NEET & NET Controversy

In a span of two weeks, two examinations conducted by the National Testing Agency (NTA) have come under intense scrutiny, casting a shadow of suspicion over all recruitment tests across the country.

Allegations of paper leaks, favouritism, and other irregularities are proving true. The National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) has been the epicentre of controversy, with the recent development of the cancellation of the UGC-NET a day after it was conducted citing irregularities further complicating the situation and creating anxiety amongst those who appeared for the tests.

The NEET scandal took a dramatic turn with the arrest of four men who confessed to leaking the question paper the night before the exam. These confessions sparked shock among students over allegations of the NEET-UG 2024. Earlier, paper leaks and the controversial awarding of grace marks to over 1,500 candidates led to nationwide protests. Although the grace marks were later revoked and a re-test offered.

The four men arrested in Bihar included NEET aspirant Anurag Yadav, his uncle Sikandar, and two accomplices, Nitish Kumar and Amit Anand. They admitted to receiving the question paper a day before the exam and memorising it.

Their confessions revealed that the exact questions appeared in the next day’s exam. Anurag Yadav, who had been preparing in Kota, confessed that his uncle orchestrated the leak, asking him to return home to study the leaked paper.

Further, Yadavendu disclosed that Nitish Kumar and Amit Anand claimed they could leak any competitive exam paper for a fee of around 30 lakh per aspirant. Yadavendu admitted to agreeing and demanding ₹40 lakh each from four candidates he knew, exploiting the situation for personal gain. As the NEET controversy continued, another scandal erupted with the University Grants Commission-National Eligibility Test (UGC-NET). The Ministry of Education (MoE) announced the cancellation of the UGC-NET a day after it was conducted in 317 cities, citing irregularities.

Dharmendra Pradhan, Minister of Education, acknowledged “some errors limited to specific regions” and announced the formation of a high-level committee to determine accountability within the National Testing Agency and review its structure examination processes, and security protocols. In a press conference, Pradhan accepted “moral responsibility” for erasing trust among youth and students. Although he had denied any evidence of a paper leak last week, Pradhan now assured efforts to ensure security, quality, and transparency, strict action to restore the faith of lakhs of students.

The issue has provided fodder for opposition parties to challenge the government in the upcoming parliamentary session beginning next week. Nationwide protests erupted, and the Supreme Court and several High Courts are now handling numerous petitions regarding these alleged irregularities. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court urged the government to “act fairly, and admit if there is any mistake in the conduct of NEET,” highlighting inputs from the Union Home Ministry about the exam’s compromised integrity.

However, mere promises of reform are insufficient. The government must address the concerns of the hundreds of thousands of students who took these exams, which are crucial for entry-level medical colleges or teaching positions in universities and PhD admissions. Accountability for these irregularities must be established promptly. The cancellation of the NET marks the first instance of a centrally-conducted examination being scrapped following the introduction of a new anti-paper leak law in February.

The ongoing investigation into these scandals could provide vital insights and dig into all the ruts happening for several past years in the name of paper leaks. The investigations can further help enforce this law more effectively, aiming to restore credibility to the educational and public recruitment systems as the integrity of recruitment tests has been severely compromised, and the government faces the urgent task of restoring trust and accountability in the examination process.

In an article for the Indian Express, former union health secretary K Sujatha Rao highlighted the need for a revamp of NEET and NET policies, emphasising the importance of inputs from all stakeholders. Rao pointed out that the coaching industry has emerged because of a failed school system plagued by poor governance. She stated, “Lackadaisical approaches, unending tinkering with the syllabus, a focus on rote learning rather than enquiry and scientific temper, poor quality of teaching and supervision, large vacancies and inadequate infrastructure have taken their toll.”

Rao criticised the deterioration of government schools and noted that even high-end public schools are only marginally better, leading to the rise of national examinations and coaching institutes. She observed that “high-end schools are facing the reality of ghost classes with parents requesting their children to be enrolled in the school but allowed to attend coaching classes,” and argued that national examinations are a “lazy response to fundamental systemic neglect of the school system over the years.”

