Kathmandu Post

Editorial»

Testing time

MAR 26 -
Even as the Minister for Education Gangalal Tuladhar assured the public that strict measures would be taken against cheaters as well as parents and relatives abetting their wards during this year’s School Leaving Certificate (SLC) exams that kicked off on Thursday, the political parties in Banke district were haggling over the appointment of SLC exam superintendents. SLC is a lucrative business. Superintendents, under whose watch the SLC question papers are opened at the hour the exam starts, have been found guilty of selling the question papers in advance. The question paper of Major English, the first of the eight SLC papers, was found in a photocopy centre in Morang district half an hour before the exam. But it is not just superintendents making some fast bucks during this once-a-year earning opportunity. Invigilators from across the country have been expelled for allowing students to cheat, apparently after being paid handsomely by their parents and guardians. During the first two papers, many students were booted out of the exam centres for copying.

But there is every reason to believe that the arrests and expulsions represent only the tip of the iceberg of the rampant cheating during SLC exams. The problem is systemic. Although there has been an improvement in question patterns—over the past few years the English question paper has started to feature more short, objective questions—the exams, by and large, still promote rote-learning. Virtually any student can pass by cramming from the ‘guess papers’.  This is also the reason it is so easy to cheat: There are readymade answers available to most questions, even to the questions of technical subjects like mathematics. And contrary to what the government has been claiming, there is a strong belief that the increase in the percentage of those passing the SLC over the last few years (it has gone up from the mid-40s half a decade ago to above 60) can be largely attributed to grace marks and a lenient marking system.

It would not be unfair to question the kind of competence being tested among the diverse pool of students. The 496,243 students appearing for SLC this year come from different backgrounds. While a minority will have studied in private schools, which have relatively better teaching facilities, the vast majority are from remote community and public schools, many of which lack even basic infrastructure. There are no separate toilets for girls (some schools might not even have a toilet at all). The roofs leak during the rainy season. There are not enough desks and benches. Or textbooks. Classes are irregular and student attendance low. So how can the SLC Board equate the level of competence of a private-school goer with that of a student who attends remote public institutions? It’s a tricky balance; hence the ambivalence on question patterns. But while the board’s concerns are understandable, there is no justification for continuing with a system that allows for widespread cheating. The involvement of major political parties in the whole mess is indicative of how little political will there is to clean up the exam system. Without that political will, the rest of the efforts, as we have seen, count for little.


Posted on: 2011-03-27 07:21

---