In the last pay commission, the UGC introduced the Academic Performance Index or API as it is (un)popularly known as. The UGC had decided to quantify the teacher's performance and it was, and continues to be, bitterly resented by teachers. I, personally, had no problems with the form once I, along with my colleagues, figured out the teaching workload section. Typically, a college teacher has more teaching as compared to the University teachers. But the University teachers have research scholars working with them. So we figured out the teaching hours and once this was figured, the form is pretty easy to fill.
Now, the UGC has decided to modify the API. The workload of the teachers has been increased. An assistant professor has to have 18 hours direct teaching plus 6 hours of tutorials/administrative work/blah...blah... This translates 4 hours of teaching per day for an assistant professor. The associate professor has to put in 22 hours of teaching and the professor has to, I think, put 18-20 hours of teaching. The other major thrust is on student feedback. The new API form has also eased the requirement for publications and UGC is going to bring out a list of acceptable journals.
Predictably, the teachers are up in arms. Regardless of what Prof. Thampu thinks, the modified teaching workload is disastrous.
Yes, there are teachers who do not teach, who use the same notes year after year (I remember my Chemistry teachers possessing yellowed notes from which they taught us) but you cannot penalize the entire community. Nor will the teaching improve by increasing the teaching workload. I typically put in 5-6 hours of preparation for a 1 hour lecture. If I have to prepare slides, then the preparation time increases. If I have to teach 4 hours every day where will I get time to prepare for classes? The notes that I prepared last year will be recycled this year and next year and next year and ad infinitum. The UGC has failed to come up with a method to motivate our teachers but I think the problem starts from recruitment where very often the one who is the most syncophantic is the one appointed as teacher. And then are Indian states where recruitment as a teacher means greasing of palms. I agree that not all teachers are motivated to teach but our recruitment process cherrypicks those who have absolutely no interest whatsoever in teaching/research and possess zero sincerity. They only know how to be a good syncophant.
On student feedback I agree with both UGC and Prof. Thampu. The teacher associations are scared of student evaluation and yes, they are right that the system is open to abuse. But world over teaching is evaluated and promotion depends on student feedback. So how come only we cannot have feedback because it will be abused? But to understand the fear read the previous paragraph.
Now, the UGC has decided to modify the API. The workload of the teachers has been increased. An assistant professor has to have 18 hours direct teaching plus 6 hours of tutorials/administrative work/blah...blah... This translates 4 hours of teaching per day for an assistant professor. The associate professor has to put in 22 hours of teaching and the professor has to, I think, put 18-20 hours of teaching. The other major thrust is on student feedback. The new API form has also eased the requirement for publications and UGC is going to bring out a list of acceptable journals.
Predictably, the teachers are up in arms. Regardless of what Prof. Thampu thinks, the modified teaching workload is disastrous.
Yes, there are teachers who do not teach, who use the same notes year after year (I remember my Chemistry teachers possessing yellowed notes from which they taught us) but you cannot penalize the entire community. Nor will the teaching improve by increasing the teaching workload. I typically put in 5-6 hours of preparation for a 1 hour lecture. If I have to prepare slides, then the preparation time increases. If I have to teach 4 hours every day where will I get time to prepare for classes? The notes that I prepared last year will be recycled this year and next year and next year and ad infinitum. The UGC has failed to come up with a method to motivate our teachers but I think the problem starts from recruitment where very often the one who is the most syncophantic is the one appointed as teacher. And then are Indian states where recruitment as a teacher means greasing of palms. I agree that not all teachers are motivated to teach but our recruitment process cherrypicks those who have absolutely no interest whatsoever in teaching/research and possess zero sincerity. They only know how to be a good syncophant.
On student feedback I agree with both UGC and Prof. Thampu. The teacher associations are scared of student evaluation and yes, they are right that the system is open to abuse. But world over teaching is evaluated and promotion depends on student feedback. So how come only we cannot have feedback because it will be abused? But to understand the fear read the previous paragraph.
