Quality of Education in Bhutan

The deployment of teachers to schools based on their specialisation (majors) has been identified as a priority since the first Annual Education Conference in 1997. However, this agenda remains unaddressed until now.

I wrote this article on April 17, 2008, prompted by my assignment to a Community Primary School where I was compelled to practice multi-grade (two grades in the same class) teaching. This was despite being a Secondary Science teacher with a specialization in Physics and no formal training in multi-grade teaching. 

I submitted this write-up to the RABSEL, the CERD educational Journal, but my efforts were in vain. A person in charge responded: "We cannot compromise the quality of education by one person."

I clarify that this opinion piece is not intended to undermine the quality of education in Bhutan. It reflects my perspective, devoid of any derogatory intent. 

giphy.com

Introduction 

The Quality of Education in Bhutan has long been a subject of debate, with some dismissing concerns over its decline as unfounded and others attributing shortcomings primarily to teachers. Yet, these discussions often lack substantial research or fail to consider the lived realities of those on the frontlines – particularly the teachers. Drawing from my personal experience, I aim to shed light on the overlooked challenges within Bhutan’s education system – challenges that I encountered firsthand when I was abruptly thrust into the world of multi-grade teaching (MGT) during my first year as a teacher. 

This is not a research paper, a report, or a policy critique. It is a personal narrative – a reflection on the lessons I learned and the struggles I faced as a secondary-level teacher trained in Physics and Health & Physical Education but deployed to teach a primary curriculum in a remote community school. With minimal preparation for MGT beyond a brief college session, I was forced to navigate a teaching model that demanded juggling multiple learning areas simultaneously – subjects far outside my specialization. This mismatch between my training and my assigned role left me feeling unprepared, anxious, and deeply disheartened. 

The challenges I faced were not unique to me but reflect systemic issues that hinder the quality of education in Bhutan. Despite the government’s investments in MGT to address the needs of rural schools, the current approach often falls short. Training programs are brief and superficial, leaving teachers ill-equipped to implement MGT effectively. Meanwhile, trained professionals with relevant expertise are frequently assigned administrative roles or retained in the Curriculum Department rather than classroom positions where they are most needed. This misallocation of resources highlights a pressing need for reform.

In this article, more than recounting my experiences, it seeks to provoke thought and action. For aspiring teachers, it offers a glimpse into the realities of teaching in the remote schools of Bhutan and the importance of resilience and adaptability. For policymakers and stakeholders, it serves as a call to reevaluate deployment strategies and address systemic inefficiencies. At its core, this narrative underscores the need to support teachers, who remain the backbone of the education system, and to align training and resources with the actual demands of schools. Only by addressing these foundational issues can we hope to enhance the quality of education in Bhutan and meet the aspirations of our nation. But first, I begin by discussing the purpose of education in Bhutan. 

Purpose of Education in Bhutan 

In Bhutan, education has long been recognised as a vital tool for national development and a means to unlock the full potential of its people. Our government has consistently prioritised equitable access to education, with a steadfast commitment to improving quality and ensuring the efficient use of resources. In this regard, education is seen not merely as a vehicle for academic instruction but as a foundational pillar for societal well-being. Any meaningful discussion on the purpose of education thus acknowledges that schools are designed to serve both individual learners and the broader society. Accordingly, education must adapt to the evolving needs of the nation and prepare children in all their diversity for the responsibilities of adult life within a democratic society.

Building on this understanding, the purpose of education in Bhutan extends beyond academic achievement. It is expected to shape the kind of society the nation aspires to become. In the Bhutanese context, values such as morality, citizenship, human rights, tolerance, mutual respect, and happiness are identified as core aims of the education system. Our education system emphasises facilitating children to become knowledgeable, productive, content, and happy. This philosophy is reflected in Bhutan’s educational vision, which adopts a holistic approach that nurtures the full development of each child and seeks to realise their innate potential. 

