Education
Cheating in exams is a manifestation of a much bigger problem.
Cheating in exams is rampant across India. A number of reasons can be attributed to it. Mushrooming coaching classes, absent teachers or poor quality teaching. CCE corrected the situation to an extent but has come with its own flaws.
Trust it on the Chinese to implement strict measures to counter anti-public practices. Recently, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) made it public that a regulation will be passed that will make cheating in the nation’s college entrance exam ‘gaokao’ punishable by up to 7 years in jail.
Obviously, any new regulation is bound to get public reaction and this announcement has attracted its fair share of proponents and opponents. While those in favour cite that the law will help in curbing corruption and ensuring fair selection of students; those against say that 7 years punishment is too stringent. While the argument by the opponents has serious weight, at the same time corruption in exams simply cannot be condoned.
Even thinking of anything on the lines of what PRC has done seems laughable in the Indian context. But the fact remains that India too has much ground to cover in this area. The most recent in the string of shameful cheating incidents came from the usual suspect, Bihar, where the results of 2 toppers of the Science stream of the standard XII Bihar State Board Examination were cancelled. In fact the third student in the scrutiny, the topper of the Arts stream refused to attend a special interview conducted by the board citing depression and hence her result is still undeclared.
The ruckus started when these ‘toppers’ were unable to answer a few basic questions posed by the media. It led to a cascading effect where an inquiry has been instituted against the college from where all 3 students appeared for the State Board exams which also seemingly holds an impeccable record with all its students clearing the exam in the first division.
The collective Indian is now numb to such incidents. Just last year the nation was shocked when images surfaced of parents and relatives scaling the walls of school buildings as high as 4 stories to help their wards cheat in the Board exams. This is doubly shocking as it shows the complicity of guardians in cheating. This incident also shows the excessive importance placed on these exams.
The problem with Board exams is that they judge the student on the basis of a single day’s performance rather than the performance displayed through the year. This is the root cause of the hundreds of coaching classes springing up in the country. In rare cases, school and college teachers start their own coaching classes, and cover the syllabus in those classes while the actual school and college classrooms fail to complete the curriculum. As a result, those not joining these tuitions are disadvantaged.
To counter this, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) took a very refreshing initiative. A few years ago the Continuous and Comprehensive Evaluation (C.C.E) pattern was introduced by the C.B.S.E with the ambition of replacing the current mode of examination by a system that would evaluate the performance of pupils during the entire academic year. Though criticised from some quarters, many appreciated the CCE. Logically, a continuous evaluation would drastically reduce the lure of cheating as nobody can cheat throughout the year. Further, appearing for monthly/quarterly exams encourage the students to study regularly keeping pace with the school, rather than studying the entire syllabus at the year end.
However, even CCE comes with its own flaw. It has handed a free hand to the schools. While 70% weightage is allotted to the marks given by schools, the Board exams are allocated 30% weightage. In a bid to inflate their students’ scores and the overall results of the school, C.B.S.E schools are wholeheartedly distributing marks to their pupils as is evident with the alarmingly high numbers of 10 pointers every school is churning out these days. These practices are seriously damaging the sanctity of these results. Before introducing such a method, the C.B.S.E should have introduced checks to guard against such practices.