Dear Editor,
This is in response to a letter titled “Follow API” by one unknown aspirant published on 6th July 2018.
The candidate cited UGC guidelines Academic Performance Indicator (API) for short listing the candidates and judging candidates for the Assistant professor exam.
This request is nothing but an attempt to choke out all the NET/SLET qualified aspirants from the final list. Also, this is an attempt of indirect way of asking reservation within reservation like the other day one aspirant asked for reservation for the disabilities.
Let me make it clear we don’t have any issue with both the demands. But had it been made earlier there would have been no opposition. But, since the advertisement has been already made public, any attempt to mould the recruitment drive for favouring any section will be vehemently opposed.
By citing API, I believe the writer was trying to give advantage to PhD holders. PhD holders need not fear simple SLET/NET holders as they should have more knowledge than them in the teaching field.
Moreover, writer has pointed that API based exams to be free from nepotism, favoritism, manipulation and backdoor entry.
I believe APPSC, with or without API will be free from all the above accusations. We should trust the highest recruiting body of our state.
Holding PhD certificate doesn’t make one worthy of interview. All must be given equal chance. Let interview be the decider not API, at least in this recruiting process.
Mass representation of candidate should be there in any exam of our state where job notification comes once in a blue moon.
I request APPSC to continue with the present recruiting process as mentioned in the advertisement. If possible introduce written/objective test (mentioned in advertisement) along with viva to judge the real talent. It will bring API and non API in the same platform.
Yours,
Aspirant