The CBSE decision to scrap moderation of marks in its board examinations with ‘immediate effect’ came as a big shock to parents and examinees. It was also particularly disturbing to teachers and educationists who just were perplexed how such a decision could be taken for the candidates, who were awaiting results and thinking of their admission in higher education, including professional courses. It was a big relief to all concerned when the Delhi High Court quashed the CBSE Proclamation as “unfair and irresponsible’. The board had to go ahead with moderation and grace marks, but Punjab Board—and maybe some others also—announced results without moderation.
A decision taken in haste—without consideration of its fallout—has adversely impacted the future of a large number of young persons throughout the country. Apparently, there is no remedy available to them. It is reported that the decision was taken in a meeting with other boards in the last week of April. One wonders why, in such an august assembly, no one could suggest to implement it only from the next session—2017-18. In a refreshing move, the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) rescued the CBSE from further embarrassment, by advising it not to move the Supreme Court.
CBSE is the most prestigious of the school boards in India. It has to play a leadership role and must remain conscious of it. It should guide other boards in keeping the process of teaching and learning ‘dynamic’ and responsive to the emerging aspirations of the young of India. How could it scrap moderation simply by taking concurrence of the officers of other boards without any sound academic basis to justify the move?
The main issue from the moderation-fiasco has not yet properly emerged. It has organic links to the issue of curriculum load, and the stress and strain that the examinees suffered because of it.
One of the steps suggested was to improve the evaluation system which, in actual practice, was converted to making the marking system lenient. It had a spiral effect and practically in every board, the process of awarding more marks became the norm. Any analysis, 2004-05 onwards, of the board exam results would reveal how the numbers and percentage of those scoring above 90 percent had over the years multiplied manifold. Subsequently, a decision taken to give weightage to board examination marks in admission to certain professional courses acted as another catalyst towards leniency in the award of marks, coupled with liberal ‘moderation’ support that reached ridiculous proportions when the cut-offs for admission to certain prestigious Delhi University colleges closed shop at 100 percent! The sense of achievement and enhanced self-confidence—natural outcomes of a first-divisioner—were lost forever. One often comes across distraught parents of children with 95-96 percent marks secured in the +2 board exams, lamenting that their child’s life stands ruined.
And all this must change. It requires intensive studies, surveys and researches which must be conducted by professional bodies such as NCERT. CBSE must work in close collaboration with the NCERT which was created some six decades ago to advise the nation on all matters of education. CBSE must shun conducting several other all-India entrance examinations that were forced on it by the MHRD. It must focus on its mandate, and act strictly within it. NCERT should take full responsibility and submit regularly its professionally sound outcomes on moderation, and related aspects of evaluation to the CBSE, and thus save the system from avoidable hasty and inappropriate decisions.
J S Rajput
Former director of the NCERT
rajput_js@yahoo.co.in