For Law Aspirants across India, the past couple of weeks have been nothing short of a soap opera. Of the tragic kind.
CLAT 2015; conducted by RMLNLU this year; had a number of changes as compared to the previous editions.
1. It was conducted online. What was hitherto; an OMR Sheet - pen/pencil based test; was to be attempted on a computer.
2. After court orders, the upper age limit (20 for general category candidates) was removed.
The removal of the age limit gave me a chance to appear for the test along with my students. (It's worth noting that I had completed my post-graduation by the time the CLAT was even introduced for the first time.)
Having appeared for both paper and computer based versions of different exams, I advised the students that their preparation for the exam would not drastically differ. However, to gain first hand experience of this exam, I registered for the same and gave the exam on the 10th of May, 2015.
In Ahmedabad (Gujarat), the exam was spread across three centers. Reports indicated that some centers had air conditioned facilities, while the one where I appeared did not. No worries there.
As the exam started (at 3:00 PM IST), I quickly went through all the questions before starting my attempts. A quick analysis revealed the following:
The English section had the standard Reading Comprehension, Vocabulary and Grammar based questions.
The Mathematics section had a few questions that seemed surprisingly tough (considering the average age of the students.)
The Reasoning section seemed to follow the usual pattern.
The GK section seemed standard; however one would have to read the questions to know more in detail.
The Legal 'Aptitude' section had few questions which were aptitude based and a lot of questions based on legal awareness. Alarm bells went off in my head. Although students were repeatedly told (during the time of preparation) that one should anticipate any googly in the paper, not many would have heeded my advice - and may panic on seeing fewer questions on aptitude and more on awareness. Well - let's start attempting the paper.
As per my game plan, I started with the General Knowledge section. A lot of questions on current affairs concentrated on the months of Jan-Feb-March of 2015. Students, who diligently prepared for this section,would find it easy. I, on the other hand, found it tough - not having actually 'prepared' for general knowledge. :)
After attempting the questions that I felt I knew the answers to, I shifted to the English section. A few questions seemed ambiguous in their wording, the answers to a few seemed suspicious. Normally, I would complete the entire section (except Reading Comprehension and Jumbled Passages). However, in this case, I purposely left those questions, I had to think about - and moved on to Mathematics.
Surprise Surprise! The questions were not of the level that students would expect. A lot of conceptual questions which one would normally expect in post graduate level entrance exams (especially the CAT) were asked. Under normal circumstances, I would crack the 20 questions in about 15 minutes and move ahead. I could hardly attempt 10 odd questions in about 15-20 minutes. Keeping my ego aside, I moved ahead with the reasoning section.
Questions based on coding, relations, directions and others were easily handled (although some of the questions were printed badly while one of the questions had the same answer repeated as options.) The puzzles were again of a difficulty level, totally unexpected in an exam of this nature.
I finally went through the legal aptitude section. The questions based on principles and facts were apparently 'copied' from commercially available entrance test preparation books and past year papers. Not a single question seemed new. The legal awareness questions tested me to the core. After attempting a couple of dozen questions, I finally paused to check my progress in the paper. I had just under an hour left and my number of attempts barely touched the 3 digit mark.
Now it was simply a game of Russian Roulette. I randomly jumped between sections and attempted questions which I could. There was no method to my madness.
After a lot of sweat and toil, I reached an attempt of 168. With 5 minutes to go, I lost my patience and stopped attempting any further.
Once the exam was over, I came out of the center and was mobbed by my students who had similar experience to mine. A lot of moans and curses were heard about the toughness of the Math and Reasoning section, the unexpected emergence of Legal awareness questions and the overall inability to attempt many questions.
My first prediction on that day was that the overall cutoffs would drastically plunge as compared to the previous editions of the exam.
This was just the tip of the iceberg.
Come 20th May. The results were announced. Students were sorely disappointed at their low scores. A common feeling across board was that, the score obtained was at least 30-35 marks lower than expected.
A common clamor for the question paper and answer key arose across the country. After a lot of delay, the committee mailed an 'answer key' and the student's key to each student. Fantastic. Except for the fact that the student had no clue which answer corresponded to what question. A key without the question paper is about as useful as an oar in the middle of the ocean without a boat.
A day before the publication of the first merit list, the committee released the question paper with marked answers.
Problems galore!
1. The question paper was not the same for all students. The students received questions in shuffled order during the exam. No problems there. Except - the published question paper gave no clue to the student as to which answer of his corresponded to which question. No way of tallying the answers.
2. There were numerous answers in the question paper which were apparently marked incorrectly. The wording in many questions were ambiguous. Students quickly identified these errors and brought them to the notice of the committee.
Current Status:
The committee has now put up this notice on the official website:
CLAT 2015; conducted by RMLNLU this year; had a number of changes as compared to the previous editions.
1. It was conducted online. What was hitherto; an OMR Sheet - pen/pencil based test; was to be attempted on a computer.
2. After court orders, the upper age limit (20 for general category candidates) was removed.
The removal of the age limit gave me a chance to appear for the test along with my students. (It's worth noting that I had completed my post-graduation by the time the CLAT was even introduced for the first time.)
