(iv) One of the important elements of physical education, all along has been emphasis on stereo- typed drills. Aerobics bringing out the rhythm in human movement have lot more educational and developmental value. This should be made part and parcel of physical education programme. The emphasis should also be on Indian games.
(v) General youth programmes to be implemented in the school system could be a package of the following measures:
* Conduct of National Integration Camps; teaching of patriotic songs special reference to children of one region learning songs of other regions; and interState visits of students;
* Introduction of National service Scheme in all the schools at +2 level;
* Grant of appropriate credits for national service at the college level for award of degrees.
(vi)Only 5% of the youth are involved in youth activities in the school system. There is a vast reservoir of youth potential outside the school system. Appropriate activities should be organised for them as well. The youth outside the school system should be given access to the infrastructure available in the schools. This alone will facilitate expanding the social base of those who are drafted for youth activities.
(vii) The physical education teachers have all along been given a secondary status in terms of their service conditions, emoluments and means of according recognition to them. They should be treated as equal in every respect to other teachers.
(viii) National Integration camps should be so organised that opportunities are offered for the mixing of the youth with the underprivileged tribal population. This will also bring about national integration in the true sense of the terms.
290
Examination Reforms 12.10.1 Examination reform has been a subject of almost consistent consideration by various Committees and Commissions appointed by the Government of India from time to time. The justification for examination reforms arises from academic considerations. Examinations alongwith teaching and learning, in fact, constitute the trinity of functions in the educational process. Examinations over the years have tended to be an instrument for testing memory. Learning has become a rather mechanical process of acquiring skills and teaching has been largely a process of coaching for examinations. The relationship between examinations and standards of teaching and learning are intimate. Improvement in any one of these aspects results in improvement of other aspects as well. Therefore, the objective of examination reform is to make it an instrument of good education.
12.10.2 The Indian University Commission (1902) observed that the teaching in Indian education stood subordinated to examination and not examination to teaching. The Hartog Committee (1929) deprecated academic bias of examinations at the school level, geared as they were to the needs of the majority who did not have access to the university system and were to enter life. Similar criticism was voiced by the Sargent Plan 1944. The Radhakrishnan commission (1948) pointed out that examination reform was a matter of very high priority in education reform as a whole. The Mudaliar Commission (1952-53) made elaborate recommendations on examination reform and called for reduction in the number of external examinations, conduct of objective tests, assessment of attainments of the students through a proper system of school records, weightage for in-school tests, symbolic rather than numerical marking for purposes of evaluation and grading etc. The Education Commission (1964-66) considered the question of examination reform at all stages of education and called for evaluation being construed as a means to assess learner development on an objective basis. The CABE Committee on Examination Reform (1970) also made wide ranging recommendations. The National Policy on Education, 1986, envisaged evaluation as a continuous process so that the student would be helped to improve his level of achievement, as distinct from certification of the quality of his performance at a given moment of time. The National Policy on Education, 1986 also considered examinations as a means for improvement of quality of education. Specifically, it called for removal of subjectivity in examinations, de-emphasis of memorisatin, continuous and comprehensive internal evaluation of scholastic and non-scholastic achievements of students, improvement in the conduct of examinations introduction of concomitant changes in instructional material and methodology, introduction of the semester system from the secondary stage in a phased manner and use of grades in the place of marks. The Programme of Action (POA) suggested several specific short-term and long-term measures for carrying out examination reform at the school level as well at the university level. The following Table presents a gist of these measures:
291
Table 3
Measures for Examination Reform
Short-term measures Long-term measures
School * Continuance of public Stipulation of the levels
Education examinations at the of attainment expected
levels of classes at classes V, VIII, X &
X & XII; XII by the State Boards
of Education;
* Decentralised conduct
of examinations; * Prescription of learning
objectives by the State
* Spot evaluation of Boards of Education;
answer scripts.
* Development of schemes
of evaluation on contin-
uous basis;
* Conduct of research in
procedures for evaluati-
on and examinations and
examinatins through con-
sortium of Boards of
Eduation.
* Movement towards cumula-
tive grading system.
University * Introduction of con- * Development of alternative
level. tinuous institution- system of evaluation in
al evaluation at the the place of external exa-
post-graduate level minations for affiliated
to begin with in uni- colleges;
tary universities,
deemed universities & * Some universities functio-
autonomous colleges; ning as examining bodies for a
number of colleges;
*Indication of studen-
ts' performance thro- * Introduction of flexibili-
ugh letter grades; ty in the combination of
courses, introduction of
* Assessment of over- modular courses, provision
all performance on for accumulation of credi-
the basis of cumulat- ts and continuous research
ive grade point on evaluation procedures
average; by agencies like AIU.
* Facility for improve-
ment of performance
by students through
subsequent appearances
292
12.10.3 Following up on NPE, 1986, NCERT conducted a National Seminar on Examination Reforms and issued certain guidelines to the States, principally covering the subjects of scaling and grading, continuous comprehensive internal evaluation, setting up of balanced question papers etc.
