Controversy Erupts Over NMC’s Draft TEQ 2024 Regulations

The National Medical Commission’s (NMC) recently proposed Draft Teachers Eligibility Qualifications (TEQ) 2024 Regulations have sparked widespread debate within the medical community. Aimed at addressing faculty shortages in medical colleges, the regulations propose expanding eligibility criteria by including diploma holders, non-teaching specialists, and non-medical educators for teaching positions. However, these changes have drawn sharp criticism for potentially compromising the quality of medical education.

Key changes include allowing diploma holders appointed as Senior Residents before 2017 and specialists with years of hospital experience to join as Assistant and Associate Professors. Additionally, non-medical educators with MSc and PhD qualifications may be permitted to teach pre-clinical subjects like Anatomy, Biochemistry, and Physiology during a “transitional period” when there is a faculty shortage.

While some, including postgraduate diploma holders, have welcomed these changes as long-overdue recognition of their expertise, others have strongly opposed the move. Critics argue that the regulations undermine the academic rigor of medical education, open doors for substandard teaching standards, and prioritize quantity over quality in medical faculty recruitment.

Prominent voices in the medical fraternity, including senior doctors and professional associations, have raised concerns that the inclusion of non-medical educators and diploma holders without sufficient academic training or clinical background may lead to poorly trained medical professionals, negatively impacting patient care. Furthermore, many have highlighted the need for a structured and merit-based approach to recruit faculty, emphasizing the importance of research, academic rigor, and clinical expertise.

Non-medical educators, on the other hand, have expressed disappointment over their marginalization, citing decades of contributions to foundational medical education. They argue that the undefined “transitional period” and the additional qualifications imposed specifically on non-medical educators create significant barriers, jeopardizing their careers and destabilizing the medical education system.

As the debate continues, stakeholders are calling for a balanced approach that addresses faculty shortages while upholding the standards of medical education. With divergent opinions across the medical and teaching communities, the fate of the Draft TEQ 2024 Regulations remains uncertain, but the discussion highlights the critical need for reforms that prioritize both quality and accessibility in medical education.