Discriminating against excellence:
Abuses in recruitment practices at the University of Jaffna
July 31, 2014, 8:52 pm
Summary of a report prepared by the Subcommittee for Academic Integrity, Jaffna University Science Teachers’ Association
Introduction
The
Subcommittee for Academic Integrity found blatant, endemic abuse
across several university departments and units in the selection of
academic and non-academic staff. The root of this abuse is both
political and personal patronage which operates at all levels of the
system, and an unwillingness of senior professors and administration to
challenge it.
The most prevalent form of abuse documented
is in the selection of probationary lecturers (or assistant lecturers),
resulting in the most highly qualified candidates such as First Class
degree-holders being systematically excluded from consideration or
denied positions.
The culpability of the University Grants
Commission in making political appointments to the Council and then
being unwilling to fulfil its statutory mandate to regulate the
administration of universities is very much part of the problem.
The Political Nexus and ‘Pre-council Meetings’
The
governing Councils, especially the external members, the majority who
are appointed by the UGC (which in practice acts as a rubber stamp for
those in political authority) have been disinclined to act on academic
principle and in the best interests of the University. The selection of
the Vice Chancellor has largely depended on them. In Jaffna a political
party which works with the current government, was given a monopoly
over the appointment of external council members, although by statute
the responsibility is the UGC’s. That party keeps a tight control over
them, by summoning them for pre-council meetings before each monthly
council meeting. Unfortunately the internal members have gone along
without protest and, consequently, few councillors know or care about
the rules. A powerful core of internal members is served well by this
system and the others take the easy way out by playing along. Academics
who fall in line enjoy unchallenged arbitrary power in their own
spheres, especially over appointments to the academic staff.
MALFEASANCE IN ACADEMIC RECRUITMENT
Zoology
The
1stClass Honours candidate, who won the Sir Sangarapillai
Pararajasingam Award for best performance in Zoology Special with GPA
(Grade Point Average) 3.72, was rejected for the post of probationary
lecturer in Zoology on 14th October 2013. The schedule given to the
selection board unaccountably failed to flag her distinctive Award. The
candidate given the appointment was about the weakest of the eleven
interviewed, having a 2nd Upper with GPA 3.44. At the interview, the
Vice Chancellor had stopped the First Class candidate’s presentation
after 2 minutes, but gave the selected candidate wide berth to present
herself.
Computer Science
Four candidates
with first class were interviewed for probationary lecturer in Computer
Science on 8th May 2012, having GPAs as high as 3.80. However, the
selection board ruled, "No selection is made since the presentation
skill, subject knowledge and overall performance of the candidates are
not satisfactory". They did not apply again.
The candidate
selected at the subsequent selection on 12th November 2013, where just
two were interviewed, had graduated with a 2nd Upper in June 2001 but
worked as Assistant Network Manager Grade II in the Computer Unit for
nine years, without any marked academic attainment. How fresh first
class graduates lacked subject knowledge is one of those unanswered
questions. Circumstances make it look as though the selected candidate
was smuggled in as Lecturer at the very moment the most eligible young
first classes had been shooed off and credible applicants had dried up.
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
An
engineer who entered the University of Peradeniya in 1982 and
completed his PhD at the University of Moratuwa in 2008 was appointed as
Senior Lecturer Grade 1 in 2012 without the mandatory 6 years
experience after obtaining the required postgraduate qualification.
Another applicant rejected twice for the same position was admitted to
the University of Moratuwa in 1981, but completed his engineering
studies at University of Madras owing to the 1983 violence, and in 1995
obtained his PhD in Coastal Engineering from Queen’s University,
Canada, which is an acclaimed leader in the field. He also had amply
fulfilled the required experience after his doctorate and met all
requirements for the post. The second time the Selection Board
decisively stated that his ‘subject knowledge, teaching skill, research
ability and overall performance are not satisfactory’. But this
engineer not selected has three refereed publications, while the
selected engineer has little to match this.
Sociology
A
first class graduate in Sociology from the University of Peradeniya,
with a PhD in Anthropology (a related subject) from the Johns Hopkins
University in the US (ranked among the top 20 Universities in the world)
applied for a position in Sociology at the University of Jaffna.
Although he was shortlisted for the interview, the SAR Academic made a
note that this candidate could be dropped because the position required
a PhD in Sociology, while the applicant’s was in Anthropology. The
regulations are clear that anyone with qualifications appropriate to
the position in a relevant discipline must be called and the selection
board must rule. In fact it is hard to draw a dividing line between
Sociology and Anthropology.
English Language Teaching
A
First Class candidate from Peradeniya who had served as temporary
lecturer in English Literature for 1 ½ years applied for an ELTC post.