While the broader vision is rooted in the nation’s values, the foundation of modern education in Bhutan was initially established through a Western model of schooling. In its early stages, the focus was largely on knowledge acquisition, particularly through memorisation and structured subject-based learning. At a more fundamental level, education aimed to equip citizens with basic literacy and numeracy skills necessary for participating in national life.

Over time, Bhutan witnessed a gradual but significant expansion of educational institutions across the country. The increasing availability of learning centres reflects the growing public awareness of education's importance. This expansion was further supported by the establishment of community schools, which played a crucial role in reducing the travel distance for students, thereby enhancing accessibility. These efforts signalled a shift towards greater inclusivity in education.

With the rapid increase in schools, the government committed to international education targets. Notably, it pledged to ensure that by 2015, all children—boys and girls alike—would complete a full course of primary education. Interestingly, this ambition materialised sooner than expected. From the age of six, every Bhutanese child is entitled to eleven years of free basic education, consisting of one year of pre-primary, six years of primary, and four years of secondary education up to grade ten. National targets further indicated that Bhutan was on track to achieve universal primary education as early as 2000, with gross and net primary enrolment rates steadily rising.

This significant progress was especially notable during the 1980s and beyond, as the government continued to increase the number of schools while adopting flexible and innovative strategies to reach remote communities. However, the path was not without challenges. A poignant reminder came from His Majesty the Fourth King, Jigme Singye Wangchuck, during the 7th SAARC Summit in Dhaka (1993), where he reflected on how acts of terrorism in the southern districts had delayed the nation’s goal of universal primary education.

Despite such setbacks, Bhutan remained committed to global efforts in advancing children’s rights. As a member of UNICEF, the country has benefitted from initiatives aligned with its national vision. UNICEF’s Medium-Term Strategic Plan (2002–2005), in harmony with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, reaffirms the long-term goal that “all children have access to and complete education of good quality”. This aligns closely with Bhutan’s educational ethos and the far-sighted vision of its leadership.

Relating Quality of Education 

There has been a lot of public concern and debate about whether the quality of education in Bhutan is declining. However, many people use the word “quality” without fully understanding what it really means in the context of education. Scholars have reminded us that it is hard to talk about standards or quality in education unless we first define what these words mean. Without a clear understanding of the terms we are using, any discussion on the quality of education can easily become confusing or misleading. An educationist, Beeby (1966), notes that even education planners do not always agree on what makes education “good,” and there is no single way to measure it that everyone accepts. This is true in Bhutan as well, where there is no clear or shared definition of what “quality education” means.

Because of this, many education experts believe it is not helpful to talk about educational quality without being clear about what we are actually referring to. By trying to define “quality” in education too rigidly might even do more harm than good. What we see as good or meaningful education often depends on the stage of development of the education system and the experience of the teachers involved. Thus, educational quality is a complex idea that cannot be pinned down to one simple definition.

What counts as “quality” depends on the specific context—what is needed at a particular time and place. Even among educators in Bhutan, there are many different understandings of what quality education means. Unfortunately, there is often a mistaken belief that everyone shares the same idea of what education and quality mean, when in fact, the meanings are debated and sometimes misunderstood. The result is that people may argue about educational quality without a strong foundation or a clear understanding of what they are discussing.

In the same way, the word “education” is also understood differently depending on who you ask. For many in Bhutan, education simply means going to school and learning enough to pass exams. This is a narrow view. A deeper understanding sees education as a process of personal growth that helps people change their behaviour, values, and knowledge. So, education is not just about grades or certificates—it is also about developing people fully, and the meaning of education can change depending on how and where it is used.

That is, education is hard to define in just one way. The meaning can shift and grow over time. However, there are still some common ideas about what education involves. Words in everyday language, like education, often take on many meanings that go beyond a simple definition.

