Lately, papers have been filled with news about the single entrance exam for admission into engineering and medical colleges. There has been a lot been said about whether it is good or bad. To the uninitiated, once a child completes his 12th or +two, they need to write a bunch of exams to get admitted into eng or med colleges across the country. There are various types of these colleges - state, nation and again at national level there are premium institutes and the not so premium. Forget about the choice available to the student, the selection pattern for each of these colleges is different resulting in myriad of exams, interviews, applications etc.. Those in-charge of higher education woke up to this situation and decided that it was high time the entire process be streamlined and came up with a single-exam format, which they claim will simplify the process and ease burden on the students.
While their claim needs to be proven, the thought that comes to mind is why did these exams come into existence in the first place. Students after spending 17 years realise that the education they got (or supposed to have got) is of no use. In order to pursue their line of interest (or their parents' line of interest) they need to appear for some additional tests. And these tests, neither in format nor content, donot resemble anything they have been used to in the past 17 years. So in effect they have wasted 17 years of their life. What do they do? Enrol into an institute that guarantees admission into your dream institute. These institutes are very smart. Initially, it was for the two years leading to the tests. Then they said, it is not enough. Competition has increased and you need to be prepared and need to start early - "early bird catches the worm". So now it is anywhere from 6 to 2 years of coaching. True, competition is on the rise, so is the admission to these coaching institutes. What to do? Entrance exams for admission to coaching institutes. Again, coaching classes for that, you need to start early, you see. So end result better start coaching from class I itself.
Is having a single test going to solve the problem? The educators are missing main point I feel. All these additional testing is coming from the fact that our schools are not efficient. If the schools do their job correctly, why would these so called premium institutes need to have additional screening process? Marks from the 12th class would suffice, to gain admission. So why are the schools failing? No one is paying attention to them. Framing syllabus is not enough, there should be some form of check to see if these syllabi are getting implemented. With the rise in high-paying jobs, the quality of teachers is falling. There is a low opinion of teaching profession. It is highly discouraged and is seen as the last resort by graduates. Lack of quality teachers is root of the problem, with low salaries and no encouragement from peers, is having a resounding effect on our education system. We need dedicated and well-qualified teachers, who can inspire students and guide them on proper path. Only when this scenario changes can any other measure work.
While their claim needs to be proven, the thought that comes to mind is why did these exams come into existence in the first place. Students after spending 17 years realise that the education they got (or supposed to have got) is of no use. In order to pursue their line of interest (or their parents' line of interest) they need to appear for some additional tests. And these tests, neither in format nor content, donot resemble anything they have been used to in the past 17 years. So in effect they have wasted 17 years of their life. What do they do? Enrol into an institute that guarantees admission into your dream institute. These institutes are very smart. Initially, it was for the two years leading to the tests. Then they said, it is not enough. Competition has increased and you need to be prepared and need to start early - "early bird catches the worm". So now it is anywhere from 6 to 2 years of coaching. True, competition is on the rise, so is the admission to these coaching institutes. What to do? Entrance exams for admission to coaching institutes. Again, coaching classes for that, you need to start early, you see. So end result better start coaching from class I itself.
Is having a single test going to solve the problem? The educators are missing main point I feel. All these additional testing is coming from the fact that our schools are not efficient. If the schools do their job correctly, why would these so called premium institutes need to have additional screening process? Marks from the 12th class would suffice, to gain admission. So why are the schools failing? No one is paying attention to them. Framing syllabus is not enough, there should be some form of check to see if these syllabi are getting implemented. With the rise in high-paying jobs, the quality of teachers is falling. There is a low opinion of teaching profession. It is highly discouraged and is seen as the last resort by graduates. Lack of quality teachers is root of the problem, with low salaries and no encouragement from peers, is having a resounding effect on our education system. We need dedicated and well-qualified teachers, who can inspire students and guide them on proper path. Only when this scenario changes can any other measure work.
It is like a prince entering an unknown fort with
ReplyDeleteso many gates.He has to answer at each gate to enter the next stage.Now-a-days clash is occurring for various entrance tests and it is a welcoming change to have a single entrance.It is a big debate whether to have entrance tests or not.But definitely the money-spindling coaching centers oppose for this
I don't agree that the admissions can be done on the basis of school marks alone. As long as there are multiple boards (state, CBSE, ICSE, IB), the comparison is difficult. Moreover, school education is more knowledge based and on the one hand, we are moving away from the mad craze for marks to a grade-based system which makes comparison difficult.
ReplyDeleteSince school exams test for knowledge, entrance exams can be more aptitude oriented. In this context, the current proposal of iSeet which tests students on both aptitude as well as knowledge is ideal. It will weed out students who work very hard to gain the knowledge, but do not have the ability to think and analyze. Such people will probably gain higher marks in their academics, but may not be really that successful in life. Remember the example of Ranchod vs Chatur in 3 idiots!!
Nevertheless, the current education system needs a lot of changes. If the focus can shift from reproducing voluminous answers to checking ability to apply concepts, building capability of comprehension and language skills, it will create better personalities. In this context, I like the American education system, where students learn to read at a very early stage (including sentences) even before they learn to write the alphabet.
you just ratified my point. Do these entrance exams really test for analytical skills? If they do indeed, why? Is engineering syllabus application oriented? I dont think so, they also pursue the same teaching format, of reproducing text material, so what is the purpose of the so called tests?
DeleteWhat I am saying is the education system needs changes at root level, trying to do something at plus-two level is like applying band-aid instead of trying to prevent the cut.