The Evolution of In-Service Teacher Training in Secondary Education

Teaching is often described as the profession that makes all other professions possible. Yet the reality is that a teacher’s formal preparation – a B.Ed. degree or its equivalent – cannot anticipate every curriculum revision, technological shift, or societal change that will unfold over a 30-year career. This is precisely why in-service teacher education exists: not to fix what is broken, but to ensure that practising teachers keep growing. For secondary school teachers in India, in-service training has evolved from occasional refresher courses into a structured, policy-backed system of continuous professional development.

What in-service teacher education actually means 🔗

In simple terms, in-service teacher education refers to all learning and development activities a teacher undertakes after entering the profession. Lawrence’s widely cited definition describes it as “the education a teacher receives after entering the teaching profession,” covering refresher courses, professional programmes, workshops, and other continuing education activities. Crucially, it is not a one-time event. It includes all planned activities that help educators improve and mature – both as individuals and as professionals – throughout their service.

This stands in contrast to pre-service education, which prepares a person to become a teacher. Both are essential, but they serve different purposes. Scholars of teacher education emphasise that the two must be planned together as complementary parts of a single system – neither is complete without the other.

A brief history: how in-service training evolved in India 🔗

The need for in-service education of teachers in India was formally recognised as far back as 1904, in Lord Curzon’s Resolution on educational policy. However, it was the Mudaliar Commission (1952-53) that made a more pointed recommendation: specifically advocating extension services to provide in-service education for secondary school teachers. NCERT subsequently promoted classroom experimentation through its extension service departments.

The institutional landscape expanded steadily. State Institutes of Education (SIEs) were set up in 1964 to organise in-service training for primary teachers, eventually evolving into the State Councils of Educational Research and Training (SCERTs) that now serve as the nodal agencies for planning, implementing, and monitoring in-service education at the state level. At the district level, District Institutes of Education and Training (DIETs) took on a pace-setting role for the training and orientation of school teachers and administrators.

Objectives of in-service teacher education programmes 🔗

In-service teacher education is not simply about attending workshops. It is designed around a clear set of professional goals. The core objectives include:

Updating subject knowledge and pedagogy: Curriculum content evolves. New research in subject areas, new pedagogical approaches, and revised national frameworks all require teachers to update what they know and how they teach it.

Developing ICT competency: Technology integration has become non-negotiable in modern classrooms. In-service programmes increasingly focus on equipping teachers to use digital tools effectively for instruction, assessment, and student engagement.

Strengthening inclusive education practices: Teachers today work with diverse learners – students with disabilities, children from marginalised communities, and learners with varied linguistic backgrounds. In-service programmes aim to build the capacity to address this range within one classroom.

Motivating and re-energising teachers: Teaching is emotionally demanding. Burnout is real. Regular training creates opportunities for reflection, peer interaction, and renewed enthusiasm – essential for long-term professional effectiveness.

Aligning with policy changes: Education policy in India has undergone sweeping changes. Teachers need structured exposure to new frameworks, not just circulars and notifications.

The institutional structure: who delivers in-service training? 🔗

India’s in-service training architecture operates across multiple levels, each with a defined role.

National level: NCERT and NCTE 🔗

The National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) sets norms and standards for all teacher education programmes across India. It promotes open and distance learning options – including D.El.Ed., B.Ed. (ODL), and part-time B.Ed. – so that in-service teachers can upgrade their qualifications without leaving their posts. NCERT, meanwhile, develops curriculum frameworks, training modules, and conducts long-term training programmes of 3 to 6 months duration for secondary school teachers.

State level: SCERT 🔗

The SCERT in each state prepares training modules, develops contextualised content, and coordinates in-service training for school teachers and teacher educators. It serves as the bridge between national policy and classroom reality. The SCERT consolidates an annual calendar of in-service training for secondary and senior secondary teachers – a critical planning function often underappreciated in public discourse.

District level: DIETs 🔗

DIETs bring training closest to the teacher’s own community. They conduct short-term orientation programmes, facilitate school-based training, and support teachers in applying what they have learned. Their effectiveness, however, varies significantly depending on infrastructure, staffing, and state-level support.

Types of in-service training programmes 🔗

In-service training in India is not a single uniform activity. It takes several forms, each suited to different needs.

Short-term training: These are typically 3 to 4 days in duration, often linked to specific initiatives like curriculum revision, Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, RMSA, or evaluation reforms.

Long-term training: NCERT conducts longer courses of 3 to 6 months, allowing for deeper engagement with content, pedagogy, and individual doubt resolution.

Orientation and refresher courses: These are periodic sessions that update teachers on new developments in their subject areas or on instructional methods. Universities and academic staff colleges also organise such courses for college-level educators.

Online and blended training: Platforms like SWAYAM, DIKSHA, and NISHTHA have expanded training access significantly, particularly in remote areas.

The current scenario: digital transformation and flagship programmes 🔗

India’s in-service teacher training landscape has changed dramatically over the past decade, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the policy imperatives of NEP 2020.

NISHTHA: scaling up integrated training 🔗

The National Initiative for School Heads’ and Teachers’ Holistic Advancement (NISHTHA), launched in 2019, is widely described as the world’s largest integrated teacher training programme. Initially targeting 42 lakh teachers at the elementary level, it expanded online through the DIKSHA platform after the pandemic forced face-to-face training to halt. NISHTHA’s 18 activity-based modules cover areas including child development, ICT integration, arts-based pedagogy, inclusive education, and school leadership. A separate DIKSHA-based programme addresses secondary and higher secondary school teachers.

