In an assertive yet principled statement, Ghana’s teacher unions have responded to the Ministry of Education’s controversial decision to license Continuous Professional Development (CPD) service providers. This move, which directly impacts over 350,000 educators across the country, has sparked nationwide concern — not just over the policy itself, but also over its legal grounding, financial implications, and potential to commercialize in-service teacher training. In this exposé, we unpack the official response issued by key teacher unions including GNAT, NAGRAT, and CCT-Gh, and explore what their unified stance means for the future of education delivery in Ghana.

This article provides a detailed analysis of the Teacher unions CPD response Ghana 2025, covering the origins of the current crisis, major concerns, implications for classroom teachers, and policy outcomes for the Ministry of Education and the Ghana Education Service (GES). Whether you are a policymaker, parent, teacher, or civil society actor, this piece will equip you with critical insight into one of the most contentious educational policy debates of 2025.

Background: Understanding CPD in Ghana and the 2025 Policy Shift

Continuous Professional Development (CPD) refers to the structured training and learning activities that help teachers upgrade their professional skills. Traditionally, these have been delivered by the GES through its district and regional offices or by union-led programmes.

However, the National Teaching Council (NTC), under the Ministry of Education, recently implemented a licensing and CPD credit system requiring teachers to attend training delivered by private, fee-paying CPD service providers. Under the new policy, teachers must accumulate 100 CPD points every three years to renew their professional licenses — a move that unions have labeled as exploitative, ill-conceived, and unconstitutional.

What began as an effort to standardize teacher quality has now morphed into a national standoff, with teacher unions calling out the profit-driven motives embedded in the policy.

Key Concerns Raised by the Teacher Unions

The union response, addressed to the NTC and Ministry of Education, outlines six main concerns:

Lack of Broad Consultation: Teachers were not adequately engaged in the development of the CPD framework.
Privatization of Teacher Development: Outsourcing CPD delivery to private entities contradicts the principle of free in-service training for public sector workers.
Financial Burden on Teachers: Teachers are now expected to pay GHS 75–GHS 150 per training session — an unsustainable cost for many.
Duplication and Bureaucracy: There is confusion between the roles of GES, NTC, and the Ministry of Education in the implementation process.
Exclusion of Unions as Providers: Despite their infrastructure and historical role in teacher training, unions have been sidelined.
Legal and Ethical Gaps: There is no clear legislative mandate allowing NTC to impose paid CPD through third parties.

The unions argue that the current rollout is not only rushed but “constitutes a dereliction of state responsibility towards public teachers.”

Stakeholder Roles & Misalignments

At the heart of the crisis is institutional conflict:

The NTC claims to have regulatory oversight over teacher licensing and training.
The GES, traditionally responsible for in-service training, has taken a back seat in the CPD provider registration process.
The Ministry of Education appears more focused on policy optics than implementation concerns.
Meanwhile, unions — representing the bulk of classroom teachers — have been sidelined despite offering viable alternatives.

The resulting confusion has created a policy bottleneck, leaving teachers confused, angry, and disillusioned.

Highlights from the Teacher Unions’ Statement

Here are some powerful excerpts from the unions’ letter:

“Professional development is not a commodity to be traded but a right of every teacher supported by the state.”
“No CPD program can be valid unless it addresses the practical needs of teachers in the classroom.”
“The attempt to turn CPD into a private market is unacceptable and must be reversed.”

Such language reflects a united front and a growing frustration among Ghana’s most essential professionals.

Legal and Policy Implications

A major question raised by the unions is this: Does the NTC have the legal mandate to outsource CPD and impose costs on teachers?

The answer is debatable. While the Education Regulatory Bodies Act empowers NTC to regulate teaching standards, it does not explicitly allow it to outsource CPD to paid private entities without GES involvement or legislative backing.

Legal experts argue that this could be a breach of Article 190(1) of Ghana’s constitution, which mandates the public service to provide essential training and supervision for public workers — without commercialization.

The Financial Burden and Ethics of CPD Commercialization

Currently, teachers must pay for CPD training out-of-pocket. An average CPD session costs between GHS 100–150, which adds up significantly over a three-year license renewal cycle.

This raises ethical concerns:

Is it fair to charge underpaid teachers for state-mandated training?
Why should private businesses profit off public sector professional development?
Where is the guarantee that CPD providers meet quality standards?

Unions warn that this could lead to “training for profit” rather than “training for impact.”

Union Demands and Expectations

The unions are clear in their expectations:

Immediate Suspension of the CPD Licensing Scheme
Reinclusion of Teacher Unions as Recognized CPD Providers
Legislative Clarity on NTC’s Powers and Responsibilities
State-Sponsored CPD Programs Delivered Through GES
A Full Stakeholder Consultation Before Any New Rollout

They have called for an emergency stakeholder dialogue and threatened mass teacher boycotts if their concerns are not addressed.

Possible Outcomes and Sector-wide Impact

If the Ministry does not back down, several outcomes are likely:

Increased Union-Organized Strikes: Already being considered for the next term.
Legal Action: Civil society groups may join teachers in challenging NTC’s actions in court.
Loss of Trust in CPD Processes: Teachers may refuse to attend any CPD sessions, undermining the entire licensing system.
Negative Public Perception: The public may begin to see the Free SHS and CPD reforms as elitist and disconnected from reality.

Commentary and Independent Analysis

Education experts and civil society leaders have weighed in on the unions’ position.

Dr. Esi K. Awuah (Education Policy Analyst): “The unions’ demands are legitimate. You cannot reform without inclusion.”
SEND Ghana: “This CPD policy, as it stands, is anti-teacher and pro-market.”
IMANI Africa: “The legal ambiguities around NTC’s role must be addressed urgently.”

Such commentary confirms that the unions are not alone in their resistance.

The Teacher unions CPD response Ghana 2025 represents a pivotal moment in Ghana’s educational reform journey. It has reignited important conversations about who controls teacher development, how training should be delivered, and whether commercialization has any place in public sector professional growth.

The Ministry of Education must take this feedback seriously. Teachers are not just implementers of policy — they are its backbone. Ignoring their voices risks not only policy failure but long-term damage to Ghana’s education system.

READ: See The 60 Private Schools in Free SHS for 2025 BECE Self-Placement

Moving forward, a collaborative, inclusive, and transparent stakeholder process must be prioritized. CPD should be a right — not a revenue stream.