Because of all these varying opinions and understandings, there is still room to discuss what makes education “good” or “high-quality.” Beeby (1966) offers a useful way to think about it by describing three levels of how people judge quality in education:

1. Classroom Level

This is the simplest way of looking at quality—how well students do in subjects like reading, writing, and maths, and whether they show good habits like neatness, discipline, and respect. In the past, inspectors (now education monitoring officers) used to judge this, but now it is more often the role of school leaders and supervisors. One measure of success at this level is how quickly students move through school and whether they pass their exams. 

2. Market Level

At this level, education is judged by how productive or useful it is. Economists, for example, look at how much benefit a country gets from its investment in education. They often focus on numbers and statistics, such as graduation rates or employment outcomes. But educators argue that this way of thinking misses the deeper, more personal aspects of education, such as values and human development.

3. Social Values Level

This level involves broader ideas about what we want for our children and society. Everyone—parents, community leaders, citizens—has opinions about what education should achieve. These views are shaped by personal values, culture, and national goals. Because people have different priorities, their opinions about what counts as “good” education can also differ widely.

In the end, Beeby reminds us that we should not be surprised by these differences. People have different views on what quality means in education, and that is completely natural. Rather than trying to settle on a single definition, it might be more helpful to accept that education—and its quality—means different things to different people at different times.

Quality of Education in Bhutanese Context

Over the years, many people have raised concerns about the quality of education in Bhutan. Some of these views come from personal memories, while others are based on different ideas of what "quality" in education really means. It is still unclear whether such criticisms are based on real evidence or just opinions. Beeby (1966) suggested that to understand education properly, we must look at how the system has grown over time and consider the role of teachers in that system. Education system should be understood based on the situation and time in which it exists (Dorji, 2005).

In Bhutan, quality education means more than just learning to read and write. It means giving students a complete or wholesome education that focuses on their overall growth—academic learning, practical skills, and character development. Academic excellence is important, but learning technical and vocational skills is also necessary. Wholesome education is what defines quality in our system (Dorji, 2005).

Beeby’s ideas help us understand why our view of quality may not fully apply at every level of education. In classrooms, the focus is often on reading and writing, and on students passing exams. Schools follow strict syllabuses, and success is usually measured by exam results. Sometimes this means that quality is seen mainly in terms of how well students meet the goals set in the syllabus.

In the job market, more graduates from schools and colleges mean more people can work and help grow the economy. Bhutan’s education system aims to provide wholesome education that includes not only academic learning but also important values and life skills. When students finish school, they are expected to know about science, technology, culture, religion, traditions, and how to live a good life. They should also have the skills to face challenges at work, be employed, and think critically and ethically. When all of these are present, we can say the education system is of good quality (Dorji, 2005).

5 Ways to Improve Quality of Education in Bhutan

The Eighth Annual Education Conference (2004) held at Khuruthang, Punakha has discussed the five strategies/ pillars to build quality education:

1. Quality infrastructure and facilities. 

2. Quality curriculum.

3. More instructional time.

4. Enhancing wholesome education.

5. Quality teachers

1. Quality Infrastructure and Facilities

A school needs to have proper buildings, classrooms, and resources for teaching to happen effectively. Without good infrastructure, it is difficult for teachers to do their job well. Teachers need basic tools and a comfortable working environment. When they have the right support, students also benefit and learn better.

When teachers are given the right working conditions and resources, it leads to better teaching and, as a result, better learning for students.

Having access to tools like computers and other teaching materials helps teachers update their skills. If teachers stop learning, students will not progress either. So, proper infrastructure supports both teachers and students in growing together.

2. Quality Curriculum

The curriculum is everything students learn in school, both planned and unplanned. It includes subjects, values, skills, and ways of thinking. Experts believe that what is taught should match the country’s culture, social needs, and long-term goals.

A good curriculum should help students develop not only academically but also socially, physically, and emotionally. It should prepare them to contribute to their families, communities, and the nation.

In Bhutan, the curriculum is expected to: 

- Reflect the values and traditions of the country. 

- Prepare students for the modern world. 

- Use resources wisely. 

- Achieve lasting and high-quality education outcomes. 

Curriculum needs regular review to keep up with changing times and society’s needs.

3. More Instructional Time

To make sure students get enough time to learn, Bhutan extended the school year to at least 180 teaching days. Since 2005, the school year starts on 20th February instead of 10th March. Teachers report earlier, on 10th February, to prepare for the start of classes.

Schools also follow a new term system:

• First Term: 20th February – 30th June

• Second Term: 1st July – 15th July

• Third Term: 16th July – 18th December

Teachers spend long hours in school, from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., to make sure students receive enough learning time.

4. Enhancing Wholesome Education

Bhutan's education system does not focus only on academic success. It also aims to help children grow into good, responsible people. Wholesome education means helping children develop physically, emotionally, morally, and intellectually. This kind of education teaches children to be kind, respectful, honest, and thoughtful (Dorji, 2003). It encourages students to build life skills, think critically, and become productive members of society.

Bhutan’s system values inclusive education, where children of all abilities learn together. It focuses on seven key areas of learning:

1. Languages (Dzongkha and English)

2. Mathematics

3. Science (Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Computer Science)

4. Human Society and the Environment (History, Geography, Social Studies)

5. Creative Arts (Music, Dance, Art, Crafts)

6. Health and Physical Education (Sports, Health Education)

7. Productive Work (Agriculture, Social Forestry, Community Service)

These areas aim to balance academic knowledge with practical skills, cultural values, and good character.

5. Quality Teachers

Of all the strategies, having good teachers is the most important. A teacher can make a huge difference in whether a school succeeds or fails. No matter how good the buildings or books are, nothing can replace a dedicated and well-trained teacher.

Teachers are central to the teaching and learning process. They shape students’ experiences, build their understanding, and guide them to grow.

Good teachers usually have strong education backgrounds and proper training. But their workplace matters too. If schools have good leadership, supportive environments, and opportunities for teachers to grow professionally, it improves teaching quality.

In Bhutan, efforts have been made to improve teacher qualifications and working conditions. However, emotional well-being is still a concern. Many teachers feel stressed and overworked, which affects their performance. Supporting teachers emotionally is just as important as providing training and resources.

Perceived Indicators of Declining Quality of Education

1. Teacher Shortage, Subject Recognition, and Deployment 

A significant issue in education today is the shortage of enough skilled teachers. This is a global problem, with many countries struggling to find adequately trained teachers. In Bhutan, 13.9% of the teachers are expatriates, mainly from India, and many schools rely on apprentices or teachers from the Colleges of Education to fill the gaps. 

Despite the importance of qualified teachers for student success, many untrained teachers lack the skills needed for high-quality education. Teacher placement is also problematic, with some teachers being deployed to schools that do not match their specialisation, leading to inefficiencies. There is also the issue of teachers, especially new graduates, being asked to work in multi-grade classrooms without proper training, which limits their ability to effectively teach.

2. Teaching Environment

The teaching environment is another factor affecting education quality. While basic infrastructure like classrooms can be provided, there are ongoing issues such as overcrowded classrooms, insufficient qualified teachers, and a lack of teaching resources. Teachers often face heavy workloads, which prevent them from focusing on each student’s individual needs. 

For education to improve, it is essential that teachers work in conditions that support their professional growth and are provided with the resources needed to teach effectively. Investment in teacher training, especially in remote areas, is crucial for improving the education system. 

3. Teacher-Parent Relationship 

There is a lack of strong communication between teachers and parents, which negatively impacts students' learning. Parents need to be more involved in their children’s education, not just by sending them to school, but by actively monitoring their progress and participating in school activities. Teachers and parents need to work together to support the child’s education. A good relationship between parents and teachers helps to prevent bad habits in children and fosters a more positive learning environment.

