DC Edit | For sake of equity, quality, it’s time to overhaul Neet
Having found no evidence of a systemic leak or disruption in the sanctity of the exam results, the Supreme Court ruled with finality against conducting the Neet-UG test again. Whatever the reservations, misgivings and heavily politicised criticism of the leaks, it is only right that the verdict be accepted, and measures taken at once to preserve an ideal inviolability of the testing process.
The court may have found the evidence was not compelling enough of a widespread leak of the papers, which may have been limited to a couple of places in Bihar. The point is not even a suspicion of a leak must be allowed to emerge if the purity of such an examination is upheld as it helps pick candidates to become future doctors and dentists. Therein lies the challenge that those who run the National Testing Agency will be facing in their complete overhaul of the system.
Not to put 23 lakh candidates through a harrowing process again of a retest may have been the logic behind this significant verdict. Holes will be picked in the court’s final stand despite the vast number of strictures it passed while allowing the revised results to stand. However, instead of dwelling on the negatives, what must be done now is to reevaluate the process of preserving the sanctity of the question paper, which surely cannot be a task beyond an IT-enabled India. Putting up CCTVs in each exam centre is the minimum requirement.
The committee headed by a former Isro chief has been tasked with introducing foolproof data protection measures and audits and surprise inspections, besides highly secure logistics in getting the question paper to one lakh exam centres. This is something every young Indian aspiring to crack the test to become a medical professional is owed as his very future depends on how secure the system of conducting exams is.
Beyond taking on the onerous task of making the secrecy of the question paper impenetrable, maybe it is time for the nation to think of whether the very system of a central test is necessary. Probes like those conducted by the Tamil Nadu government exposed how the system has been gamed by those from elite backgrounds who can afford tuition at expensive dedicated coaching centres to crack the code of objectivity tests.
While no one can argue against the corrections the system needed to root out the rampant evil of capitation fees which had made medical seats unattainable except for the very affluent, there is a clear case for the central test to continue, but only to decide the allotment of the seats marked for the national pool. Is there not a way for each state to decide how best it can apportion other seats to its students?
Sad as it is to see young people taking their lives because of exam stress, they are not sufficient grounds to dismantle entrance tests, which works well enough as seen when the IITs run their annual JEE. They don’t do grace marks or transport question papers by rickshaws to invite breaches of security.
Complex as the question of equalising marks or grades obtained in different school leaving exam systems is if Class 12 marks alone are to be the criterion for enrolment in medical colleges, an algorithm to solve the problem must be attempted before states are allowed to take over allotment because they will otherwise bring their biases into it. The least that can be done to counter valid points made against the current Neet system is to set apart seats that states can fill without eroding the principle of picking the best to take up a profession in medicine.