TET debate in J&K: Two articles in Ziraat Times praised Sakina ji. I am asking are we celebrating collective suicide?

By Nazia Farooq

I read two articles in Ziraat Times on September 26 and 27 about the Jammu & Kashmir Assembly resolution seeking exemption of teachers appointed before October 31, 2019 from appearing in the Teacher Eligibility Test. Both articles, most probably written by teachers, praised Education Minister, Sakeena Itoo ji for her vision and empathy.

As a parent, I am honestly quite surprised by the way we are discussing and celebrating this issue.

I understand the argument about dignity. I understand years of service. I understand that many teachers have worked in difficult circumstances and that asking experienced teachers to sit for another examination can feel, to some, like questioning their contribution. The Minister herself has made precisely this argument, saying that many of these teachers have already cleared examinations during their careers and have taught students who went on to become doctors, engineers, civil servants and other professionals.

But I keep coming back to one uncomfortable question: where is the child in all this?

Are all our teachers today equipped with the skills, knowledge and confidence required to teach children in this frighteningly fast-changing AI era?

I am not saying they aren’t. I genuinely don’t know. And that, perhaps, is the problem.

We seem to be celebrating the removal or possible removal of one test without asking the much bigger question: what should a teacher know in 2026?

The world our children are entering is changing at a speed we haven’t experienced before. Artificial intelligence is transforming the way people learn, work, communicate and solve problems. Information is no longer scarce. Knowing how to find it, question it, verify it and use it intelligently is becoming more important.

So what exactly are we preparing our children for?

Are we still teaching them primarily for the world that existed ten or twenty years ago? Are we giving teachers enough opportunities to update themselves? Do they understand what AI means for their subjects, their classrooms and their students? Do they know how to help a child distinguish between knowledge and misinformation when both can appear equally convincing on a screen?

These aren’t questions about humiliating teachers. They are questions about protecting children.

And I worry that we may be confusing experience with preparedness. Years spent teaching are valuable, certainly. But experience by itself doesn’t guarantee that a person has kept pace with a changing world. A teacher who was excellent in 2005 may need substantial new skills in 2026. That’s not an insult. It’s simply the reality of professional life.

Perhaps the real debate should therefore be different.

If the concern is that experienced teachers shouldn’t be discarded because of a test, then let us discuss a serious alternative: continuous professional assessment, regular training, digital and AI literacy, classroom observation, subject updating and meaningful professional development.

Let us make our teachers stronger, not simply exempt them.

I also worry about our children five years from now. What happens if they are taught fundamentals that were relevant yesterday but have little relevance tomorrow? What happens if they leave school without the ability to adapt, question, create and learn continuously?

They could become inconsequential in a world that rewards precisely those abilities.

I don’t want that for my children. I don’t think any parent does.

So yes, respect our teachers. Protect their dignity. Recognise their years of service. But let’s also protect the dignity and future of the child sitting in front of them.

Because education policy should ultimately answer one question: are we giving our children the teachers they need for the world they are actually going to inherit?