12.10.4 The CABE, in July, 1989, also recommended that the State Boards should take effective steps in the areas of grading and scaling, continuous comprehensive internal evaluation of scholastic and non-scholastic achivements of students etc. The 19th Annual Conference of the Council of Boards of School Education in India, (COBSE) recommended the following in September, 1990:
* Comprehensive and continuous internal evaluation should be introduced in a phased manner, initially at the elementary stage;
* A letter grading system on a nine point scale should be introduced fro declaration of individual results by the State Boards by 1995 at the elementary stage.
* The State Boards should work towards abolition of public examinations, particularly at the end of class x subject to credibility of continous and comprehensive internal evaluation, stage of reforms effected in grading system and introduction of entrance test for admissions in institutions for higher learning.
* Introduction of semester system in a phased manner from the secondary stage so that the students are enabled to progress at their own pace.
12.10.5 Examination reforms having been recommended consistently by various Committees and Commissions over the years, steps for the same have been taken differently in different Stages. Presented below is a statement of the status of examination reforms at the schools stage in different States.
Table 4
Status of Implementation of Examination
Reforms at The School Level.
S. Steps for Examination Reform Boards/States which have
No. introduced Reform
1. Development of policy Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Gujarat
statement (designs) for Kerala, Maharashtra, Punjab,
each question paper. Rajasthan, CISCE, J&K M. P.,
Manipur, CBSE, Haryana
Tripura, Karnataka, Goa, U.P.,
West Bengal.
293
2. Appointment of paper Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Kerala,
setters from among those Maharasthra, Orissa, Rajasthan
trained in evaluation. CISCE, J&K, M. P., Manipur,
Tamil Nadu, Haryana, Goa
U.P., West Bengal.
3. Appointment of panels or Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Kerala
paper steers for each Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan,
question papers. CISCE, Tripura, Goa, U.P.
4. Allocation of definite Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Gujarat
proportionate percentages Maharashtra, Kerala, Rajasthan
of marks in question pap- CISCE, J & K, M.P., CBSE, Hary-
ers for testing different ana, Manipur, Tripura, Karnataka,
abilities. Goa, U.P.
Ensuring an effective Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Gujarat
coverage of the syllabus Kerala, Maharashtra, Rajasthan
through the question CISCE, CBSE, J & K, Manipur,
papers M.P., Haryana, Goa, U.P.
6. Introduction of specific Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Gujarat
pinpointed questions in Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra
the question paper. CISCE, CBSE, Haryana, Tripura,
Goa, U.P., West Bengal.
7. Inclusion of short-answer Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Gujarat
questions in the question Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra
papers, besides the Manipur, Orissa, Punjab,
essay-type ones. Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, CISCE,
CBSE, Haryana, Tripura, Goa,
U.P., West Bengal.
8. Introduction of objective Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka,
type questions (multiple Kerala, Maharashtra Manipur, Orissa
choice) in the question , Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu,
papers. CISCE, Tripura, Goa, U.P.
9. Use of question banks for Gurajat, Rajasthan, CISCE, Goa,
setting question papers. Bihar, CBSE, Haryana, West Bengal.
10. Abolition of overall Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Gujarat
options in the question Karnataka, Kerala, Orissa,
papers. Rajasthan, CBSE, U.P.
11. Development of marking Assam, Gujarat, Karnataka,
scheme alongwith each Kerala, Punjab, Rajasthan,
question papers by the CISCE, CBSE, U.P., Goa
setter himself. Maharashtra, West Bengal.
294
12. Division of question pap- Andhra Pradesh,Gujarat,
ers into two separate se- Kerala, Karnataka,Punjab,
ctions for fixed response Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, CISCE.
and free response ques-
tions with fixed separate
time limit.
13. Introduction of centrali- Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Gujarat
sed spot evaluation 'of Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu,
scripts. CISCE, CBSE, Tripura, Goa, U.P
14. Introduction of mechanical Andhra Pradesh,Gujarat,
processing of examination Kerala, Karnataka, Maharashtra
results. Rajasthan, CISCE, CBSE, U.P.
15. Scaling of subject-wise Gujarat, Kerala, CISCE.
results for making them
comparable.
16. Allowing students to clear Andhra Pradesh,Karnataka,
the examination in parts. Kerala, Rajasthan, Punjab,
CBSE.
17. Permitting students to Andhra Pradesh,Karnataka,
improve their grades by Kerala, Rajasthan,Punjab,
appearing at subsequent CBSE.
examination.
18. Reckoning both the produ- Assam, Gujarat,Kerala,
ct and performance in ev- Punjab, Maharashtra, Rajasthan
aluation of practical CISCE, Tripura, CBSE, Goa,
work in science subject. U.P.
19. Incorporation of both Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu.
academic and non-academic
ares of pupil growth in
the scheme subject.
20. Issue of separate certif- Rajasthan.
icate of internal assess-
ment alongwith that of
external examination.
21. Analysis of question pap- Rajasthan.
ers in details as feedback
for paper setters.
22. Analysis of answer-scripts Rajasthan.
of the examination locating
common errors, correlation
in score and functional
value of item, etc.
