The 50% weightage given to class 12 marks in the KEAM (Kerala Engineering Architecture Medical) entrance examination can be avoided this time as various educational boards have cancelled the examinations, but it should not be scrapped permanently, R.V.G. Menon, educationalist, has said.
Prof. Menon, who led the Entrance Examination Reforms Committee appointed by the then government in 2006, had submitted a report in 2008 stating that 50% weightage should be given to the performance of the aspirants in the qualifying examination. Since 2011, the State has been finalising the KEAM ranks on the basis of a 50:50 criteria wherein equal weightage is given to the score obtained through the entrance examination and the marks obtained for mathematics, physics and chemistry in Class 12 examinations.
Proposal
Prof. Menon was responding to reports that the government was mulling a proposal to discard the 50% weightage given to class 12 marks in the KEAM entrance exam for admission to various professional courses. “The 50% weightage given to class 12 marks cannot be normalised this time as most of the school boards had cancelled the written examinations in view of the pandemic. It would be difficult to arrive at an accurate assessment based on the alternative evaluation proposed by the central boards,” he said.
However, Prof. Menon cautioned the government against walking into the trap laid by the Office of the Entrance Commissioner by opting to do away with the 50% weightage given to class 12 marks permanently. “The 50:50 criteria of finalising the rank list can be restored as and when the traditional form of written examinations is restored at the Plus Two level. From the beginning, the Entrance Commissioner had objected to the committee’s recommendation to give equal weightage to the performance in the qualifying examination. They had tried to subvert the recommendation,” he alleged.
Drill-based training
In its report, the Entrance Reforms Committee had pointed out that the entrance examination based on multiple-choice questions was not adequate to make comprehensive evaluation of student’s knowledge for admission into professional courses. It encouraged drill-based training by students and favoured those who could afford high-value entrance coaching.