TSC should withdraw appraisal, engage union on appropriate tool

The perception that trade unions thrive on bravado intimidation and an ingrained feeling of victimhood is as fallacious as it is untrue.

The validity and relevance of the Kenya National Union of Teachers (Knut) is firmly anchored in the recognition agreement it signed with its members’ employer, the Teachers Service Commission (TSC), on May 15, 1968.

The agreement stipulates the rules of engagement with the TSC and it would be foolhardy for Knut to deviate from it.

For the past 60 years, the union has made tremendous achievements in the improvement of terms and conditions of working for teachers among other social, political and economic accomplishments. This has been made possible largely by observing the binding rules.

NATIONAL DISCOURSE

The raging national discourse on teachers’ performance and appraisal programme is a case in point where the TSC has reneged on the principles of the recognition agreement.

Contrary to media reports attributed to the commission, the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) it signed with Knut clearly stipulates that, whilst recognising the need for an performance appraisal system, evaluation of teachers’ performance shall be based on the agreed standard in a consultative manner.

The CBA further states that annual performance evaluation shall be undertaken by the TSC through a tool to be developed with the participation of both parties.

A technical committee was mutually formed to develop, pilot and implement the tool and report to the parties on its viability.

In total disregard of this, however, the TSC never facilitated the team and then went ahead to implement a tool only known to itself.

DELOCALISING TEACHERS

To add salt to injury, the TSC rolled out its policy of delocalising teachers, which was not part of the CBA as it wants the public to believe.

The union is, by all means, justified to raise its concerns on this important national issue in pursuit of fair practices in the education sector.

Knut has a commanding presence in all public schools. Its school representatives listen to concerns and observations of teachers on a daily basis, which they relay to the secretary-general through the structure.

It is the duty of the secretary-general to address the collective grievances on behalf of members. In pressing for fair treatment and public involvement on the evaluation and appraisal, therefore, the secretary-general is expressing the concerns of teachers — not his views — for public good.

CAREER DEVELOPMENT

Teachers are not opposed to the appraisal system. It is even recommended by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) for career development and excellent performance and productivity. But in its current form, it is unacceptable and inoperable.

Moreover, the assessment tool has created unnecessary disruption of learning in Kenyan schools. Too much time is spent on paperwork at the expense of teacher-learner contact. This, ultimately, affects the students’ performance — which defeats its very purpose.

It is in the public domain that the quality assurance officers in the field are equally confused by the system, which they work under intense pressure to implement within strict deadlines.

INACCURATE DATA

Silently, they complain about disjointed coordination nationally, unnecessary paperwork and inaccurate data that is hard to detect considering the sheer volumes of paperwork. The digital transmission of data also challenges the officers, most of whom are not computer-savvy.

For the programme to succeed, the TSC should first withdraw it and initiate an all-inclusive and consultative process involving Knut to develop an acceptable tool.

Without the teachers’ support, and taking into account the drawbacks so far witnessed, the system is doomed. That would be a huge embarrassment to the emplyer and, generally, the government.

Mr Gitau is executive secretary, Knut Kiambu East branch. [email protected]