Streamlining teacher categories to boost efficiency and equity
In the vast and vibrant workforce of our school education system, teachers—despite carrying the same mission—remain shackled by divisive nomenclature: Directly Recruited Lecturers, Promoted Lecturers, SSRB Recruited Teachers, Regularised ReTs, Grade II and Grade III Teachers, Third Teachers, and more. What started as administrative distinctions has unfortunately become a marker of worth in staffrooms, meetings, and even training halls. While these labels may have served an administrative purpose once, today they’re breeding division, mistrust, and, disturbingly, open sabotage. Certain groups go so far as to brand others as “incompetent” simply because their entry wasn’t through a particular exam, even when those same “lesser” teachers have decades of effective classroom service and upgraded qualifications. This is not just misleading—it is a disservice to the education system
These categories were never meant to define merit or professional standing, yet they have come to define opportunity, recognition, and even dignity. A passionate, innovative teacher may still be judged not by the quality of their pedagogy, professional skill and academic qualification but by the so-called ‘category’ they fall into.
Instead of fostering a unified teaching community, this fragmented nomenclature has created divisions among teachers who essentially perform the same roles, under the same department, and often with similar qualifications and experience. Sadly, the nomenclature has become an identity—one that determines how teachers are transferred and treated.
Teachers are no longer seen through the lens of merit or capability, but rather judged by how they entered the system. This has created a sense of inequality, injustice, and alienation. The most unfortunate part is that many teachers who were recruited under schemes like ReT or SSA—even after regularisation and meeting all academic and service prerequisites—are still referred to by their original labels. This continuous branding has created a deep psychological impact and a systemic hierarchy, where no sense of equality or belonging thrives. This diversification has not failed to affect a major chunk of the teachers who entered the department as ReTs through a properly framed policy by the government. These ReT teachers have taken up critical academic and administrative responsibilities, serving as Resource Persons, contributing at SCERT and DIETs, and playing a key role in teacher trainings, content development, and national initiative implementation.
Their dedication has borne rich fruit: hundreds of students from far-flung, marginalised regions—educated and mentored by ReT teachers—have succeeded in competitive examinations and now serve the country in esteemed positions. Their achievements stand as a testament to the life-changing impact of the ReT initiative.
This classification has given rise to numerous teacher forums, associations, and unions—each confined to a particular category—who often end up sabotaging each other instead of working collectively for the betterment of the education system. The collective voice of the teaching community stands fractured. A sense of insecurity prevails. The resulting chaos affects not just teachers’ morale but also the quality of education delivered in our classrooms.
To move forward, the department must acknowledge that all teachers, once appointed and regularised, must be treated as equals—one cadre, one identity. There should be no space for historical recruitment tags in a modern education system.
Moreover, to do away with this nature of recruitment-based classification and to ensure vibrancy in the department, it is but inevitable to hold departmental examinations for considering merit-based career progression. To make the system more productive and efficient, it is imperative that the merit obtained in such departmental examinations should determine promotion at every level—be it Teacher to Master, Master to Headmaster or Lecturer, Headmaster to ZEO, ZEO to Principal, and Principal to CEO.
This merit-based approach will ensure that experience, expertise, and academic understanding of the promotees will drive the system forward. Those entrusted with higher responsibilities will be better prepared, both in knowledge and in leadership skills, and will be more accountable and effective in delivering results.
The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 envisions a system where quality, equity, and merit prevail. To align with that vision, we must break free from outdated labelling and forge a path that uplifts the dignity of all teachers, irrespective of how they entered the system. Let us not allow nomenclature to become a tool of discrimination. Let performance, professionalism, and passion for teaching be the real identity of an educator.
The writer is a teacher in the Education Department
Irshad Ahmad Wani
ab******@***il.com