Last year, Bajo HSS had a sufficient number of teachers dedicated to instructing commerce and accountancy courses, and there were even some educators left without the opportunity to teach their designated electives. Nevertheless, a situation arose where a teacher, in order to teach elective courses in commerce and accountancy, agreed to teach mathematics as an additional subject upon volunteering.
Similarly, this year, a comparable scenario is unfolding at Bajo HSS, where a teacher is being assigned a subject unrelated to their elective field, contingent upon their willingness to teach history. This is occurring despite an ample presence of teachers already competent in teaching history. In light of these circumstances, questions arise regarding the significance of maintaining academic qualifications and the essence of specializing in elective subjects. The implications touch upon matters of fairness and justice, challenging the notion of equity.
Conversely, it is reasonable for individuals to have well-founded justifications; however, these compromises should not exceed reasonable limits. As professionals, it is imperative to uphold a sense of professional integrity when engaging in academic pursuits. In our Bhutanese context, there exists a prevailing belief in various concepts that might be likened to superstitions or dogma. For instance, it is commonly held that when seeking assistance or placement from a superior, a straightforward approach might not yield results. Instead, having a favorable rapport with a higher authority, such as the head of one's direct superior, could lead to the desired outcome, as they can exert influence in such matters.
This trend has manifested in the past and continues to persist. It underscores the intricate interplay between professionalism and personal connections. Ultimately, the level of professionalism and integrity upheld by an individual within their profession becomes evident in such instances.
