Knec, for example, is the successor of the East Africa Examination Council that came after the Cambridge University of the United Kingdom. These transitions had challenges that were resolved by strengthening the Knec and not bringing it under the control of the ministry since it is acknowledged that it is a specialised agency that must be facilitated to carry out its mandate successfully.
The TSC, on its part, has had 52 tumultuous years of existence. It was set up in 1967 after agitation by stakeholders in education led by the Kenya National Union of Teachers (Knut) for the setting up of a single employer for teachers and uniform terms and conditions of service for them.
It operated between 1967 and 2010 under the Ministry of Education. During that period, the commissioners were appointed by the minister at his or her own whim since the Act did not even specify the qualifications of the candidates to be appointed.
COORDINATION
Funding of the commission was also tightly in the grip of the ministry. There used to be many instances when the TSC would request for funding for certain programmes or projects from the Treasury through the ministry but the latter would reduce or rule against such requests to the detriment of teachers, who would have benefitted from such initiatives.
There was also lack of coordination in promotion of teachers at the primary school level through the “merit” system. Once in a while, a teacher facing a disciplinary case would at the same time be “promoted on merit”, to the chagrin of their colleagues.
The Totally Integrated Quality Education and training report of 1999 (The Koech Report) recommended the distribution of the functions of the TSC to departments within the ministry. This never saw the light of day.
It is against this background that commissioners and senior staff of the TSC lobbied aggressively for the upgrading of the TSC to the Constitutional Review Commission in 2000. Fortunately, Knut supported this initiative and through their own networks, the union leadership lobbied for this cause. When Knut made a presentation to the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) earlier this month, it advocated for the TSC “to be brought under the direct control of the State Department of Basic Education”.
STABILITY
Furthermore, Knut asserted that “since the Constitution appreciates that education has a vital role to play in the development of the country’s human, natural and material resources, and being the main enabler of socio-economic development; the management of teaching and learning needs to be in safe, trusted and secure hands at all times”.
This is a surprise turnaround from the position Knut has held since the establishment of the TSC. Firstly, as indicated above, teaching and learning involves curriculum development, implementation and evaluation.
If, indeed, Knut would like to have all matters to do with teaching and learning under the State Department of Basic Education, then it should have recommended the dissolution of the respective councils and the commissions of the KICD, Knec and the TSC so that the employees of these three institutions are answerable to the Director General of Education and the Public Service Commission.
Secondly, if Knut has an issue related to safety, trust and security on the TSC as asserted above, then it might need to consider ways and means of sorting these matters administratively rather than push for a constitutional review.
The gains made by the government in strengthening Knec, KICD and TSC over half a century and the benefits that have accrued to teachers, students and parents through the stability in the sector should not be reversed. Let TSC be.
Mr Sogomo is a former Teachers Service Commission (TSC) secretary.
