As institutions of learning grapple with inherent biases, policy reforms and cultural shifts become imperative to uphold the tenets of equity, collaboration and educational integrity.
Higher education institutions are often seen as sanctuaries of knowledge, equality, and critical thinking. Ironically, within these institutions, a culture of discrimination and prejudice persists, particularly against contractual faculties. These individuals, despite teaching the same courses, using the same textbooks, and interacting with the same students, are subjected to an ecosystem of systemic bias and exclusion. This article delves into the issue, highlighting its implications for education, equity, and institutional integrity, and proposes actionable measures to address it.
The Role and Contribution of Contractual Faculty
Contractual lecturers are indispensable in the modern education system, especially in degree colleges. With growing student populations and limited permanent faculty appointments, they shoulder a significant portion of the teaching workload. They prepare lesson plans, conduct classes, evaluate assignments, and mentor students—often with equal or greater dedication than their permanent counterparts.
Despite their critical role, contractual lecturers face glaring disparities in treatment, both from permanent faculty and institutional heads. This divide is not only unfair but also detrimental to the overall quality and ethos of education.
The Ecosystem of Prejudice
1. Social and Professional Exclusion
One of the most disheartening observations is the deliberate exclusion of contractual faculties by their permanent counterparts. Many permanent faculties maintain an attitude of superiority, refusing to interact with contractual colleagues. This exclusion extends to share spaces like staff rooms, meetings, and even casual discussions, creating an atmosphere of isolation.
This segregation is not just a personal affront but a professional one. By not engaging with contractual faculties, permanent faculties deny themselves and their institutions the collaborative synergy that comes from mutual respect and the exchange of ideas.
2. Differential Treatment by Institutional Heads
Heads of institutions, who are expected to uphold equity, often exacerbate the divide. Contractual faculties frequently find themselves under disproportionate scrutiny. Every action, every decision, and every performance metric of a contractual faculty member is intensely monitored, often with the implicit assumption of inferiority.
In contrast, permanent faculty members enjoy leniency, a privilege not extended to their contractual peers. This dual-lens approach not only demoralizes contractual faculties but also undermines the principles of fairness and accountability that institutions are meant to uphold.
3. Student Perception and Bias
Students, observing the discriminatory behaviour of permanent faculty and institutional heads, internalize this bias. They begin to view contractual faculties as inferior, showing them less respect and often disregarding their authority. This perpetuates a vicious cycle where contractual faculty are demotivated, which in turn affects their performance and further reinforces the prejudice against them.
Implications of the Divide
1. Erosion of Institutional Integrity
An institution that tolerates or nurtures such divisions compromises its credibility. Higher education is built on the principles of inclusivity, respect, and collaboration. When these values are not practised internally, the institution’s moral and intellectual authority is called into question.
2. Demoralization of Contractual Faculty
The mental and emotional toll on contractual faculty is immense. Constantly treated as second-class citizens, many lose their motivation to contribute meaningfully. This affects their teaching quality, which in turn impacts students and the institution as a whole.
3. Adverse Effects on Students
When students witness prejudice and discrimination, they are implicitly taught that such behaviour is acceptable. This not only affects their respect for contractual faculty but also shapes their broader attitudes towards fairness and equity in society.
4. Undermining Educational Quality
An institution divided by prejudice cannot function optimally. Collaboration and mutual respect are essential for academic excellence. The exclusion of contractual faculty from intellectual and professional exchanges deprives the institution of diverse perspectives and ideas.
Root Causes of the Divide
1. Structural Inequalities
The contractual employment model itself is a root cause of the divide. Contractual faculty often work under precarious conditions, with lower pay, lack of job security, and limited benefits. These inequalities create a hierarchy that fosters discrimination.
2. Cultural and Attitudinal Bias
Many permanent faculty members perceive their contractual colleagues as less qualified or less deserving, despite evidence to the contrary. This bias is often rooted in a misplaced sense of superiority rather than any objective assessment of competence.
3. Lack of Institutional Policies
Most institutions lack clear policies to address the equitable treatment of all faculty members. This absence of guidelines allows prejudice to go unchecked.
Proposed Solutions
1. Policy Reforms
Institutions must implement policies that ensure equal treatment for all faculty members, regardless of their employment status. This includes access to shared spaces, participation in decision-making processes, and opportunities for professional development.
2. Sensitization Programs
Regular workshops and sensitization sessions can help permanent faculty understand the importance of inclusivity and mutual respect. Highlighting the contributions of contractual faculty can shift perceptions and foster collaboration.
3. Equal Opportunities
Contractual faculty should be given opportunities to participate in research, committees, and administrative roles. Recognizing their contributions in these areas will elevate their professional standing and integrate them into the institutional fabric.
4. Transparent Feedback Mechanisms
Institutions should establish platforms where contractual faculty can voice their concerns without fear of retribution. These mechanisms should ensure that grievances are addressed promptly and fairly.
5. Role of Institutional Heads
Leaders must lead by example. Heads of institutions should actively promote a culture of equality, intervening whenever prejudice or discrimination is observed. They must treat all faculty members with equal respect and ensure that this standard is maintained across the institution.
6. Student Awareness Campaigns
Students should be educated about the value and contributions of all faculty members. This can be achieved through orientation programs, awareness campaigns, and regular interactions that highlight the importance of respect and equity.
The Way Forward
The discrimination faced by contractual faculty is a symptom of deeper structural and cultural issues within higher education. Addressing this problem requires a multifaceted approach that combines policy reforms, cultural change, and individual accountability.
Institutions must recognize that the strength of their academic community lies in unity, diversity, and mutual respect. By dismantling the mental walls of superiority and fostering an inclusive environment, higher education can truly live up to its ideals.
Inference
The prejudice against contractual faculty in higher education institutions is not just an issue of workplace dynamics—it is a challenge to the core values of education and democracy. Allowing such discrimination to persist undermines the integrity of institutions and the quality of education they provide.
It is time for stakeholders at all levels—faculty, administrators, and students—to come together to create a culture of respect, equity, and collaboration. Only then can higher education fulfil its mission of being a beacon of knowledge and justice for society.
By Farooq Ahmad Bakloo
fa************@***il.com