4. Acknowledgement and Motivation

Teachers play a key role in shaping the future of the country through education. However, the profession has lost some of its prestige due to modernisation and a lack of adequate incentives. Teaching is now seen more as a last resort for those who cannot pursue other professions, which affects teachers' motivation. 

To improve education quality, the government must provide better incentives to retain and attract skilled teachers. The lack of recognition and motivation has led to low teacher morale and some teachers leaving the profession for other opportunities. For education to improve, the government needs to address these issues and provide better support for teachers.

Solutions to Improve Our Education System

To provide quality wholesome education to our students, a strong and effective education system is integral to individual success, social cohesion, progress and national prosperity. 

Prioritising Quality over Quantity

Our education system should identify that enhancing the quality of primary education is a crucial aspect that cannot be overlooked while looking for quantitative progress in enrollment. That is, a higher proportion of enrollment is not necessarily a designation for a better quality. Sometimes, it is necessary to relook at addressing non-enrollment as a challenge instead of focusing on enrollment as a sole indicator of success. With our education system committed to delivering quality wholesome education, education planners and practitioners must prioritise children who are not enrolled, those who repeat grades, or have dropped out. Considering these issues may have the potential to address the quality of education in our context. 

Planned School Upgrades

School upgrades should be carefully investigated and planned. Ad-hoc upgrades often result in schools operating without necessary teaching-learning materials and enough teachers. For example, most of our newly upgraded schools do not have science laboratories, adequate classrooms, textbooks, a library, and a playground. When curriculum revisions take place, textbooks and teaching materials are often delivered late, leaving teachers to rush through the syllabus and compromising the educational quality. 

Teacher Incentives and Scarcity Allowances

Identifying teaching as a complex and demanding profession, the incentives required for the service are discussed widely. Despite the clear necessity to reinstate these incentives, they are yet to be implemented. To address the challenge of recruiting national science teachers, scarcity allowance for Physics and Maths teachers should be considered regardless of nationality (Tenth Annual Education Conference, 2007). The current practice exists where national physics teachers are deployed in remote schools, depriving them of teaching specialised subjects and losing other opportunities (e.g., incentives). Consequently, national teachers despite their dedication and shouldering equal responsibilities often remain the most overlooked and de-motivated individuals.

Enhancing Teacher Deployment Practices 

Teacher graduates should be recognised and respected for the subject they are specialised in during the deployment. Instead, secondary teachers are placed in community/primary schools, engaging in different roles they are not trained for (e.g., multi-grade teaching). If the quality of education has to be considered, multi-grade programs in schools must be handled by trained and experienced teachers (Tenth Annual Education Conference, 2007). A teacher is better qualified to implement new ideas or practices when they are exposed to greater training. The current statistics of multi-grade teachers should be recorded and give them a platform to raise their skills. Ultimately, they are the ones who face the challenges of multi-grade teaching with limited resources in the schools.

There are mystic procedures in the decentralization of teacher deployment. There is no clear and due recognition of the subjects during the time of deployment, as being configured in the training colleges. Primary and secondary B.Eds, the term itself depicts the disparity of the training pursued, while their subject specialization pertains to huge variation. Thus, ‘…it would imply that B.Ed primary teachers are also to be placed at primary schools only and B.Ed secondary teachers in secondary schools (NIE Paro & Samtse, 2005:42).

A reasonable percentage of the teaching force in our country is made up of expatriate teachers. While many strive to perform well within the limits of the requisites, a few cases of uncertain leaving are still rampant. Some arrive to seek temporary employment before they avail of other lucrative businesses in their country, often leaving the school a complicated predicament. Deeming it less frequent and minute, in which we normally fail to execute exquisite attention and remedies does matter to have the share in delivering quality education.