She discussed the impact of centralising the education system, mentioning the establishment of the NTA in 2017, which has faced numerous complaints of irregularities. Rao expressed concern that both the ministries of education and health have failed to address the adverse consequences of centralisation. Rao urged the education and health departments to reflect and correct the flawed policy.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has been actively involved in addressing allegations of misconduct and paper leaks in NEET exams. For a month, petitions were filed seeking the cancellation of NEET-UG results due to an alleged paper leak and the arbitrary awarding of grace marks. The Supreme Court acknowledged the compromise in the exam’s integrity and sought a response from the National Testing Agency (NTA) while refusing to halt the counselling process for successful candidates. The Supreme Court has scheduled hearings to delve into these issues further, emphasising the need for clarity and transparency from the NTA.

In recent hearings, the Supreme Court has reiterated the importance of maintaining the sanctity of NEET, seeking thorough investigations into any reported discrepancies. The Court’s refusal to halt the counselling process despite ongoing investigations highlights its balanced approach to addressing grievances without disrupting the academic schedule of thousands of students.

The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Bill, 2024, takes effect from June 21, 2024. This law includes provisions for a maximum jail term of 10 years and fines up to Rs 1 crore for those found guilty. The Act aims to prevent unfair practices in public examinations conducted by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), the Staff Selection Commission (SSC), railways, banking recruitment exams, and the National Testing Agency (NTA), among others. Before this legislation, there was no specific law addressing unfair means or offences by entities involved in conducting public examinations for the central government and its agencies.

The act was introduced in the 17th Lok Sabha on February 5 and passed quickly, with the Rajya Sabha approving it by February 9. The Bill aims to enhance transparency, fairness, and credibility in public examinations by preventing unfair practices. Section 3 of the Act specifies at least 15 actions considered as using unfair means for monetary or wrongful gain. These actions include: Leaking question papers, answer keys, or parts thereof, and colluding in such leaks; accessing or possessing question papers or Optical Mark Recognition (OMR) response sheets without authorisation; tampering with answer sheets, including OMR response sheets; providing unauthorised solutions to exam questions; Assisting candidates directly or indirectly during exams.

The section also outlaws tampering with documents needed for short-listing candidates or finalising their merit or rank; tampering with computer networks, resources, or systems; creating fake websites and conducting fake examinations and issuing fake admit cards or offer letters to deceive or gain money.

Way forward

To address the issues surrounding NEET and NET controversy and ensure its integrity and fairness in the future, several suggestions and strategies have been proposed in addition to the high-level committee that is going to investigate it.

Implementing stricter security protocols to prevent paper leaks and other malpractices is crucial. This includes using advanced technology for surveillance and monitoring during the examination process and secure transportation and storage of examination papers. Any changes or compensations should be communicated publicly, and clearly to avoid confusion and ensure fairness in future.

Conducting regular audits of the examination process and incorporating feedback from students and educators can help identify and rectify issues. These audits should focus on all aspects of the exam, from the question paper setting to the result declaration.

Revising and strengthening legal frameworks to penalise those involved in malpractices can deter future violations. This includes imposing stricter penalties on individuals and institutions found guilty of compromising the examination’s integrity.

Establishing a robust and efficient grievance redressal mechanism will allow students to raise concerns and get timely resolutions. This mechanism should be easily accessible and transparent in its operations. Establishing an independent oversight committee to monitor the conduct of NEET and other competent tests.

Leveraging technology for various aspects of the examination process, including digital question papers, biometric verification of candidates, and AI-based invigilating, can significantly reduce the chances of fraud and improve overall security.

By implementing these suggestions, the integrity and fairness of recruitment tests can be significantly improved, ensuring that it remains a reliable and equitable means of taking transparently competent tests.

The author is National Editor

Greater Kashmir