One exam fits all

The Tamil Nadu government8217;s decision to abolish entrance exams for admission to professional colleges in the state raises some serious ...

The Tamil Nadu government8217;s decision to abolish entrance exams for admission to professional colleges in the state raises some serious questions. At one level, the timing of the government8217;s decision is certainly questionable. It has cast a shadow of uncertainty over the admission process during the current academic year. It would have been advisable to notify such a momentous decision, affecting lakhs of students, well in advance. But on the other hand, the decision has forced a serious reckoning with a debate that has been haunting Indian higher education. Is the increasing proliferation of standardised entrance exams, that are over and above school leaving exams, a good thing? Do these exams place undue pedagogical, financial and psychological burdens on students that diminish their overall educational experience? Why should not results of the school leaving exam be sufficient markers of ability, at least as a first approximation? Why should technical and engineering colleges not give school leaving marks the same importance that universities do? If these results need to be supplemented by other criteria, are yet another set of exams the best measure? These are serious questions that require a national debate. The Tamil Nadu government8217;s decision will certainly force open these questions.

The government has been careful to stay within the spirit of various judicial decisions on the matter. The judiciary has been concerned that any criteria for admission be objective and not open to discretionary manipulation. But it has left the room open for how various governments meet this requirement. The idea of relying on school leaving marks certainly meets the test of a non-discretionary criteria. Nevertheless, an important question remains unanswered. Who is in a position to best determine what criteria to use? The fact that these decisions are being taken by governments rather than educators should be a matter of concern. In the case of Tamil Nadu, it seems that the government itself decided that these exams were onerous. But how did it come to such a decision? The absence of genuine debate prior to the decision will lend substance to the charge that educational decisions are being governed by political considerations.

The Tamil Nadu decision raises another question. Why should the state government promulgate a single unified policy across a range of institutions. Provided the criteria meet minimal requirements of reasonableness and objectivity, should individual institutions not be given more leeway over their admission policies? It is high time educational policies moved away from a one-size-fits-all approach. The Tamil Nadu decision will have served a salutary purpose if it ignites this badly needed and much wider debate.