The system keeps returning to credentials because credentials are easier to defend than outcomes
The government’s defence of its school system often begins with teacher qualifications. That is a weak defence. A certificate does not educate a child. A salary does not produce learning. What matters in the end is whether children read, write, calculate, and stay in school with some hope of progress. In Jammu and Kashmir, the real question is not whether government teachers are formally qualified. Many are. The harder question is why public confidence in government schools remains so fragile, and why families continue to look elsewhere when they can afford it. That shift is itself a form of judgment. Parents do not move their children on the basis of slogans. They move them on the basis of experience. This is where the debate has been distorted. The system keeps returning to credentials because credentials are easier to defend than outcomes. But classrooms are not saved by paperwork. They are judged by attendance, teaching time, learning levels, school discipline, and whether a child actually gains from the years spent inside them. That is the deeper failure. Education policy too often stops at recruitment and ignores delivery. It counts appointments, not outcomes. It counts postings, not performance. It counts institutions, not trust.
A serious education system should be able to answer a simple question: what do children know after years in school? Until that answer improves, the argument about qualifications will remain a convenient shield for poor results.
Leave a comment