Checking in on sociologist Rituparna Patgiri, author of ‘Precarity in the Sociology Job Market in India’
Note: The following is a Q&A between sociologist Rituparna Patgiri—who participated in the Miami Institute’s sociology forum in February 2022 with a piece on “Precarity in the Sociology Job Market in India”—and the Miami Institute’s executive director Maribel Morey. With this question and answer session, the Miami Institute for the Social Sciences checks in on Patgiri’s experiences in the academe since the publication of the 2022 essay.
Q: Rituparna Patgiri, when you initially wrote “Precarity in the Sociology Job Market in India,” you were teaching Sociology at Indraprastha College for Women (IPCW). Could you explain the status of your employment when you wrote that piece? And at that time, what were your hopes for both your career and Sociology at IPCW?
When I wrote the earlier piece that you mentioned, I had completed two years of teaching at Indraprastha College for Women (IPCW), University of Delhi as an ad hoc (non-tenured and contractual) employee. During these two years of my teaching, I received very positive feedback from the students. At the same time, I was involved in several student research projects and also given administrative assignments. Similarly, the Department of Sociology was flourishing with several of our students scoring good grades, presenting research papers at the intra-college and intra-university levels, etc. As such, I was hopeful that in case there is recruitment for tenured (or permanent) positions, I will have a good chance of getting selected. It was not just about me, I was hopeful about my colleagues as well who were equal participants in the Department’s growth and prosperity.
But if you ask me today, I am losing hope bit by bit. It is very difficult to explain to yourself, your parents and well-wishers what is happening, and why is it happening. Academia is a very brutal and competitive space and there are several ‘equally deserving’ candidates for a job that one applies to. As such, it can be a matter of luck in terms of who is selected. Thus, when I wrote the piece in 2022, I was much more hopeful about my career than I am today.
Q: Going back in time a bit, how would you describe your experience earning a PhD in Sociology at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi? How was the Sociology Department at JNU? What could the Sociology Department at IPCW (then and now) learn from JNU’s Sociology Department—and vice versa?
I enrolled in the integrated MPhil-PhD programme that was offered by the Centre for the Studies in Social Systems (CSSS), Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in 2014. I defended my PhD in 2021. During these years, I learned a lot from my supervisor, other faculty members and peers. The environment in JNU is very diverse and composite and as such, discussions were very rich in different perspectives. The coursework was rigorous and there was an option to choose from diverse electives. When it came to writing, my supervisor particularly, paid a lot of emphasis on writing. She spent a lot of time editing and revising my draft and that has been crucial for my growth. Her input was also very helpful in strengthening my theoretical and conceptual frameworks. The best part about CSSS was the diversity – both of the students and the faculty. Hence, one had the option to know and learn from multiple vantage points. In many ways, this was also the case with IPCW. I found both spaces to be democratic and open to discussions and debates.
In terms of the departments, CSSS is a much older centre whereas the IPCW Department of Sociology is very nascent. The latter only offers an undergraduate course in Sociology. However the former is the leading centre for the practice of Sociology in the country with postgraduate and PhD programmes. It has been the home of several distinguished Indian sociologists like T K Oommen, Yogendra Singh, Dipankar Gupta, Maitrayee Chaudhuri, Avijit Pathak, Susan Visvanathan, Surinder Singh Jodhka, V Sujatha, Nilika Mehrotra and Vivek Kumar (to name only a few). Thus, when I was working in IPCW, I had only hoped that we could create a legacy like that of CSSS.
Q: Could you tell us a bit more about the ways that you and your colleagues helped grow the Sociology Department at IPCW and, ultimately, how and why the University justified letting you and your colleagues go?
The Department of Sociology at IPCW was established in 2017 and since then, has been solely run by ad hoc teachers. I joined in 2020 and since then have been involved in teaching, student guidance and administrative activities. One of my colleagues joined in 2019, two others in 2021 and the other one in 2022. We set the timetable, taught at least two full courses and more each, and were part of several committees that looked at administrative services like student mentoring, prizes and scholarships, maintaining the departmental website, career guidance and placement, library management, etc.
While officially we have not been given any justification for letting us go, in an interview with the digital news portal The Quint, the Principal said that our appointments were contractual. So we should not have expected to become permanent (or tenured) faculty. While her rationale makes sense, this is in complete contrast to the Delhi University Teachers’ Association (DUTA)’s assurance to ad hoc teachers.
Q: What are your views on the field of Sociology in India today, particularly at IPCW and JNU? What are your views on higher education generally both in India and globally?
Sociology in both the Indian and the global contexts is at a crucial juncture. There are both practical and methodological criticisms of the discipline. At the global level, the very essence of global Sociology has been questioned. At the same time, when it comes to practical aspects like employment, the situation is grim. Jobs are scarce, and the market conditions are very tough. You require not just a PhD but also publications and teaching experience to get shortlisted for an entry-level position. Precarity has become a very commonly used term to describe the situation that a lot of young people today are facing.
I would argue that what unfolded at IPCW was not an isolated incident. It is part of what has been happening worldwide. Faculty are appointed on contracts that can be terminated at any point in time by a university or institution. As such, contractual employees are in danger of losing their means of livelihood and therefore cannot voice their thoughts freely. It is not good for maintaining academic freedom as one has to compromise on their actual viewpoints and thoughts for fear of losing employment.
Q: What are some closing thoughts that Miami Institute community members should reflect upon?
As already stated, what happened in IPCW is not a personal matter. It is an issue of public interest and thus, requires collective reflection. Hence, I am really glad that the Miami Institute for the Social Sciences has given me a platform to voice my concerns. We need to think if academic teaching and research can be carried out in an environment in which so many people are at risk of not getting jobs or losing their existing jobs. The question is, can we expect people to ‘publish or perish’ when the only option available is perishing?
-Rituparna Patgiri
Rituparna Patgiri is a sociologist by training and has a PhD in Sociology from Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU).
