The introduction of the Common University Entrance Test (CUET) in 2022 might have been well intended but its application is haphazard and does not take into consideration the difficulties that students from small towns and rural habitats face to travel outside the state to write the Test. Now writing an entrance test is fine if such tests are held in locations within the candidate’s state. But for students to have to travel to other states involves needless expenditure which pinches the pockets of those who scrimp and scrounge just to support their children’s education up to the time they pass their higher secondary levels. Now to have to spend money not only to travel outside the state but also for accommodation and other expenses for at least three days is a huge burden that many parents can ill afford. For many who have never stepped out of the state, having to sit for an examination in an alien environment is traumatic enough. It can be assumed that they might not be able to do well in the CUET due to the unfamiliar surroundings.
CUET is a case of good intent but faulty application. The test is conducted by India’s National Testing Agency (NTA) and is meant to help students get admission to courses in 45 central universities, including for doctorate, undergraduate, postgraduate, integrated postgraduate, certification courses, diploma, and research programs. In addition, many central universities and state universities in India accept CUET scores for admission. Earlier, the admission process for undergraduate and postgraduate programs varied across central universities in India with each university conducting its own entrance test. It was to streamline this process and ensure consistency that the Ministry of Education introduced the CUET. The main purpose for conducting the CUET is to provide a level playing field and equal opportunity to each student and to end the subjective bias inherent in entrance tests conducted by individual universities.
The CUET provides students with a clear understanding of their rank, allowing them to assess their position in the admission process. Hence it is a transparent process. It also eliminates the competition based on cut-off marks and allows for a more equitable admission system. As a result of CUET, central universities are able to take in students from a broader pool of candidates and to get the most deserving students for their courses. To that extent CUET cannot be faulted. It is the faulty implementation that is to be addressed. State governments have to have some say in the matter and impress upon the Ministry of Education that the CUET be held in each state for students of that state but under strict supervision in the same manner that other examinations are also held and supervised. Last year the CUET was conducted in North Eastern Hill University (NEHU) and turned out to be a disaster. The reason was that there was not enough preparation time and the faculty were not involved in the process. Students coming from distant villages left without writing the test as they had to wait interminably to be called to the respective examination hall. This is patently unfair and needs to be urgently addressed.