DIKSHA and SWAYAM: the digital infrastructure 🔗

DIKSHA (Digital Infrastructure for Knowledge Sharing) has reached 27.5 crore users, while SWAYAM has recorded 3 crore enrolments. Research indicates that both platforms have achieved measurable improvements in teacher competency – in the range of 20 to 30 percent – and have contributed to modest gains in student pass percentages. DIKSHA is valued for its scalability and mobile-friendly interface; SWAYAM is recognised for its rigorous, certification-linked MOOCs.

However, the picture is not uniformly positive. Research published by IDR India highlights a structural problem with NISHTHA: there is currently no reliable mechanism to verify whether a teacher completed a course personally, or whether someone else completed it on their behalf to meet government-mandated numbers. Issues of insufficient rigour in certification, poor tracking of competency development, and weak linkage between training completion and classroom implementation remain unresolved. Training, in many cases, is still treated as a compliance activity rather than a genuine professional development opportunity.

The shift from content to competency 🔗

SCERT Delhi’s INSET Cell articulates a direction that reflects a broader national aspiration: moving from seminar-based, subject-focused training towards need-based, competency-driven interventions. This marks a meaningful philosophical shift – from telling teachers what to know, to developing what teachers can do. Competency-based modules recommended to SCERT Programme Advisory Committees signal that training design is becoming more contextual and outcome-oriented.

NEP 2020 and the mandate for continuous professional development 🔗

The National Education Policy 2020 represents the most comprehensive policy statement on in-service teacher education India has seen. Several provisions stand out.

First, NEP 2020 mandates that every teacher participate in at least 50 hours of Continuous Professional Development (CPD) per year, driven by their own interests and professional needs. This is not a trivial commitment – it represents an expectation of self-directed, sustained learning as a baseline professional responsibility.

Second, the policy introduces the concept of National Professional Standards for Teachers (NPST). NPST defines what teaching quality looks like at different career stages – from a beginning teacher to an expert practitioner – and links these standards to preparation, performance, and career advancement. This frameworks shifts the conversation from qualifications held to competencies demonstrated.

Third, NEP 2020 proposes that CPD opportunities will specifically cover competency-based learning, formative and adaptive assessment, experiential learning, and arts-integrated approaches – reflecting the broader pedagogical transformation the policy envisions for Indian classrooms.

The policy also envisions a National Mission for Mentoring, where experienced teachers support younger colleagues – embedding professional learning into the school’s everyday functioning rather than confining it to off-site training events.

Persistent challenges 🔗

Despite significant investment and policy ambition, in-service teacher education in India continues to face structural and practical challenges.

Digital divide: Around 60% of rural educators face internet connectivity issues, limiting the reach of online training platforms.

Compliance over engagement: Training is frequently treated as a box-ticking exercise. When completion is mandatory and certification automatic, the quality of learning suffers.

Lack of follow-through: There is a well-documented gap between what teachers learn in training and what they actually implement in classrooms. Without structured support, follow-up visits, and peer accountability, training impact dissipates quickly.

Rural-urban disparity: Access to quality training resources, resource persons, and physical infrastructure remains uneven. Studies from Gujarat show that teachers in rural talukas rate their NISHTHA training experience significantly lower than those in urban centres – a pattern that mirrors broader educational inequality.

Monitoring and tracking: IDR India recommends building digital teacher portfolios – similar to the Academic Bank of Credits – where earned CPD credits are tracked, verified, and linked to career progression. This would transform DIKSHA from a training delivery platform into a comprehensive professional development record system.

The way forward 🔗

Effective in-service teacher education for secondary schools must move beyond periodic training events. Research consistently shows that professional development programmes tailored to specific teacher needs are far more likely to produce real classroom change. Structured peer learning, school-based mentoring, and reflective practice communities offer models that do not depend entirely on external training inputs. The Ministry of Education’s push to strengthen SCERTs and reconceptualise DIETs points in this direction – building institutional capacity closer to where teachers actually work.

The ambition articulated in NEP 2020 is clear: a teaching workforce that is self-motivated, continuously learning, and professionally accountable. Getting there requires not just more training hours, but a deeper culture shift – one where professional growth is valued, tracked, and rewarded at every level of the system.

What do you think? If in-service training is treated as a compliance requirement rather than a genuine professional opportunity, what would it take – at the school level, at the policy level, or in teacher culture itself – to change that? And given the digital divide that limits access for rural secondary school teachers, how should India prioritise its investments in teacher professional development over the next decade?

References

1. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376558243_IN-SERVICE_TEACHER_EDUCATION_PROGRAMME_IN_INDIA
2. https://ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in/edup10/chapter/scope-of-teacher-education-programmes-in-india/
3. https://scert.delhi.gov.in/scert/inset
4. https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/planning-an-in-service-teacher-education-programme/242892904
5. https://ncte.gov.in/website/about.aspx
6. https://elementary.assam.gov.in/portlets/teacher-education-and-training
7. https://www.skoolbeep.com/blog/reforms-for-teachers-and-teacher-training-in-nep-2020/
8. https://vajiramandravi.com/current-affairs/nishtha-scheme/
9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393967869_Empowering_Educators_Bridging_Divides_Evaluating_Diksha_And_Swayam_For_Digital_Teacher_Training_And_Economic_Inclusion_In_India
10. https://idronline.org/article/education/rethinking-professional-development-for-teachers-in-india/
11. http://s3-ap-southeast-1.amazonaws.com/ijmer/pdf/volume13/volume13-issue4(1)/11.pdf
12. https://ncte.gov.in/WebAdminFiles/PublicNotice/Hindi_0_17_11_2021_637727482281976435.pdf
13. https://www.globalscienceresearchjournals.org/articles/continuous-professional-development-and-teacher-education-post-implementation-of-national-education-policy-2020-102409.html
14. https://www.ijnrd.org/papers/IJNRD2406165.pdf
15. https://dsel.education.gov.in/teachers-education