With the contemporarily demanded teaching skills and pedagogic methodologies, the fresh graduates assumed to apply innovative initiatives is risked when their ideas are made vulnerable to criticism rather than motivation in the schools. In such circumstances, it is sensible that the leader of the schools is well-informed and made exposed to existing revolutions in the education system. Theoretical seminars on making them the breathing examples of the young and novice, a mentor to accept failures and the man of principles, a motivator thus up-gradation of their qualifications are crucial. Confining themselves with traditional kinds of educational settings coerces the vigorous beginners to metamorphose and drink the ‘new wine in the old bottle’. Much later, acclimatization to such nature engenders the lust and optimism of the young and this is where many get engulfed by complacency and tag along with the age-old tradition that the school has. 

The Bhutanese school curriculum is reviewed constantly so that it sensitises the immediate needs and ladder up with the fast-changing world. Still, then a reasonable appreciation is required in ‘making the curriculum more relevant and interesting, including aspects of developing valuable life skills and improve the aptitude, motivation and qualification of teachers are necessary for upgrading the quality of education in primary schools and at higher levels.   

Conclusion 

As more has been learned about the educational problems of emergent countries, it has become increasingly obvious that quality and quantity in education are inextricably intertwined, and that the relationship is a complex one. One cannot detach either while trying to spring the light of quality in education. And this entails almost the same to our education system.

In recent years, the rapid adoption of the western model of education has facilitated many of our people to face the new challenges posed due to advancements in science and technology. Today, putting education in the lead, we notice a swift expansion in enrollment quantitatively. Now, it has pronounced a predictable configuration where we observe that ‘…education is at the heart of both personal and community development; its mission is to enable each of us, without exception, to develop all our talents to the full and to realize our creative potential, including responsibility for our own lives and achievement of our potential aims.

With the comprehensive inception of schooling in our country, recently there has been an increasing call for a more ‘wholesome’ education. The succinct adoption of this approach, within our context, has enriched us to better appreciate the quality of education. We are also reminded that Bhutanese understanding of quality in education is absolutely based on wholesome education.

Every year, during the time of vacation, with the initiatives from the parent ministry, the responsible stakeholders assemble to brainstorm innovative processes to provide quality wholesome education. The provision of ‘the idea of wholesome education needs the collective efforts of a supportive community, leadership, dedicated teachers, and the necessary infrastructure (Dorji, 2005). The shared effort of parents, community and the stakeholders concerned, therefore, persistently remains as a calling rather than attempting to see it as a trade or a business to realize this particular vision.

At some instances, when none remains accountable, ‘perhaps the quality might suffer a little owing to the pressures and depression teachers have to undergo (Dorji, 2008:5). Because teachers’ single-handedly cannot lift the quality, they are currently at the same time, ascribed for the cause. As a direct instructional gatekeeper and the practical implementer of the curricula, they are liable to have their share in the deal but not on a total basis. In its ultimate sense, there is no possible reason to infer the same. Indeed, it is comprehensive that a blend of rationales integrates sturdily and reasonably.

And the recent cry over the drop in quality of education is because people are agreed with the unconfined echelon of expectations from the schools. ‘In practice, at the lowest level of judgment, people with very different backgrounds and purposes want many of the same things from the schools (Beeby,1966:13). One cannot merely predict and take for granted without firm evidence when pertaining to a dispute over such subject. No piece of study has attempted to indicate this degeneration so far and the current beliefs are there, hypothetical.

In Bhutan, one logical expression can be because; there is a varied comprehension of foreign interpretations. Many debates seem to have argued based on the subjective connotation. Through, study, reveals that our approach to accepting quality is embedded with wholesome education, where children are fed academically sound information; instils value education, provides cultural and co-curricular activities. It means, in our setting, even if the children fail to continue higher studies, as a result of which s/he is dropped out of the school, the relative use of the acquired vocational and technical skills at home would infer quality.

In summary, any sort of discussions that pertain to portray the nature of quality of education in Bhutan has adequate room to explore and is debatable otherwise. Many studies are demanded to diagnose the much-talked-about topic. It should not curl as a cause and in any way, should not depict as a failure. In a nation of the small population like ours, with assurance, it is affordable to say that the quality of education stands beautifully as an occult opportunity. It is an opportunity retained with cause and solutions defined but left without a trace of investigating with those solutions.

