Supporters of including non-MBBS faculty argue that many possess valuable expertise gained through years of academic training and research experience relevant to their subjects. | Photo: iStock/ Getty Images
The inclusion of non-MBBS distance Ph.D. degree holders in core teaching positions at medical colleges has sparked a debate among educators and medical professionals. Critics argue that this approach compromises clinical and ethical standards, while supporters assert that these educators are competent and well-equipped to teach future doctors.
Supporters of including non-MBBS faculty argue that many possess valuable expertise gained through years of academic training and research experience relevant to their subjects. They contend that excluding these qualified individuals undermines educational diversity within medical institutions.
Conversely, critics maintain that allowing non-MBBS graduates into teaching roles could dilute the quality of education provided to aspiring doctors—a sentiment echoed by various professional associations advocating for stricter regulations regarding faculty qualifications.
In response to the growing controversy, The Hindu hosted a live webinar titled ‘Who Should Teach Future Doctors? The Debate Over Non-MBBS Ph.D. Faculty’, on August 16 at 5:00 p.m. The panellists included: Dr. Anoop Singh Gurjar from Government Medical College Pali, Dr. R.P. Parasher from the All India Doctors Association of ISM, Dr. Shashank Kambali from The M.Sc Medicine Association, and Dr. Rohit Jain, MD Pathology, Secretary, Practicing Pathologists Society, Rajasthan. Bindu Perappadan from The Hindu moderated the discussion.
Opponents of the inclusion raise concerns that non-MBBS faculty, who pursue their doctoral studies alongside unrelated full-time jobs, lack essential hands-on experience with patients. They emphasize that critical aspects of medical training—such as supervised patient contact, procedural stewardship, morbidity-mortality analysis, and ethical case discussions—cannot be replicated through distance learning or part-time programs.
The panel explored various perspectives on this contentious issue as medical colleges face significant faculty shortages—estimated at 30-40% across institutions nationwide—especially in non-clinical departments such as Microbiology and Pharmacology.
Dr. Kambali highlighted that non-MBBS teachers primarily cover five departments: Anatomy, Physiology, Biochemistry, Pharmacology, and Microbiology—all crucial for foundational medical education but lacking direct patient care involvement. He noted a dramatic increase in the number of medical colleges—from 387 in 2014 to nearly 780 projected by 2025—which exacerbates existing faculty shortages.
Dr. Gurjar said it is misleading to call subjects like Microbiology or Pharmacology non-clinical. He says these are pre-clinical and para-clinical subjects. Students in these disciplines must eventually apply their knowledge in hospitals. For example, Pharmacology students learn about drug administration and injections, while Anatomy training extends into surgical practice. If teachers themselves lack exposure to patient care, learning can be compromised. That is why regulation and licensing matter in determining who teaches.”
Published – August 19, 2025 04:07 pm IST
