The Central Board of Secondary Education’s (CBSE) decision to shift Class 12 evaluation to a fully digital On-Screen Marking (OSM) system this year has sparked debate after students reported blurred answer-book scans, missing pages and, in some cases, being shown another candidate’s answer script.
While the controversy has focused attention on the rollout, the idea behind digital evaluation is not new. Examination boards in countries such as the United Kingdom have used various forms of online marking for years. At the same time, education experts warn that technology can support assessment, but cannot replace the professional judgement of teachers.
On-Screen Marking, or OSM, is a digital evaluation system in which teachers assess scanned copies of aswer books on a computer rather than checking physical scripts.
Students still write their examinations in conventional answer booklets. The change begins after the exam, when answer books are scanned, uploaded onto a secure platform, anonymised and distributed digitally to evaluators.
CBSE says the idea is not new. The Board first explored OSM in 2014 but did not proceed because suitable scanning technology was not available. At the time, answer books often had to be cut from the spine before scanning, creating the risk of pages being mixed up.
Why did CBSE decide to adopt OSM now?
According to CBSE, the objective was to make evaluation more uniform, efficient and secure. The Board believed digital evaluation would reduce regional variations in marking, eliminate clerical mistakes in totalling marks, improve monitoring of evaluators and strengthen the overall examination process.
Before implementation, CBSE conducted a dry run involving teachers from Kendriya Vidyalayas, Navodaya Vidyalayas, state government schools and private schools. Dr. Latika Gupta, Assistant Professor of Education, argues that the very premise of OSM is flawed.
“Its whole goal is speedy checking. If you scan and make answer books available on a computer, it will lead to speedy checking and therefore results can be declared sooner. But that itself is a faulty understanding of evaluation,” she said.
According to Gupta, evaluation is not merely about checking answer scripts and declaring results. “Teachers meet at centres, discuss, arrive at a collective understanding. There are subject heads who also evaluate copies and discuss them. Teachers grow in the process,” she said.
What do researchers say about digital evaluation?
Research from countries that have used online marking for years generally points to improved consistency. A study commissioned by Britain’s examinations regulator found that “markers using online marking systems showed greater consistency in the application of mark schemes than those using traditional paper-based methods.”
Assessment researcher Victoria Crisp has argued that digital systems offer better opportunities for standardisation and quality monitoring.
At the same time, experts caution that technology does not eliminate mistakes altogether. Researchers from Cambridge Assessment have noted that digital marking changes the nature of errors rather than removing them completely. Problems related to scanning quality, software performance and implementation can still affect outcomes.
Speaking to The Indian Express Edward Vickers, Professor of Comparative Education at Fukuoka University in Japan, believes the current controversy may say more about implementation than about the concept itself. “The real question with the Indian system and this current scandal seems to me to be maybe not the system itself or not the idea behind it, but the practicalities of whether it was trialled, how it was trialled, how it was piloted,” he said.
Vickers said any transition affecting millions of students required extensive consultation with teachers and examiners. “What seems to have happened suggests that the system wasn’t ready, the CBSE itself wasn’t ready, the teachers weren’t ready. So what was the rush?” he asked.
How do examination boards abroad use digital marking?
Major UK examination boards such as Assessment and Qualification Alliance (AQA), Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examination ( OCR) and Pearson Edexcel which conducts exams like the A-levels have used online marking for many years.
Scripts are scanned centrally and distributed electronically to examiners. In some cases, examiners do not mark entire answer books; instead, they evaluate specific questions across thousands of scripts, helping improve consistency.
According to Britain’s regulator Ofqual, online marking was introduced primarily to improve quality control, increase efficiency and strengthen examiner monitoring.
Vickers stated that the British system differs from many Asian examination systems because GCSE and A-level examinations frequently include long-form written responses and essays.
“Technology can help with distributing students’ answers to markers and making the process more efficient,” he said. “But we need to be very careful about seeing technology as taking over the role of actually assessing students’ answers.”
Earlier this year, Ofqual also issued guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in assessment, emphasising that human examiners must remain responsible for final decisions.
“The human markers have to be in charge. Students and parents need to have faith in the system,” Vickers said.
The International Baccalaureate (IB), whose examinations are taken in more than 150 countries, also relies heavily on digital evaluation. Scanned scripts are accessed online by examiners around the world, while senior examiners monitor marking quality through moderation and standardisation exercises.
“The technology is supposed to be assisting human markers to do the marking. It isn’t the technology itself doing the marking,” Vickers added.
What concerns are being raised about CBSE’s rollout?
Beyond technical glitches, educators have questioned whether the system was introduced too quickly.
“A 17- or 18-year-old writes for three hours. Their handwriting cannot be expected to remain stable throughout. However advanced your scanners are, they will misunderstand some things,” Gupta said.
She also noted that subjects such as Geography, Biology, Physics and Mathematics involve diagrams, figures and pencil work that may not always reproduce clearly on scanned copies.
According to Gupta, another concern is the possibility of widening inequalities between schools. “Private schools that can afford secure infrastructure and machines will be in a better position. Government schools may not be. It could institutionalise inequality,” she said.
She also questioned the broader philosophy behind reducing the role of teachers in assessment, pointing to China’s Gaokao examination as an example of a large-scale assessment system that continues to rely heavily on human evaluation.
“Reducing the human element in education and assessment is not a good idea. It is a very problematic idea,” she said.
Is OSM the future of evaluation?
Most major examination boards have already adopted digital marking in some form, suggesting that technology will continue to play a growing role in assessment.
“This reform is aimed at the mechanics part of education and evaluation. It is not aimed at the real content part of evaluation,” Gupta said.
Meanwhile, Vickers said Digital systems can play a useful role, but only if they support rather than replace professional judgement. “The technology should be assisting human markers,” he added.
On-Screen Marking, or OSM, is a digital evaluation system in which teachers assess scanned copies of answer books on a computer rather than checking physical scripts. (Image: AI Generated) 
Share
