A student protest, backed by JVM, outside the council office in Ranchi in August last year

More than nine months after dismal intermediate results shocked the academic circuit, triggered widespread protests and forced a few star-crossed students to make their death wish, the Jharkhand Academic Council has, finally, admitted scrutiny lapses, slapping showcause on some 200 evaluators for “utter carelessness”.

The notices, served a couple of days ago, have sought response from the 2011 examiners within a week.

JAC chairperson Laxmi Singh conceded that the action was a follow-up to the special scrutiny prodded by candidates, many of who had cracked competitive tests but were marked in red in the state board examination.

“After requests for special and general scrutiny poured in, a review committee was pressed into service. The experts have found out that many evaluators did their job with utter carelessness. There were mistakes in totalling marks, while in some cases, answers were either not marked or a student was given less than what he or she deserved. Similar lacunae in the evaluation process left students victimised and traumatised,” Singh said.

She added that the council was giving evaluators adequate time to come up with logical explanations on how the errors happened on their part, if they did not wish to be blacklisted. “A response is must. We do not want a rerun in the future. We want to avoid blacklisting because that may aggravate problems, but for that logical explanation is mandatory,” she maintained.

The higher secondary examinations were conducted between April 2 and May 12 last year. The report card in June was a numbers shocker, with 72 per cent of the total 1,04,333 science students failing to clear the exam. In 2010, the success rate in science was a tad better at 30.33 per cent.

In commerce, the pass percentage slumped to 42.44 vis-à-vis 58.99 in 2010. Out of 46,769 students in the stream, just 19,850 cleared the exam. The success rate also plunged in the arts discipline. Of 1,42,740 students, only 75,176 managed to notch qualifying marks. The pass percentage stood at 52.66 compared to 61.78 in 2010.

The council was swamped with over 6,000 applications for special and general scrutiny by July. The requests for special review came from students who were rank holders in prestigious engineering tests, including the AIEEE. Senior JAC officials had, however, maintained stoic silence over possible evaluation lapses though a probe was initiated. Singh now insists that the showcause is a baby step towards making the evaluation process foolproof.

Reacting to the JAC notice, an “errant” lecturer from a Chaibasa-based college under Kolhan University claimed that he did not recall having made any mistake while checking answer papers. “Besides, if my evaluation was flawed and the same was detected during the special scrutiny, I should have been called in person by the committee. How can I accept that I have done something wrong without evidence?” he said, not willing to be named.

Singh, however, reiterated that evaluators could either furnish written explanations or appear in person before the probe panel. “If dissatisfied with their answers, the committee may recommend blacklisting of the examiner concerned, she said.

To ensure that the scrutiny shame is not repeated, the council has also decided to send surprise teams to monitor various matriculate and intermediate evaluation centres this year.

Should JAC blacklist errant intermediate evaluators?

Tell ttkhand@abpmail.com