295
23. Autonomy to schools in Rajasthan.
curriculum teaching, text
books and evaluation etc.
12.10.6 The following further statement presents information on the status of implementation of examination reforms in the universities:
Table 5
Status of Implementation of Examination
Reforms at the University Level.
S. Item No. of
No. Universities
1. Universities which have introduced internal 74
evaluation at different levels
2. Universities which have developed question banks. 74
3. Universities which have adopted grading systems for 45
various courses
4. Universities which have introduced semester system 71
5. Universities which have initiated steps to divide 56
syllabus into units/areas of content
6. Universities which have decided that choice in 50
answering questions should be restricted to each
units of syllabus
7. Universities which have agreed to hold examinations 52
without fulfilling the requirements of minimum
lectures/tutorials, laboratory sessions etc.
12.10.7 The above statements on the status of implementation of examination reforms clearly bring out that not in all the States or universities all the elements of examination reform have been brought under implementation in a coordinated manner. Despite efforts at reforms the present day situation is one of tail wagging the dog i.e. the system of examination dictating the character and quality of education itself. The schools have come to be construed as some kind of a giant conveyer belt, transferring students from stage to stage leading to the university, rather than institutions equipping the students for life and working in society. The centralised public examination system, as distinct from evaluation at the institutional level results in the majority of the examinees getting thrown off the
296
conveyor belt, in effect making education discriminatory and elitist. (It is the comparatively more well-to-do who are able to afford the coaching materials and guidance through tuitions required for success in examinations.) The importance given to the marks in public examinations obtained by students either for admission to higher courses or for selection of jobs has resulted in marks-based value system. The universities also have tended to jack up their marking system to compete with good universities, not necessarily mindful of standards. Universities are also under severe strain on account of the burden of holding examinations at the under-graduate level. It is desirable that universities are relieved of the load of administering examinations. The students have to take several admission tests for entry into engineering and medical institutions. Apart from being a strain on the students, parallel tests by different institutions are an avoidable waste of resources.
Recommendations (i) The question of examination reform should be construed as a package of all the following factors:
* Introduction of semester system.
* Continuous internal evaluation; and maintenance of integrity of such evaluation (and examinations in whatever form and scale they may be conducted); within the same classes, in primary stage, diaggregated evaluation of groups of students to cater to individual differences.
* Teachers playing the key role, the principle being "He or she who teaches shall lay down the syllabus and also evaluate".
* Facilities for students to move from one stage of education to another by appearing in entrance tests.
* Facilities for students to have the freedom of choice of modules rather than whole course packages.
* Provisions for credit accumulation by students and facilities for transfer of grade from one institution to another'; facilities of multiple entry and exit for students which in effect facilitates opening up and non- formalising the school system. It is this package as a whole which should be brought under implementation and not merely individual elements, that too in a piecemeal or ad-hoc fashion.
(ii) In the present context of our educational system, however, there are serious apprehensions basically about the
297
concept of the teacher playing the key role. In the responses received in pursuance of the perspective paper on education, these apprehensions have been voiced by a large number of respondents. The main reason for these apprehensions is that the authority vested in the teacher in this regard might be abused in various ways. Respondents have also expressed the opinion that experiments in this regard in the past have not necessarily been successful. Another view expressed is that the teachers themselves might not be prepared to accept the onerous responsibilities going with examination reforms. It is natural that any attempt at reforms for the purpose of changing the status-quo means resistance from the established order. However, the call for examination reforms on the part of experts over the years having been very consistent and several States and universities already having taken up examination reforms in fact, though in a piecemeal way, there is undoubtedly need for orderly progress towards examination reforms in terms of the above package. Implementation of this package, however bristles with several practical problems, diversities in the educational system in the country being vast. Therefore, there is need for an Examination Reforms Commission. This should also be a permanent body which will facilitate monitoring of progress in examination reforms from time to time until the task is fulfilled in stages. The terms of reference for this Commission may be:
i) Review of the status of examination reforms from time to time.
ii) Phasing of examination reforms, indicating timeframe within which, and levels at which, the reforms are to be effected.
iii) Introduction of fair and objective systems of grading/scaling.
iv) Laying down norms for continuous comprehensive internal evaluation and suggesting safeguards against abuse of this evaluation system.
v) Advising on minimum levels of learning to go with internal evaluation system.
vi) Laying down modalities for semesterisation and modularisation.
vii) Advising on inter-institutional linkages to secure comparable standards.
viii) Teacher orientation for successful implementation of examination reforms.
298
It is obvious that the Examination Reforms Commission will have to go into problems relating to the reforms in each State, fully involving the State level authorities such that problems at the State as well as the sub-State levels are fully taken into consideration. Functionaries of UGC, AIU, AICTE, NCERT, NIEPA, State resource institutions, State Boards of Education and other expert bodies at the national and other levels, apart from teacher and student organisations will also have to be consulted from time to time by the Commission. The Commission may be headed by an eminent educationist with the rank of Minister of State, Government of India. The Commission maybe a compact body consisting, apart from the Chairman, of experts in the areas of school, university and technical education. The Chairman and members may be full tine functionaries.