Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
The ivory tower is tilting. What was once a sanctuary for intellectual exploration and high-level research is increasingly being repurposed as a low-cost logistical hub for the state’s sprawling examination machinery. While conducting civil service and competitive exams is a necessary administrative process, the growing reliance on degree college professors (professors here means Assistant, Associate, Full Professors) and acting as weekend invigilators is not merely a scheduling issue—it represents a systematic devaluation of the teaching profession and a violation of the professional dignity of our educators.
The Myth of Compensated Rest
The bureaucratic defence of this practice typically relies on two pillars: one, government necessity, and the other, remuneration. However, both are fundamentally flawed. The small honorariums for weekend duty—often ranging from ₹500 to ₹1000—are effectively an insult to a professor’s professional standing. To suggest that a scholar who has spent decades mastering a discipline can have their essential need for recuperation bought for the price of a modest meal is a gross misunderstanding of human capital.
Teaching is inherently hectic and mentally exhausting. Unlike repetitive administrative tasks, a professor’s work involves high-level cognitive synthesis, emotional labour in mentorship, and the constant pressure of original research. The weekend is not a bonus; it is a vital requirement for the brain to reset. When the state mandates that Saturdays and Sundays be spent in an exam hall for six hours, it effectively deprives professors of the recovery time needed to ensure the quality of academic work. Moreover, any amount of money cannot replace the biological need for rest and family time.
A Subversion of Hierarchy and Dignity
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this arrangement is the complete undermining of professional hierarchy. During these examinations, Professors are often placed under the supervision of lower-ranked bureaucrats. It is a disgraceful and serious situation for the country when senior educators, who are the intellectual backbone of society, are forced to accept directives from administrative officials who may lack their expertise and seniority.
When a professor is treated as a subordinate order-follower in an exam hall, the dignity of the entire education system is compromised. This power dynamic sends a dangerous message: that the bureaucrat’s logistical command carries more weight than the educator’s intellectual contribution. A nation that diminishes its teachers to the role of subservient staff under the thumb of the bureaucracy is a nation that has forgotten the value of its own wisdom.
The Residuary Work Trap
We have already witnessed the tragic effects of this policy in our primary schools. For years, school teachers have been the government’s Swiss Army Knife, assigned to everything from census tasks to election duties. This has led to the creation of teacherless schools and significantly damaged public perception of school education.
The same shadow now looms over higher education. By treating professors as a reserve army of administrative labour, the bureaucracy signals that their specialised academic role is secondary to their utility as available bodies. This residual work culture suggests that a teacher’s time has no intrinsic value outside what the state mandates. It is a slow erosion of the distinction between a scholar and a clerk.
A Constitutional and Professional Crisis
There is a deeper, possibly constitutional, injustice at stake here. The rights to professional dignity and to a healthy work-life balance are vital for any democratic workforce. Forcing academic staff into non-academic, administrative roles under the pretext of national duty borders on exploiting the master-servant relationship between the state and its employees.
The bureaucracy must recognise that a professor’s mind is not a resource to be drained until empty; it is a garden that requires the rain of rest to remain fertile. To uphold the sanctity of educational institutions, the government must acknowledge that the exam centre model is flawed. Therefore, Professional Separation, The Right to Refuse, and Academic Primacy should be the key principles.
- Professional Separation: The state must establish a dedicated, independent body of invigilators, allowing educators to focus on their primary vocation.
- The Right to Refuse: The invigilation duty must be entirely voluntary.
- Academic Primacy: The primary role of a professor must be legally and administratively protected as solely academic.
If we continue treating our universities, higher education institutions, and colleges merely as infrastructure for government needs, we will end up with a system packed with exams but devoid of the education they are meant to provide. It is time to stop undervaluing our professors and to restore the weekend—and their dignity—to those who have earned it.
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint.