New Delhi: The Delhi University has recently revised its eligibility criteria for the recruitment of assistant professors, introducing a new requirement for candidates to deliver a presentation and altering the weightages. These modifications have drawn criticism from the academic community, prompting calls for their reconsideration.

The university has elevated the minimum eligibility score from 50 to 55 points, with a five-point concession for SC/ST/PwD candidates, as outlined in its updated Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for teacher recruitment.

Under the new guidelines, the final selection process will entail two stages: an evaluation through presentation and an interview with the selection committee.

According to the June 3 notification, the presentation will be assessed based on attributes such as “humility, passion and zeal for teaching”. In addition, candidates will be tasked with composing an essay on the day of the presentation to evaluate their writing proficiency.

Abha Dev Habib, the secretary of the Democratic Teachers’ Front, expressed reservations regarding the recent circular — proposing a centralized presentation committee for college-wise appointments, a proposition met with dissent. The consolidation of appointments could potentially breed issues of control and favoritism.

“The additional layer of presentation, not mandated by the UGC, seems superfluous and may further marginalize longstanding contributors to the university. Given the administration’s previous handling of appointments, where highly performing teachers were displaced, concerns arise regarding their commitment to quality and fairness in this new process,” she said.

The professor contends that the SOP introduces an additional layer of presentation in the selection process, to be conducted by a centralized committee, potentially leading to excessive centralization.

She remarked, “A single window for appointments, without college involvement, could pave the way for centralized corruption.”

Mithuraaj Dhusiya, a member of the Academic Council, remarked, “The SOP issued by the DU on June 3, 2024, violates the UGC Regulations 2018. It imposes additional recruitment conditions, such as the ‘Presentation Assessment Committee’, which are not stipulated in the regulations, mandated for all universities and colleges. This oppressive SOP must be promptly revoked.”

What About Existing Ad-hoc Professors?

The university has also revised the weightage for various components in candidate assessments. Objective parameters such as academic record, experience and research performance now collectively account for 20 points out of the 100-point scale; whereas, subjective parameters have been accorded higher weightage.

Professor Abha explained to The Mooknayak that in colleges, there had been no appointments for a decade, resulting in a deluge of applicants when the process was reopened, with up to 1,000 people applying for interviews in some instances. In smaller departments, according to him, this number might have been around 400, and up to 1,500 for commerce, but the high volume meant only 5 to 10 minutes could be allocated per interview.

Now, with a new system allowing only select candidates, experienced teachers who have served for a decade but deferred their PhDs in anticipation of securing permanent positions could face adverse repercussions.

This issue particularly affects women, Dalits and Bahujans, who prioritized job security initially and now find themselves entrenched in ad hoc positions without leave options.

With only 10 marks allotted for teaching experience, veteran educators might find themselves marginalized despite their extensive service. The 2019 MOU acknowledged the absence of appointments for a decade since the first phase of OBC expansion in the DU.

Appointments were regular until 2009 but then faced delays due to restructuring and other factors. By 2019, a significant movement for absorption led to the ministry agreeing that serving teachers would be permitted to attend the selection committee.

However, the new system, which restricts candidates to 40 or 20 per post, could displace numerous experienced teachers, as the emphasis lies on PhD marks rather than teaching quality.

This disparity raises concerns about the university’s commitment to excellence, particularly in light of past instances where highly qualified teachers were replaced.

For instance, Lakshman Yadav, an OBC candidate and gold medalist with a high API score, was replaced by an individual with significantly inferior qualifications. This new process appears to favor recent PhD recipients over seasoned educators, potentially displacing many who have made substantial contributions to the university.