Hi Everyone,
API (Academic Performance Indicator) was recently introduced by UGC for the evaluation of qualitiy of candidates for new faculty positions in India. Eventhough, it was introduced in good spirit (1. to have some system to evaluate the performance/quality of candidates, 2. to give candidates an system to compare themselves to those selected 3. to nab malpractices in selection in universities and so on), but it has many lacuna and draft is not proper in many sense. It has become a point of contentions in academia and burdensome for candidates. I get many emails and get discussion for API. I am starting this post to discuss the points on API and your views on this.
I heard this term in my previous job. Or, I should say faced the consequences. Till date, I have not explored much about it :(. I think, it’s some mathematical formula to evaluate the performance of faculty in which weightage have been given to various components like number of national and international publications, number of authors in one paper, number of PhDs guided, number of masters guided etc.
I don’t know much about API. but, want to share my personal experience. I joined one of premier engineering institute of north India after finishing maters’ from IISc. As I was not a PhD, hence, given a contract of one year with a promise of further extension based upon performance (though, promise was verbal only and nothing was said about quantitative measures of performance). In December 2010, institute advertised the faculty positions for next session. At that stage, no clarification was given to me whether I will get extension or not. So, to be on safe side, I applied for the same position again. To my surprise, I didn’t get the interview call. I inquired with the dean. He told me I didn't met the certain criteria set by them, hence, didn’t get the call. He was not ready to disclose the criteria. Through my colleagues, I came to know that my zero API was the reason. I came to know that no weightage was given to gate rank (only achievement I have till today :P :P ), one year teaching experience, students feedback (I got quite good feedback from students, even, some students are my good friends now). So, as per their API rule, a person with masters’ from state university having one national conference publication is better than a person with masters’ degree from IISc or IITs having no publication. I didn’t accept this. So, I met with the director (after not getting any satisfactory response from all other authorities). He was a faculty from a top IIT. He assured me I have enough credentials to continue on the same position. I don’t have to go through interview again. So, I was relaxed. But at the end of the session, they recruited one girl from a university campus who had one national conference publication. When I reminded the director about the meeting I had with him in the past, I got the response that there was no vacancy right now in the department. so, I had to leave.
Now, here is the question from my side. Say there is one PhD (call him X) from IISc/IIT with 2-3 international publications and there is another candidate (call him Y) having 10 national publications (Amount of effort needed to get national publication is almost minimal). Let’s say weightage to international publication is 4 and to national is 1.5. Now, X has 8-12 points but Y has 15 points. So, Y is much better than X by a margin, which is not true most of the times (exceptions are always there, I am talking about a general scenario). There are many other things which must be considered like kind of exposure one has in terms of course work, instruments he/she handled, Software packages he/she knew etc.
The point I want to make is that API can be a good initiative but we need to devise a mechanism where we can differentiate between quality and quantity, otherwise we will just promote the rat race which will worsen the situation. We need to put systems which motivate performers at least.
Again, I repeat, I am not much aware about API. I am sharing my personal experience and perception only.
Bhupender Singh said:
But sorry state is that universities modify it according to their need (they change the marks allotted for specific points to suit their candidates).
Agreed. I saw cases where non-performers got promoted and deserving ones were sidelined by twisting rules.
Bhupender Singh said:
@Parveen, on second point I don't agree that IIT or IISc students should get more weightage... it is caliber and capability of candidate that should be criteria for selection/deselection, not the affiliation.
Agreed. Let’s remove IIT/IISc point, then, also, X is better than Y as X has international publications. But at entry level, API score is showing otherwise.
Anyway... now you are in a better position and can make as much API as you want.. just check the draft (just by presenting in conferences you can make lot of API (rather more than by publication in journals)).
Yes, I am in a much better position :) :) I will try my level best to do some good work and get some good publication in my PhD studies. But I will not run after some crap mathematical formula. Although I want to join academics, but if wouldn’t get, then I will be equally happy with industry.
I mentioned IIT/IISc because there people have more chances to get publications on an average at least as compare to state universities. Central universities and national labs may have different stories. Anyway, I completely agree with you that institute should not be given weightage. But we shouldn’t undermine hard work of someone just because of some poorly managed mathematical formula.
I mentioned other points like course work, instruments, software packages etc for the institutes where primary focus is on teaching not on research. And, master degree is the entry level. These skills can add values to them. I mixed two things in my 1st post in X and Y example. Sorry for that.
