I am posting this comment on the anxieties of a colleague regardinmg the loss of job by some adhoc colleagues, having served for many years through interviews for the permanent appointment in a DU teachers group:
Once he has become jobless, he/she is no more a teacher, unless he/she is not temperamentally also a teacher. These are the ironies and lacuna of the system of the set of autonomies including the duly constituted selection committees; "convention" of favoritism, nepotism, patronization among the so-called custodians of the higher academics, so called because in my understanding of a teacher, 2 of the definitional preconditions are: transcendence of personal considerations and ability and will to teach by example. I have full sympathies with some one losing job after being on adhoc for 9 years are even less in the interview of permanent selection. Had interviews been bit postponed, that the college could have easily managed if wished so, they would not have been deprived of their summer salaries. The university/college had enough time to judge his/her ability. I do not know the protagonists (taken in and ousted) of case/cases therefore, am in no position of discussing the relative merit but 9 years adhoc is as surprising as few other past/present cases that I know of longer periods of adhoc, as the interviews have been stalled since3 last 4-5 years? Its the tricky issue to a clear stand on. In principles I am against natural right of the adhoc to be permanent. Their experience must have helped them improve their articulation/communication/expression/abilities and competence in the subject. This itself gives an edge over others to compete at par, so that the unfortunate non-adhocs in the race also get fair treatment but there is no way to authenticate the fairness of the fair treatment. I never got an adhoc job in this or any other university during my around one and half a decade visits to the campuses of various universities and colleges of Delhi and outside before not unexpectedly but unbelievably getting one permanent ( and a year temp 5 years before that).( I will write an anthology of my select interviews and their aftermaths, some time if time permits). Very honestly speaking I don't lament about getting the job very late but still feel as surprised on the rarest of the rare concurrence of circumstantial coincidences as I feel on around 2 decades of adhoc experience of a colleague, who finished his PhD around 1990 and to my understanding is a good and committed teacher.
In the present context of the existing objective realities, I stand with the long serving adhoc teachers as for them, as I have said before, for them, it is not the question of getting but losing the job, also we the permanents are no Socrates either, with an appeal to adhocs (with additional appeal to not taking it personally) to focus on work and not on pleasing one or the various groups of seniors. Some mechanism must be evolved to stop the system of prolonged adhocism.
Once he has become jobless, he/she is no more a teacher, unless he/she is not temperamentally also a teacher. These are the ironies and lacuna of the system of the set of autonomies including the duly constituted selection committees; "convention" of favoritism, nepotism, patronization among the so-called custodians of the higher academics, so called because in my understanding of a teacher, 2 of the definitional preconditions are: transcendence of personal considerations and ability and will to teach by example. I have full sympathies with some one losing job after being on adhoc for 9 years are even less in the interview of permanent selection. Had interviews been bit postponed, that the college could have easily managed if wished so, they would not have been deprived of their summer salaries. The university/college had enough time to judge his/her ability. I do not know the protagonists (taken in and ousted) of case/cases therefore, am in no position of discussing the relative merit but 9 years adhoc is as surprising as few other past/present cases that I know of longer periods of adhoc, as the interviews have been stalled since3 last 4-5 years? Its the tricky issue to a clear stand on. In principles I am against natural right of the adhoc to be permanent. Their experience must have helped them improve their articulation/communication/expression/abilities and competence in the subject. This itself gives an edge over others to compete at par, so that the unfortunate non-adhocs in the race also get fair treatment but there is no way to authenticate the fairness of the fair treatment. I never got an adhoc job in this or any other university during my around one and half a decade visits to the campuses of various universities and colleges of Delhi and outside before not unexpectedly but unbelievably getting one permanent ( and a year temp 5 years before that).( I will write an anthology of my select interviews and their aftermaths, some time if time permits). Very honestly speaking I don't lament about getting the job very late but still feel as surprised on the rarest of the rare concurrence of circumstantial coincidences as I feel on around 2 decades of adhoc experience of a colleague, who finished his PhD around 1990 and to my understanding is a good and committed teacher.
In the present context of the existing objective realities, I stand with the long serving adhoc teachers as for them, as I have said before, for them, it is not the question of getting but losing the job, also we the permanents are no Socrates either, with an appeal to adhocs (with additional appeal to not taking it personally) to focus on work and not on pleasing one or the various groups of seniors. Some mechanism must be evolved to stop the system of prolonged adhocism.
सिस्टम लिखे हो आप उसे हटा दीजिये बाकी सब अच्छा लिखे हैं ।
ReplyDeletekahan? sentence mark karke bataiye
ReplyDelete