An imperative overhaul

Last month, the NEET-UG results sparked a controversy involving allegations of question paper leak, awarding of grace marks to more than 1,500 students, and an unusual number of toppers with the same score. While the aggrieved students approached the apex court challenging the results, the CBI has taken over the investigation. The government responded immediately, replacing the DG of NTA and constituting a seven-member high-level committee to review the conduct of exams by the NTA. The committee's mandate, inter alia, is to suggest ways to reform the examination process, strengthen the functioning of the NTA, and improve data safety.

Allegations of ‘question paper leaks’ or the use of unfair means are not new to our education and recruitment systems, but what is worrisome is that the frequency of scams engineered by mafias with impunity over the years seems to have become the new normal. Besides causing untold suffering to young aspirants of higher learning, these scams also challenge the professional competence of both central and state agencies responsible for holding various tests and exams. Unfortunately, despite elaborate arrangements and reasonable precautions by the agencies, the possibility of unfair means or fraud in exams always looms large, especially where cutthroat competition exists for limited seats in institutions of higher education. NEET-UG is one such entrance test, held for seats 20 times fewer than the number of aspirants. While hundreds of thousands of aspirants go through a gruelling process of coaching, spending their parents' hard-earned money, and even as the number of suicide deaths increases over the years, paper leak scams further add to the miseries of not only the young students but their families as well.

The current NEET-UG crisis may pass soon as the government initiates action at the necessary levels. But can we rest assured that exam scams will not recur in the future? A few days ago, the government notified a new law, the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024, which prescribes stringent punishments for offenders, including imprisonment for 3-10 years and a fine of Rs 1 crore. But do laws have the definite deterrent force to guarantee that future scams in entrance tests or recruitment exams will not occur? We already have a plethora of existing laws, yet exam mafias continue to jeopardise the sanctity of exams. The larger question is how to make the selection process for admission to institutions of higher learning or for recruitments not only transparent and fair but also inclusive, as opposed to the narrative of meritocracy propagated by the urban-centric coaching industry, which is one of the chief reasons for the criminal sabotage of the system by mafias.

Despite the merits NEET-UG has in its favour, it denies equality, equity, and inclusiveness—the main pillars of the education system. Firstly, the entrance test is largely biased in favour of CBSE schools, whereas the vast majority of aspirants hail from State Boards. Secondly, the rigors of the exams necessitate expensive coaching, which puts aspirants from low-income groups and rural areas at a disadvantage. According to a survey (https://www.careers360.com), over 80 per cent of successful candidates receive coaching. The present system seems to indirectly patronise the multimillion coaching industry in the country. Thirdly, unlike in Europe and the US, academic performance up to class 12 is of no consequence in our admission process. Only the NEET ranking is decisive, ignoring the possibility that a consistently bright student may fail in the entrance test while an average student with the best coaching may succeed (we are not even discussing the management quota). No wonder criminal mafias find it profitable to corrupt the system and ensnare young aspirants with promises of shortcuts to success.

"The first priority for us is to elicit from the students and parents in the country their concerns and suggestions," Dr. Radhakrishnan, the head of the high-level committee constituted by the government in this matter, is reported to have said. This is a practical approach to understanding the problems firsthand. The committee needs to adopt a holistic approach to the problem instead of looking for piecemeal solutions. To this end, the committee needs to widen its purview to examine and assess the very admission process to begin with. As long as the 'win-lose' single entrance test that focuses more on elimination than selection continues to be the decisive factor for admissions, it is wellnigh impossible to prevent the use of unfair means and the recurrence of scams in the exams.

The admission system in most Western countries focuses on selection rather than elimination. There is neither a roaring coaching industry nor mafias running paper leak rackets. The University Clinical Aptitude Test (UCAT), followed by a consortium of universities in the United Kingdom, Singapore, Australia, and New Zealand for medical and dental degree programmes, is only a test of aptitude and attitude, not of academic performance, which the candidate already acquires in the A-Level (school leaving qualification in the entire UK). UCAT assesses behavioural attributes and mental abilities such as critical thinking, logical reasoning, and inference. Additionally, UCAT is only part of a well-rounded admission policy designed to probe innate skills in an aspirant. The UCAT consortium also provides free study materials to the aspirants for preparation. The International Medical Admission Test (IMAT) in Italy is also a test of aptitude. It includes 20 questions on logical reasoning and general knowledge, and 40 on the candidate’s ability to apply scientific knowledge from school science. Most importantly, if two candidates score equally, their respective scores in Logical Reasoning and General Knowledge will serve as the tiebreaker. The Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) in the US, Australia, and Canada is a medical ability test offered by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMCs), with a 50 per cent chance of success compared to the 5-7 per cent for NEET.

Admission criteria should be more like a marathon rather than a hundred-meter sprint, allowing aspirants from diverse backgrounds enough space to prove their mettle. Selection solely based on one grand but nightmarish entrance test disregards years of academic achievements in school and ignores the natural mental abilities and critical thinking of the aspirants. Even increasing the number of seats or regulating the coaching business cannot protect the system from malpractices. The system needs radical changes. A holistic approach to admissions with a comprehensive evaluation system that gives equal importance to school performance, aptitude, reasoning skills, and behavioural attitudes will offer a level playing field to all. In other words, entrance tests should only be a part (of qualifying nature), and not the whole and soul of the admission process, similar to the CSAT in the Civil Services exam by UPSC. Such an overarching and all-embracing admission policy will leave no room for unfair practices. A review of the admission system by the high-level committee may help improve matters.

The writer is a former Addl. Chief Secretary of Chhattisgarh. Views expressed are personal