Evaluation system needs transparency
Young Hans Team In the recent results of Junior Intermediate examination, although the pass percentage at 54.6 per cent seems better compared to...
Young Hans Team
In the recent results of Junior Intermediate examination, although the pass percentage at 54.6 per cent seems better compared to the last two years (52.21 and 53.75 respectively) and as a morale booster to the Intermediate Board, on the flipside, there is more than 45 per cent students failed. Besides the poor show, allegations on spot evaluations of students evaluating answer-sheets in visuals of some sting operations carried out by vernacular channels worry the parents. HMTV, in its weekly edition of Progress Debate on Wednesday, focussed on the vulnerability in the system. MLC Janardhan Reddy (JR) and Dr Madhusudana Reddy (MR), Secretary, AP Government Junior Lecturers Association, took part in the debate and discussed elaborately on desired transparency in the system. Excerpts: HMTV: More than 45 per cent of students who appeared for Junior Intermediate exams failed. Is it not an alarming situation? Is it being addressed properly? MR: The marks-oriented approach of institutes and parents who are sending their hapless students for the mad rush for marks is worrisome. So, the students are pressurised and it's not only leading to the rise of failure percentage, but also to the increase of suicides by students.
HMTV: Even students who got 90 marks or more are taking extreme steps for losing one or two marks. MR: Our students outshine students of many other states in getting IIT seats and other competitive exams. But our liberal allotment of marks is perceived sceptically at the national level. For example, a student from Mizoram with 40 per cent marks in his Class XII is officially equal to our student of 80 per cent marks. Even the weightage given to Class XII marks in ISEET by CBSE is 'discriminatory'.
HMTV: One can understand 'cent per cent' in subjects like Mathematics. How do students get such marks in languages and humanities? MR: Since one cannot give more than 99 marks in languages, the evaluators of languages are holding back that one mark; otherwise, they would have put 100 out of 100 in languages too.
HMTV: Only students of corporate colleges seem to be getting the maximum marks. Are the government institutes like Intermediate Board playing into the hands of the private corporate colleges? Is there any nexus between the evaluating system and the corporate colleges? JR: There is absolutely no such nexus. But, the system must be made more accountable, transparent to wipe off such doubts.
HMTV: Recent sting operations carried out by some channels show that unqualified personnel are evaluating the answer sheets of the Intermediate students. What is your observation? MR: There is absolutely no chance for unqualified people to evaluate answer sheets. The evaluation system of SSC papers or Junior Intermediate is impeccable. More than 22,000 lecturers are engaged in evaluation of the answer sheets. The evaluator must be a post graduate with a minimum of 55 per cent marks and should have at least three years of teaching experience. There are plenty of lecturers available in addition to the engaged evaluators. There is no dearth of hands to correct the papers. JR: The system is very foolproof. A team of six assistant examiners (AE) is monitored by a Chief Examiner and special assistants are also used for non-academic jobs. While projecting them, the news channels had blown up the issue; but, it was not correct.
HMTV: If everything is perfect and flawless, where is the point in seeking for changes? Does the system require any reforms? MR: Reforms are definitely necessary because the present system still has room for improvement. More accountability in the system will reinstate the confidence in the students and their parents. The current evaluation system must be redressed further.