The examination overload, its enormous cost

Why in the News

Indian students sit a long series of entrance and recruitment tests on top of board and university exams, and these tests are hit by paper leaks. A former Secretary General of the Association of Indian Universities argues that admissions should rest on school-leaving and university results instead.

What is the examination overload, and why was it built?

1. What it is: Beyond board exams, students sit a separate entrance test for each course and a recruitment test for each job, like a relay where every stage demands a fresh run.
2. Entrance tests: Each level of study has its own gate:
   • undergraduates take the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE), the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET), the National Aptitude Test in Architecture (NATA), the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) or the Common University Entrance Test (CUET);
   • postgraduates take the Graduate Aptitude Test in Engineering (GATE), the Common Admission Test (CAT) or CUET-PG, and researchers the National Eligibility Test (NET).
3. Recruitment tests: A degree only establishes eligibility. Jobs depend on tests by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), State commissions, the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) and the Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS).
4. Why they were introduced: Board and university exams were said to lack uniform standards and to be open to manipulation.
5. The takeaway: The new tests repeat the flaws they were meant to fix, and make school results count for least.

What has gone wrong with layered testing?

1. Integrity failures: Paper leaks, dummy candidates (impostors sitting the test) and mark manipulation lead to repeated cancellations, which waste public money and delay admissions.
2. Cost on families: Every layer needs months of preparation and separate coaching fees, so the tests reward the ability to pay rather than ability.
3. Stress on students: Layered tests and centralised counselling for seat allotment multiply anxiety, and scarce affordable seats push many into repeat attempts.
4. Inverted learning: Students study to clear filters, so coaching drills replace classroom teaching and the board exam becomes a formality.
5. Narrow skill tested: A multiple-choice test rewards speed at ticking answers under pressure, a coachable skill, over years of performance.

Why have reforms not restored trust?

1. NTA’s record: The National Testing Agency (NTA) runs the major entrance tests. Its failures persist after a 2024 review by a committee headed by a former space scientist.
2. Another committee: A new committee was set up in July 2026 amid youth protests in several States. Whether it will fix the design is open.
3. Misplaced trust: Policy trusts testing agencies that have repeatedly failed more than years of assessment by teachers.

What would a merit-based alternative look like?

1. Existing records: Class XII marks and a university Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) reflect years of work and are harder to game than one test.
2. Standardise boards: Uneven boards can be made comparable through normalisation and common moderation (adjusting marks to one scale), external audits and score equating, not a separate test system.
3. Proposed design: Admissions on moderated school-leaving results, scholarships on academic records and public recruitment on verified records with structured interviews.
4. One aptitude test: At most one national aptitude test per exit level, its scores used only to moderate board or university results.
5. Global practice: Many countries admit students mainly on school-leaving results, so India’s repeated testing is the outlier.

Challenges

1. Uneven boards: State boards differ in syllabus and marking, so raw marks are not yet comparable across States.
2. Mark inflation: If board results decide admission, schools face pressure to inflate internal marks.
3. Seat scarcity: Affordable quality seats remain few, so competition persists whatever the filter.

Way Forward

1. Common moderation rules: The Ministry of Education should set one moderation framework for all boards.
2. Audited internal marks: External audits should check school internal assessment so it stays credible.
3. More affordable seats: The Centre and States should expand quality public seats to cut repeat attempts.

Conclusion

India has built a second examination system on top of school assessment, and it has inherited the integrity problems it was meant to solve. Whether the new committee strengthens school assessment or adds another test is the decision to watch.

Government efforts on examination integrity

1. Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024: Penalises paper leaks and impersonation in exams run by bodies such as the UPSC and SSC. Organised leaks carry up to 10 years in jail.
2. NTA scope narrowed: From 2025 the NTA conducts only higher education entrance tests.
3. PARAKH: A national assessment centre to standardise board exams and introduce a Holistic Progress Card.

Matching Previous Year Question

“[2020, GS2, 15 marks] National Education Policy 2020 is in conformity with the Sustainable Development Goal-4 (2030). It intends to restructure and reorient education system in India. Critically examine the statement.”