The interview was fixed a year after he had applied, two months after he
left for doctoral studies in the US in August 2011. He was refused an
online interview. He applied next time and the interview was fixed for
17th April 2012 while his academic sessions were on and was refused a
postponement by a month when his vacation began. Parallel to this (on
the same date) interviews were also fixed for Law. Since Category 1
candidates (1st Class or 2nd Upper) turned up for neither, Category 2
(2nd Lower candidates) were summoned for interviews on 15th May. A 2nd
Lower was selected for English. But one of the two Category 2 law
candidates who turned up for the interview was told that the interview
was postponed. The Law interview was held on 24th May and the candidate
absent earlier was chosen. By this time the 1st Class candidate in
English who was refused a postponement was present in Jaffna as he had
already told the University.
The ELT position was
advertised again in April 2013 and interviews were held in October
2013. The Peradeniya First Class who applied again from the USA and
appealed for an on-line interview was not granted it. The schedule
failed to mention the three merit prizes listed in his application. A
First Class in English Literature from Jaffna who faced the same
interview was rejected, while three Second Class (Upper Division)
candidates from her batch were selected.
Financial Management
A
First Class candidate from Jaffna University’s 2012 batch with GPA
3.63 who won the Securities and Exchange Commission Gold Medal was
rejected and a candidate from the same batch with GPA 3.49 was chosen.
The schedule given to the Selection Board did not flag the first
candidate’s Gold Medal. Further the selected candidate had her
credentials inflated in the schedule to have worked as Temporary
Lecturer from Apr. 2012 whereas she was not given the temporary
lecturer appointment until May 2013. In addition, the leading candidate
who was not selected states in her complaint to the Council that the
interview was held with the Chairman of the Selection Board (Vice
Chancellor), though absent shortly after the beginning of the
interview, had signed the selection document. A fundamental rights
appeal has been filed in the Supreme Court by this candidate.
Commerce
In
the 19th Feb. 2014 interview the applications of the First Class
candidate with GPA 3.63 and others with a BBA degrees were turned down
contrary to the rules as Business management is a discipline relevant to
Commerce. Three First Class candidates interviewed with GPA 3.55 and
above (two from the 2012 batch) were dropped, while among the three
selected were a 2nd Class Upper with GPA 3.19 from the 2012 batch and
another 2nd Upper who graduated in 2000 and obtained an MA in Planning
from Jaffna in 2009.
Sports Science: The Case of
the Preferred Candidate
A
candidate with a First Class Master’s in Physical Education from
Annamalai University who was attached to the University’s Physical
Education Unit and a Second Class Master’s from another Indian
University who had been a sports master for 4 years were interviewed
for Lecturer in Sports Science on 30th March 2012. No one was selected.
But about two weeks later the Vice Chancellor took the unusual step of
making the 2nd Class a Temporary Lecturer for one whole year at a time
the academic year was about to end.
When the position was
advertised next time both candidates applied. The First Class candidate
was without prior notice summoned by the SAR for an interview
involving a presentation at 12.00 noon while the interviews were in
progress. The Second Class candidate was selected. The Vice Chancellor
cancelled the appointment after the First Class candidate pointed out
the irregularities. These candidates together with others were
re-interviewed on 10th October 2013 and were all found unsuitable. How
does one explain such volatility of selection boards?
NON-ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS
*
The March 2009 list of selections for Computer Applications Assistants
(CAA) drawn from a mainly EPDP list forwarded through the Ministry of
Higher Education was prefaced with the Scheme of Recruitment which
claimed candidates were sought by open advertisement.
*
Issue of appointments to selected CAA candidates was deferred in June
2011 though the Council recorded that the procedures were correctly
followed. Later this became an indefinite deferral citing a letter from
the Secretary of the Ministry of Higher Education. The same drama was
repeated in 2012.
* Ministry of Higher Education sent a
list of candidates for the post of Labourer and they were told to
obtain their qualifications and complete their applications. On 8th
July, the Ministry telephoned the University to withdraw 30 names from
the list already given and to include 23 names from a fresh list. The
schedule for candidates in the new list was prepared in record time and
interview was held on 10th July. The following day, the Selection Board
interviewed five absentees and acceded to a further request by a
candidate to be considered in absentia. The selection was passed the
same day (11th) by a Special Meeting of the Council.
Compare
this with the treatment of well-qualified applicants from abroad for
academic posts whose requests for on-line interview or adjustment of
date were never considered.
Recommendations
1.
We recommend that all cases of irregularities that have come to light
be reviewed swiftly and highly qualified applicants that were excluded
at interviews be called. To guard against retaliation, applicants who
have filed complaints should have their cases heard by a special review
board appointed in consultation with the Unions.
2.
Independent persons of repute with an appreciation of university values
should be appointed to the Council as external members, and student
representatives and academic staff must be allowed to review their
qualifications. Internal members should be advised to resign their
positions and seek a fresh mandate from their constituencies in the
Faculties. This means starting on a fresh slate where the more
independent internal members are not inhibited from speaking out;
indeed part of their new mandate must be speaking out against cases of
abuse or political manipulation.
