Discrepancies in selection process

Editor,

I am writing to highlight serious discrepancies in the final selection process for the DIET science lecturer posts, conducted by the Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (APPSC), the results of which were declared on 27 November, 2024.

The recruitment test, though not initially designed to give equal weightage to physics, chemistry, and biology, inadvertently did so, allowing candidates from all three subjects to compete on an equal footing. However, this fairness was entirely disregarded in the viva voce phase. Out of the six available posts, five were allocated to biology candidates and only one to physics, leaving chemistry completely unrepresented.

This raises an important question: if the viva voce was to favour candidates from a specific subject, why were all subjects treated equally during the recruitment test? Such inconsistencies not only create confusion but also undermine the integrity of the selection process.

It is also disheartening that the evaluation during the viva voce focused more on subject-specific and general questions rather than the pedagogical skills crucial for this role. The position, after all, is not about teaching science directly to learners but about equipping elementary science teachers with interdisciplinary knowledge and attaining effective teaching-learning. Yet candidates were evaluated separately based on their subject streams, rather than their pedagogical skills and ability to train teachers holistically. It is deeply disheartening that the viva voce focused primarily on general and subject-specific questions, with minimal emphasis on the pedagogical aptitude essential for this critical role.

This disparity has jeopardised the efforts of many candidates. Who will be held accountable for this oversight?

To add to the frustration, abrupt changes in the examination schedule were communicated through late-night phone calls, causing unnecessary confusion and stress among the candidates. This lack of transparency and organisation further erodes trust in the recruitment process.

I urge the authorities concerned to address these concerns and ensure that future recruitment processes for such important roles are conducted with fairness, transparency, and alignment to the actual requirements of the position. Such steps will restore faith in the system and ensure that the most deserving candidates are selected to shape the future of elementary science education in the state.

A deprived candidate