Suggested Readings: 

Black, Maggie & Stalker, Peter. (2006). A situation analysis of children and women in Bhutan. UNICEF.

Bhutan Times Ltd. (2007). Immortal lines: Speeches of the 4^th Druk Gyalpo Jigme Singye Wangchuck. Bhutan Times Ltd. 

Beeby, C. (1966). Quality education in developing countries. Harvard University Press.

Choden, Karma. (Sept 10, 2008). It takes two hands to quality education in Kuensel. 23. P.11.

Centre for Educational Research and Development. (2007). The State of our nation’s teachers: An enquiry into teaching as a profession in Bhutan. Paro College of Education.

Curriculum and Professional Support Division. (1996). The purpose of education in Bhutan: A curriculum handbook for schools. Ministry of Education. 

Dakpa, Kinga. (2006). Survey on quality of education in Bhutan. The CERD Education Journal. Vol. IX.

Danielson, Charlotte & Abrutyn (1997). An introduction to using portfolios in the classroom. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).

Dorji, Jagar. (2005). Quality of education in Bhutan: The story of growth and change in the Bhutanese Education System (2nd Ed). KMT Publisher.

Dorji, Tshewang. (2007). A paradoxical role of supervisors in a centralized HRD system. The CERD Education Journal. XI. 

Eight Annual Education Conference (Dec. 24^th-29^th, 2004). Policy and Planning Division. Ministry of Education.

General Statistics (2005). Policy and Planning Division. Ministry of Education. 

General Statistics (2006). Policy and Planning Division. Ministry of Education. 

Lhazom, Pema & Chhoeda, Tenzin. (2003). Bhutan study on quality education draft: A paper prepared for UNESCO. Policy and Planning Division.

Ministry of Education. (2005). Bhutanese school management guidelines and instructions. Royal Government of Bhutan.

Ministry of Education. (May 9, 2006). Quality of education (Standards): Presentation to CCM.

Millennium Development Goals: Progress report 2002. (2003). Royal Government of Bhutan.

National Institute of Education (NIE) Paro and Samtse. (2005). Researching pre-service teacher education: Moments of truth. Report on the baseline survey conducted under the support for teacher education project (STEP). The Royal University of Bhutan.

Planning Commission Secretariat. (1999). Bhutan 2020: A vision for peace, prosperity and happiness. Keen Publishing Co., Ltd.

Peter, R. (1966). Ethics and education. George Allen & Unwin.

Rickards, Debbie & Cheek, Earl (1999). Designing rubrics for K-6 classroom assessment. Christopher-Gordon Publishers, Inc.

Safaya, R. (1982). School organization and administration. Dhanpat Rai & Sons.

Sherpa, Ajit. (2007). The perspective of secondary school science teachers on integrated science in Bhutanese schools. The CERD Education Journal. X. 

Teaching learning to be: Suggested values education lessons, Section 1. (2004). Curriculum and Professional Support Division. Royal Government of Bhutan.

Tenth Annual Education Conference (Jan. 26^th -31^st, 2007). (2007). Policy and Planning Division. Thimphu: Ministry of Education.

 Thinley, Pema et al. (1999). Education for the 21^st century: Bhutan country paper on the Delor Commission report. UNESCO. 

26^th Education policy and guidelines and instructions. (2007). Policy and Planning Division. Ministry of Education. 

UNICEF. (2000). The future of the Nation Lies in the Hands of our Children: A resource guidebook supporting the rights and needs of children in Bhutan based on the convention on the rights of the child.

UNICEF. (2003). Examples of inclusive education Bangladesh. Katmandu: The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Regional Office for South Asia.

Wangchuk, Dorji. (May 2, 2008). Teachers’ day-a long drawn tribute. III. (p.5). Bhutan Observer.