Editor,
I am replying to the letter published regarding introducing a pre-viva waiting list in the PGT recruitment process.
The proposal appears to be based on an unrealistic assumption that candidates who have qualified for both PGT and assistant professor viva voce will surely be selected as assistant professor and therefore skip the PGT viva if it is conducted later. However, qualifying for viva does not guarantee final selection. Performance in the interview plays a crucial role, and a candidate may succeed in one viva and not in the other.
It is also incorrect to assume that all candidates who qualify for assistant professor viva possess both PhD and BEd qualifications. In reality, there are candidates who may have only a PhD and are eligible for assistant professor but not for PGT, and they can still be selected based on their performance. This shows that the candidate pool is not identical, and outcomes cannot be predicted in advance.
Even among those who have qualified for both viva voce, there is no certainty that they will be selected in assistant professor exam. Both recruitment processes usually follow a selection ratio, meaning more candidates are called than the number of posts. Therefore, assuming that such candidates will definitely secure one post and leave the other is not logical.
Because of this uncertainty, the idea of creating a pre-viva waiting list is based on speculation rather than facts. Recruitment processes should be guided by fairness and complete merit, not by assumptions about who might or might not attend.
A waiting list should be prepared only after the final results, based on complete merit. Any attempt to create it before the viva risks undermining fairness.
As the saying goes, do not cross the bridge before you come to it.
An aspirant