- Teachers continue to raise concerns that repeated restructuring of the Career Progression Guidelines has failed to address career stagnation.
- The proposed 2026 reforms have sparked fresh debate over redesignation of grades and promotion pathways.
- Teachers are calling for transparent, structured and meaningful career progression rather than repeated changes in job titles.
One of the greatest frustrations facing teachers today is the continuous restructuring of the Career Progression Guidelines (CPG).
The Teachers Service Commission (TSC) introduced the CPG with the promise of reforming career progression, addressing promotion challenges and ending the long-standing problem of stagnation.
The former Scheme of Service was replaced by the CPG, which was presented as the solution to these persistent concerns. However, instead of resolving them, the reforms have arguably deepened the marginalisation of teachers.
The CPG replaced the traditional job groups, such as K, L and M, with new grades ranging from B5 to D5. In the process, TSC created additional job grades and reassigned teachers into the new structure, setting the stage for even greater career challenges.
For example, a secondary school teacher who joined the profession at Job Group K and was later promoted to Job Group L under the common cadre system was redesignated to Grade C3 when the CPG took effect.
Thereafter, the teacher was required to undergo competitive interviews for promotion to Senior Teacher IV (C4), Senior Teacher III (C5) and subsequently through Grades D1 to D5. Under the 2016 CPG, it could take approximately 30 years for a teacher to progress from the entry grade to the highest job grade.
In effect, TSC created additional promotion stages while giving the impression of faster career progression. Teachers appeared to advance because they moved from one grade to another, yet these redesignations brought limited progress towards the highest career levels.
Fresh concerns over the 2026 proposals
The proposed 2026 reforms have introduced another round of restructuring, with TSC indicating that the changes are intended to align the teaching service with the Competency-Based Education (CBE) framework.
As before, the Commission cites stagnation and limited promotion opportunities as the reasons for the reforms. However, the proposed changes have introduced another round of redesignations, creating uncertainty similar to that experienced during the introduction of the 2016 CPG.
This uncertainty has particularly affected Senior Masters and Deputy Principals in secondary schools.
For instance, a Senior Master III (C5), who has already undergone two competitive interviews to attain Grades C4 and C5, is proposed to be redesignated as Senior Teacher 5 (ST5) under the new structure.
This effectively places such a teacher at the first competitive promotion level, only two grades above the bachelor’s degree entry grade (ST7) and one grade above the common cadre promotion (ST6) for newly employed teachers.
Many teachers argue that such a redesignation raises legitimate concerns. They question how an educator who has served for many years, successfully competed for multiple promotions and accumulated extensive experience can be placed only marginally ahead of a newly employed teacher.
To many, this appears to be career regression rather than progression.
Need for a clear promotion framework
More importantly, the proposed reforms do not provide a clear roadmap for eliminating stagnation.
As long as promotions remain dependent on vacancies and the availability of funding, redesignating job grades alone is unlikely to resolve the underlying problem.
Without guaranteed and structured career progression, teachers may continue facing the same frustrations under different grade names.
TSC should therefore be candid with teachers about the intended outcomes of the proposed reforms.
Beyond changing job titles and grading structures, the Commission should present a practical, transparent and actionable career progression framework.
It should also clearly explain how Senior Masters, Deputy Principals and other affected cadres will be placed within the proposed structure to ensure that their experience, qualifications and previous promotions are recognised and protected.
Meaningful reforms, not rebranding
Teachers deserve reforms that deliver genuine career growth rather than repeated restructuring that merely changes job titles while leaving the underlying challenges unresolved.
READ ALSO: President Ruto urges parents to embrace African parenting to curb school unrest
Sustainable career progression should reward experience, recognise merit and provide teachers with confidence that their professional growth will be protected throughout their careers.
By Liban Galgallo Alio
Liban is a practising teacher.
You can also follow our social media pages on Twitter: Education News KE and Facebook: Education News Newspaper for timely updates.
>>> Click here to stay up-to-date with trending regional stories
>>> Click here to read more informed opinions on the country’s education landscape
