Gurcharan Das, a highly respected columnist in India, says that only 1 out of 4 public school teachers in our country visits her classroom; and even this one teacher does not bother to teach. He then educates us that Public School teachers in our country are paid 7 times the Indian per capita income; which he enlightens, is far more than what public school teachers in the developed world receive (which is pegged at around 3 times their PCI). Mr. Das concludes that the problem is not a lack of remuneration; it is a lack of governance and accountability in public schools.
While his argument may have its merits, he fails to note that even though money has been proposed by behavioural scientists to be nothing more than an extrinsic motivator, it is the single most important aspect on which people in India base their decisions. Therefore, to shrug off pay scales as not being the central issue in the case of the careless public school teachers may not be prudent after all.
Here are some facts that Mr. Das has missed out on by a wide margin:
- While a public school teacher in India earns at 7 times our per capita income, an average Project Manager in an IT firm is likely to earn around 30* times our PCI.
- While the Vice Chancellor of a public Indian university may earn 21* times our PCI, an average CEO of an IT company is likely to earn around 300* times our per capita income.
- While a public school teacher earns at 7 times our PCI, a private school teacher may be paid up to 15* times India's per capita income.
What do these statistics tell us? Well, using the Theory of Equity as a model, something that Gurcharan Das himself swears by, a public school teacher in India is not likely to find any Distributive Justice for herself within this framework. This would lead to job dissatisfaction; and the most obvious response would be for a teacher to neglect her work.
That teaching the next generation should be an intrinsic motivator, while money should be nothing more than a hygienic factor, is true. However, given that our society values money more than any other attribute, it is plausible that a public school teacher is not going to put in as much effort into her job as it requires. The reason for a public school teacher's antics may go even beyond this, to include a lack of Interactional Justice, which is, 'the perceived degree to which an individual (or an occupation) is treated with dignity, concern, and respect (by society).'
Mr. Das hints that the private sector would have sorted the issue of the errant school teachers by making an example of at least one of them by giving a wrap on their knuckles. By that logic, we might as well have military rule in our country.
At this stage of my tirade, a lot of free market ideologues may want to argue that from the perspective of Equity and Distributive Justice, the private sector would be the best bet for education in India, as sky is the limit to the amount of money a teacher can earn, commensurate to her effort. While this is true, it is also beyond doubt that every time a teacher's pay is increased in a private school, it would make the cost of education for the poor that much more expensive and unaffordable. To make it affordable for the poor, a private school would have to subsidise education by redistributing resources. And that's just what the Indian Government does. However, subsidies and redistribution of resources is exactly what the scions of the private market, that lead our industry, are vehemently and vociferously against.
Here's a fact: Mukesh Ambani's salary is pegged at Rs.15 crore, which is roughly 4100 times India's per capita income. Remember, this Rs.15 crore salary of Mr. Ambani is after taking into consideration the pay cut he has given himself this year. In America, by contrast, the highest paid salary would be no more than a 1000 times the US per capita income. Talk about inequality!!
Note: an interesting study on the productivity of Indians would be to analyse, which of the two - an employee from the public or private sector, is more productive on an hourly basis? The results may be too close for Mr. Das' comfort.
* these are rough figures and have been calculated by keenly observing inequalities of income in India. However, the figures need to be backed by research data, which i urge the reader to check for themselves on the various forums of the internet that hold this information.
~
Here's a fact: Mukesh Ambani's salary is pegged at Rs.15 crore, which is roughly 4100 times India's per capita income. Remember, this Rs.15 crore salary of Mr. Ambani is after taking into consideration the pay cut he has given himself this year. In America, by contrast, the highest paid salary would be no more than a 1000 times the US per capita income. Talk about inequality!!
Note: an interesting study on the productivity of Indians would be to analyse, which of the two - an employee from the public or private sector, is more productive on an hourly basis? The results may be too close for Mr. Das' comfort.
* these are rough figures and have been calculated by keenly observing inequalities of income in India. However, the figures need to be backed by research data, which i urge the reader to check for themselves on the various forums of the internet that hold this information.
2 Comments:
Your arguments however still cannot negate the fact that public education lacks governance & accountability by the Government. Teachers who do want to work for a small salary are free to go & search elsewhere. But the Government cannot sit idle on the fact that they take home the 'so-called' meagre salary & at the same time do not show up in the schools for day together. I have to agree with Gurcharan Das here.
I have in no way attempted to negate the fact that public schools in India lack governance and accountability. What i have argued though is that to put the blame of a public school teacher's disinterest squarely on a lack of governance & accountability is a clear example of satisficing ourselves with the first available solution on the horizon.
To suggest that if a public school teacher is not satisfied with her meagre salary, she should search elsewhere, is an unfortunate portrayal of a very rash and faulty process of ideation. It is rash because it hasn't been thought through adequately; and faulty because it does not address the larger issue, which is: 'why should a teacher offer her services to a public school in the first place?' And if a teacher is not willing to teach in a public school, who is it that we suggest, should teach the poor?
If teaching the poor is the job of the government, then it would need funds. The funds in turn come from taxes paid by a country's citizens; but with only 2.77% Indians paying their taxes every year, the government certainly won’t be able to pay public school teachers a competitive wage. Following a lack of incentives, a public school teacher will have one of 3 choices: either to Exit, or Voice her disapproval, or Neglect her work. In fact, neglecting you work is the 3rd step in the process of showing your dissatisfaction to your job, and is one of the most common ways employees show rebellion to a lack of equity in pay scales.
For the government to rap teachers on their knuckles, without adequate incentives in place, would mean a flight of teachers away from public schools. Add their replacements, with the same lack of equity in pay scales across industries, into the mix, and sooner rather than later they too will start neglecting their work.
Besides adequate funds, the government, even if it wanted to, would not be able to raise a public school teacher's remuneration to the standard of... say... an IT manager, without a social shift in the perceived value of a teacher; which even if it isn't of the same level of an Ambani, must be respectable nevertheless.
Your solution: 'teachers who do not want to work for a small salary are free to go & search elsewhere' is born out of a lack of applied thought, asymmetrical information and an escalation of commitment of what you've always been led to believe is true – the theory of comparative advantage, which unfortunately is a flawed theory to start with. You're free to agree with whoever you choose. As far as Gurcharan Das is concerned, with all due respect to him, in this instance he is wrong.
Post a Comment