The Delhi High Court recently, directed Delhi University to commence physical exams for final year undergraduate students from September 14, and to work out modalities for stay and transportation of disabled students who had left the national capital during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. The Supreme Court is presently hearing the challenge made to the University Grant Commission’s guidelines (UGC guidelines) that require universities to conclude their final year examinations amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Even the conduct of NEET and JEE are being challenged. There are lessons for everyone. Institution Managements, Academicians and the Bureaucracy.
The students have been battling Covid for the past six months like we all have been. A child goes to school or a youth goes to college to study, to be able to participate in a fair assessment of his skills and then be meaningfully employed. Should he not feel cheated of these basic virtues, if these are denied to him? How would his psyche be affected, if his education is disrupted, assessments not completed and is caught in the cross fire between the regulator and the university? Are not universities autonomous enough to conduct their own examinations in the way they see them or not conduct them if they so deem fit? Of course, they are answerable to the stake holders and a considered and studied explanation would be due. How does the State enter the debate here? Must a State decide if the universities should conduct exams or not, pandemic or no pandemic? Be it Maharashtra, Delhi, Orissa or West Bengal, they have all opposed conduct of paper-based examinations.
It is not as if no one knew the pandemic’s potential to disrupt proceedings. Universities the least. It was apparent in early March, and manifesting itself in no uncertain terms that it was here to stay for a considerable time. While the colleges moved online to complete the academics, the assessments were staring at the faces of everyone who cared. There are any number of online assessment methodologies available which could have been quickly deployed to complete the same. Are not those helming the universities guilty of procrastinating and abdicating responsibility by escalating the problem to State administrations? Yes, the State had a set of do’s and don’ts of acceptable practices during the course of the pandemic which had to be respected.
The final year examinations are extremely important in a student’s life. The certificate of success that he is entitled to, is the gateway to his future. This entails conduct of an examination and a credible assessment. Is it not the prerogative of the universities to decide on the mode of such examinations and assessments? The Academic Council could have assessed the situation and instituted a set of tangibles that could have led to a successful conduct of online exams. As an alternative, it could have used continuous assessment as a metric, that is cardinal to the accreditation processes of agencies like NAAC and NBA. Of what use is mandatory accreditation, if its processes are not followed? Further, a certain weightage of continuous evaluation and that of all previous semesters could have been used, to generate credits and mark sheets of the final year.
May be the universities did not have the wherewithal and technology to conduct such assessments. Since the State was involved anyway, it could have subscribed to a robust online platform, hosted on its site for use by the universities. They could have even taken the help of National Testing Agency (NTA). Instead, whereas some States allowed the problem to fester and then decided to cancel them altogether, some others informed a delayed schedule, putting the student’s future in complete quandary. Meanwhile the regulator entered the fray insisting that the paper-based exams be held before the end of September even as Covid 19 cases were rising. Is it not pertinent to ask, as to what changed between March and September for this wisdom to dawn? The problem is compounded further, when some student bodies and some parents got into the act to completely derail conduct of exams, resulting in what was a purely academic activity to be pushed into the Courts. Is this not abdication of responsibility of the executive?
This brings us to ask, as to what is happening in the education space in the country when even routine matters like the conduct of examinations are sought to be decided by the Courts. When the executive, fails the Courts will step in. The jury must decide if the executive has failed. Accountability too must be seen to be implemented like justice.
Applied Sciences like Engineering and Technology and even some Basic Sciences need Lab work evaluation. These take considerable time and are conducted on strict schedules. Expanding an already delayed window following the social distancing norms, means that completion would take more time than it normally would. Assessments in affiliated systems are usually centrally administered events, where several hundred teachers sometimes come together, and agree on a common framework of assessment. Results are declared only after this process is completed. Assuming the pandemic has other ideas, has anyone factored the contingencies? Once the results are declared, the students are entitled to a revaluation process when the entire cycle is repeated, albeit on a smaller scale. Is it not a fact that flood gates then open to multiple court cases by all those unsatisfied with the results and the process of assessment?
It is very necessary that we as a society must be sensitive to our children’s needs. It serves no one’s purpose that paper-based examinations are held this year. This does not mean that examinations and assessments are given a goby. Assessments can be many as any academic would vouch for. They must be used in these times of extreme turbulence. The current examination system does not inspire confidence in learning. With a curriculum that is at best ordinary, examinations testing an ability to master a few past question papers, with very little effort put in, the skill quotient of a student always stands questioned.