Many activists and scholars are questioning the report that denied paper leaks and malpractices.
Published Jul 14, 2024 | 7:00 AM ⚊ Updated Jul 14, 2024 | 7:00 AM
NEET exam.(Commons)
Questions have been raised over the accuracy of an IIT-Madras report that ruled out widespread malpractice and undue benefits to certain NEET-UG candidates at select centres.
The Ministry of Education had submitted the IIT-M report along with a fresh affidavit to the Supreme Court on 10 July, a day before the court was to hear a batch of petitions, The apex court later deferred the hearing to 18 July.
The Union ministry opposed a demand for re-examination, citing the IIT-M findings.
The IIT-M analysis indicated that the marks distribution followed a bell-shaped curve, which is typical for any large-scale examination and suggested no abnormalities.
A detailed analysis was conducted for the years 2023 and 2024 to identify any abnormal patterns. The focus was on the top 1.4 lakh ranks, given that the total number of seats across the country is around 1.1 lakh.
This granular analysis aimed to detect any malpractices or unusual benefits to students at specific exam centres or cities. It revealed no evidence of mass malpractice or any localised benefits leading to abnormal scores.
It indicated that there was no large-scale wrongdoing or specific centres or cities showing unusually high ranks.
The report noted an overall increase in marks, particularly in the range of 550 to 720. This increase was consistent across various cities and centres and was attributed to a 25 percent reduction in the syllabus,” IIT-M noted.
Moreover, candidates obtaining high marks were distributed across multiple cities and centres, reducing the likelihood of malpractice, the report said.
“You cannot use pie charts, bar charts, or histograms to compare ranks and prove whether the paper is leaked or not. You cannot say it happened only in Patna and not anywhere else,” RTI activist Dr Vivek Pandey told South First.
He added that the paper was leaked the night before the exam. “It doesn’t matter if it went on social media or Telegram. The sanctity of the paper has been compromised. Whether small or big, it’s still a leak,” Dr Pandey said.
He added that citing examples of Telegram was misleading. “The point is there was a leak, and we don’t know where all the paper went or who all had accessed it. Multiple people are being arrested because several people are working in the nexus across the country. How can a pie chart or histogram prove that this nexus was not there,” he asked.
“Last year, a score of 650 corresponded to a rank of 7,000, but this year, a score of 650 corresponds to a rank of 30,000. They say it’s because of the removal of syllabus content,” he said.
“Students also know which topics were removed, and which weren’t important. Most questions don’t come from those topics. You keep only those topics that are important for the future, and these were not the topics that were removed. So, this justification doesn’t suffice,” he further stated.
“The core syllabus remained the same. Only less important topics were removed. If the paper was easy, the rank at 650 marks could have been 10,000 or 15,000, not 30,000,” Dr Pandey pointed out.
Managing Director of Scholars Den Vivek Thakur said on an X post that IIT Madras toed the National Testing Agency (NTA)’s line. One government agency was trying to save the other, he added.
“The hypothesis: nothing went wrong, no paper leak, no mass malpractice. Data Analysis: show the data supporting the above hypothesis, hide the data against it- don’t release complete data. IITMadras will toe the NTA line- one government agency trying to save the other one,” said Vivek Thankur on X.
The hypothesis: nothing went wrong, no paper leak, no mass malpractice.
Data Analysis: show the data supporting the above hypothesis, hide the data against it- don’t release complete data. #IITMadras will toe the NTA line- one government agency trying to save the other…
— Vivek Thakur (@VivekThakurVT) July 11, 2024
He further added that as a Mathematics and Computing graduate and Master’s degree holder from IIT-Kharagpur, he can tell NTA and IIT-M that the data submitted to the Supreme Court, even small bumps towards higher scores have a difference of hundreds in number because this graph covered 23 lakh students.
“What looks like a small gap between 2023 and 2024 depicts thousands of students- on what grounds can it be concluded that there were no malpractices?” he questioned.
As a Mathematics & Computing graduate & master from IIT Kharagpur, I can tell #NTA & #IITMadras that in this data analysis graph submitted to Supreme Court in #NEET case, even the small bumps towards higher scores have difference of hundreds in number because this graph plots 23… pic.twitter.com/WBeDUlpYSw
— Vivek Thakur (@VivekThakurVT) July 12, 2024
Addressing the IIT-M Director, he said the affidavit “bearing your signature in the NEET case, no data expert would ever claim his analysis to be ‘granular’ enough to rule out malpractice in an exam with several candidates as big as 23.3 lakh”.
“If I provide exam paper two days before to say 2,000 students in your own data set, there won’t be any visible changes in the graph. Even a fairly accurate data analysis would have an error margin of 5%- which amounts to a wrong conclusion about 1.2 lacs candidates! Even a 1% error amounts to 24, 000 candidates having used unfair means!” Thakur said.
He asked the IIT Director to withdraw the submission (to court) “which has biased interpretations of the data and graphs. Moreover, the conclusions were on technically weak grounds thereby lowering the reputation of an institution like IIT,” Thakur added.
@aajtak @IndiaToday @sardesairajdeep @iitmadras Director
Dear Sir,
Referring to the affidavit presented in Supreme Court bearing your signature in the #NEET case, no data expert would ever claim his analysis to be ‘granular’ enough to rule out malpractice in an exam with… pic.twitter.com/cigoIdXuQ1— Vivek Thakur (@VivekThakurVT) July 13, 2024
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
(South First is now on WhatsApp and Telegram)
