Motion to withdraw continuous professional development allowance for teaching staff within the Ghana Education Service

Today, I stand before you to present a debate in favor of withdrawing the teacher professional development allowance. Section 16 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement accentuates the need for the allowance to be used to support the continuous professional development of teachers.

While professional development plays a critical role in enhancing the skills and knowledge of our educators, it is evident that many teachers do not utilise this additional funding for its intended purpose, thus the urgency to reevaluate the allocation of such resources to better serve the interests of both educators and students.

Firstly, let us acknowledge the limited impact that teacher professional development allowance has on actual classroom practice. Despite the availability of funds, research has shown that a significant portion of teachers do not attend professional development workshops or conferences or pursue higher education opportunities.

Surveys indicate that a large number of teachers are unable to dedicate the necessary time or energy towards these initiatives due to their interest in using the funds for personal gains, and providing allowances without effective monitoring and accountability measures is a wasteful use of resources.

Again, the lack of alignment between professional development opportunities and the needs of teachers is another reason to support the withdrawal of the allowance. In many cases, teachers give excuses that the available workshops or courses do little to address their specific needs and interests, resulting in a lack of motivation to participate.

By reallocating these funds towards more targeted and personalised development opportunities, we can ensure that teachers are benefiting from the resources provided.

Additionally, it is important to consider the financial implications associated with the teacher professional development allowance. In certain situations, these funds may be used for personal expenses or non-educational purposes, rather than directly contributing to professional growth.

This misappropriation of funds undermines the intended purpose of the allowance and raises questions about the overall effectiveness of the policy.

By withdrawing the allowance, we can direct these resources toward other educational initiatives that have a higher likelihood of positively impacting student outcomes.

In conclusion, withdrawing the teacher professional development allowance is a necessary course of action due to the limited impact it has on classroom practice, the complaints of lack of alignment between available opportunities and educators' needs, and the potential misallocation of funds.

The focus must be directed at developing a more targeted and accountable system, where professional development opportunities are tailored to the needs of teachers and closely monitored to ensure the effective use of resources. Alternatively, the funds should be paid to the employer to organise CPD programs for its employees.

By doing so, we can ensure that our educators receive the support they need to continuously grow and improve their teaching practices, ultimately benefitting students and the education system as a whole.