Candidates wait to enter a NEET examination centre in Mangaluru on May 5, 2024.
| Photo Credit: The Hindu
During the National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (NEET) this year, scores and ranks were inflated. As a consequence, many candidates may not get admission to their desired college as predicted based on previous years’ scores.
Coaching and admission counselling centres, typically run by business tycoons, have realised that clients, the NEET aspirants, have failed to secure preferred seats despite their advice. However, despite this fiasco, the industry has found a way to enhance their brand value through media and social media coverage. The owners of this trillion-rupee industry, along with the 23 lakh NEET aspirants this year, are up in arms. Their hypothesis is that mapping scores to ranks cannot vary very widely from previous years. In this conundrum, various allegations of cheating and paper leakage, amongst others, have been raised. Despite numerous crackdowns and investigations, paper leakage in medical admission exams remains a persistent issue.
No room for weak links
Since its inception, NEET has emerged as the largest exam in the ‘One Exam, One Nation’ model because of the number of candidates taking the exam, the number of languages the exam is conducted in, and the diversity of various other factors. The quality of education and the college fees payable are critical factors that vary widely. A seat in a top government college with good quality education could cost a few lakhs, whereas a seat in a private college could cost a few crores. Moreover, parents are willing to go beyond their means to secure higher ranks for their children in these competitive exams, as the family’s reputation is considered to hinge on this.
Thus, the stakes in NEET are incredibly high, making it vulnerable to irregularities, accidental or intentional. Therefore, we need strong governance in the form of foolproof and complete Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and their compliance. There cannot be any weak link in the chain of operations from setting question papers to conducting the exam to admissions.
Editorial | A NEET mess: On the conduct of the medical entrance test
However, there are many weak links, as seen from the distribution of the wrong question paper at some centres, for example. Reportedly, some centres distributed the back-up question paper instead of the primary paper. How were both sets — the primary and the secondary/back- up question papers — accessed almost simultaneously? Were they accessed from banks’ strongrooms or another reserve? How was the back-up question paper set taken from the banks’ strongrooms without any emergency circumstances or protocols? There are several unanswered questions about the authorisation and attitude of the officials concerned. This seemingly inconsequential event is actually of enormous consequence and could give us an idea of how the exam was conducted this year.
This one error led to a cascade of errors. A wrong question paper was distributed, subsequently taken back along with the Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) sheet, thus creating panic among the candidates. The correct question paper was then distributed, and no additional time was given for the time lost. Then, exceptionally huge grace marks were awarded for the time lost, which was later scrapped due to a public outcry.
Each of the above demonstrates the need for critical SOPs for complete governance of the exam, which includes several stakeholders such as those who set the question paper, translators, reviewers, the printing press, officials at examination centers, banks’ strongrooms, and invigilators. Any loose links in this chain have the potential for malpractices. Only proper investigation may reveal any substantial wrongdoing.
Despite all the above pitfalls, it is commendable that the National Testing Agency (NTA) voluntarily disclosed most of the information, as per Section 4 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. Since the declaration of NEET 2024, the NTA has disclosed the most relevant information through its press releases. In addition, the NTA has followed SOPs for disclosure of answer keys, collecting feedback about wrong questions and answer keys, disclosure of the individual OMR sheet, and self-evaluation of one’s score, which seem to have worked with no issues at all.
The way forward
It is on record that these SOPs were developed and directed through a decade-long (2006-2015) protracted legal battle by the author of this article in the Supreme Court and High Courts to ensure transparency and develop well-defined rational SoPs for admissions to the prestigious Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs). In one such judgment, the Supreme Court observed in 2011, “In fact the action taken by the appellants in challenging the procedure for JEE 2006, their attempts to bring in transparency in the procedure by various RTI applications, and the debate generated by the several views of experts during the course of the writ proceedings, have helped in making the merit ranking process more transparent and accurate.”
However, this alone is not enough for NEET. The NTA should devise SOPs to get stabilised cut-offs, as done by the IITs, avoid inflated scores and ranks, and achieve a long-tail distribution. It should work to replace ad-hocism with well-defined, sound, and secure SOPs. It should follow a professional war-room culture to facilitate quick and sound decision-making during the entire process. As the Supreme Court said in 2011, “The selection process requires to be upgraded and fine-tuned year after year with periodic changes…, so that the selection process and examination remain relevant and meaningful.”
Rajeev Kumar a former Computer Science professor at IIT Kharagpur, IIT Kanpur, BITS Pilani, and JNU