Having appeared for both paper and computer based versions of different exams, I advised the students that their preparation for the exam would not drastically differ. However, to gain first hand experience of this exam, I registered for the same and gave the exam on the 10th of May, 2015.
In Ahmedabad (Gujarat), the exam was spread across three centers. Reports indicated that some centers had air conditioned facilities, while the one where I appeared did not. No worries there.
As the exam started (at 3:00 PM IST), I quickly went through all the questions before starting my attempts. A quick analysis revealed the following:
The English section had the standard Reading Comprehension, Vocabulary and Grammar based questions.
The Mathematics section had a few questions that seemed surprisingly tough (considering the average age of the students.)
The Reasoning section seemed to follow the usual pattern.
The GK section seemed standard; however one would have to read the questions to know more in detail.
The Legal 'Aptitude' section had few questions which were aptitude based and a lot of questions based on legal awareness. Alarm bells went off in my head. Although students were repeatedly told (during the time of preparation) that one should anticipate any googly in the paper, not many would have heeded my advice - and may panic on seeing fewer questions on aptitude and more on awareness. Well - let's start attempting the paper.
As per my game plan, I started with the General Knowledge section. A lot of questions on current affairs concentrated on the months of Jan-Feb-March of 2015. Students, who diligently prepared for this section,would find it easy. I, on the other hand, found it tough - not having actually 'prepared' for general knowledge. :)
After attempting the questions that I felt I knew the answers to, I shifted to the English section. A few questions seemed ambiguous in their wording, the answers to a few seemed suspicious. Normally, I would complete the entire section (except Reading Comprehension and Jumbled Passages). However, in this case, I purposely left those questions, I had to think about - and moved on to Mathematics.
Surprise Surprise! The questions were not of the level that students would expect. A lot of conceptual questions which one would normally expect in post graduate level entrance exams (especially the CAT) were asked. Under normal circumstances, I would crack the 20 questions in about 15 minutes and move ahead. I could hardly attempt 10 odd questions in about 15-20 minutes. Keeping my ego aside, I moved ahead with the reasoning section.
Questions based on coding, relations, directions and others were easily handled (although some of the questions were printed badly while one of the questions had the same answer repeated as options.) The puzzles were again of a difficulty level, totally unexpected in an exam of this nature.
I finally went through the legal aptitude section. The questions based on principles and facts were apparently 'copied' from commercially available entrance test preparation books and past year papers. Not a single question seemed new. The legal awareness questions tested me to the core. After attempting a couple of dozen questions, I finally paused to check my progress in the paper. I had just under an hour left and my number of attempts barely touched the 3 digit mark.
Now it was simply a game of Russian Roulette. I randomly jumped between sections and attempted questions which I could. There was no method to my madness.
After a lot of sweat and toil, I reached an attempt of 168. With 5 minutes to go, I lost my patience and stopped attempting any further.
Once the exam was over, I came out of the center and was mobbed by my students who had similar experience to mine. A lot of moans and curses were heard about the toughness of the Math and Reasoning section, the unexpected emergence of Legal awareness questions and the overall inability to attempt many questions.
My first prediction on that day was that the overall cutoffs would drastically plunge as compared to the previous editions of the exam.
This was just the tip of the iceberg.
Come 20th May. The results were announced. Students were sorely disappointed at their low scores. A common feeling across board was that, the score obtained was at least 30-35 marks lower than expected.
A common clamor for the question paper and answer key arose across the country. After a lot of delay, the committee mailed an 'answer key' and the student's key to each student. Fantastic. Except for the fact that the student had no clue which answer corresponded to what question. A key without the question paper is about as useful as an oar in the middle of the ocean without a boat.
A day before the publication of the first merit list, the committee released the question paper with marked answers.
Problems galore!
1. The question paper was not the same for all students. The students received questions in shuffled order during the exam. No problems there. Except - the published question paper gave no clue to the student as to which answer of his corresponded to which question. No way of tallying the answers.
2. There were numerous answers in the question paper which were apparently marked incorrectly. The wording in many questions were ambiguous. Students quickly identified these errors and brought them to the notice of the committee.
Current Status:
The committee has now put up this notice on the official website:
CLAT-15 first allotment list - delay regarding
On uploading of the question papers with answer keys on the
CLAT website, representations have been received from some
candidates wherein they have questioned accuracy of answers of
certain questions. Taking into cognisance these representations, an
expert committee has been constituted to look into the matter.
Publication of the proposed first indicative allotment list is,
therefore, withheld till a final view is taken on these
representations.
Candidates shall be informed about the next date of publication of
first indicative allotment list in due course.
Convener,
Implementation Committee
What will happen next?
Scenario 1: There is no change in the rankings of the student. In this case, how does the exam conducting agency justify the fact that students with the right answer got negative marks for the same question that a student who answered it incorrectly scored on.
Scenario 2: There is a change in the answer key and hence the overall results and rankings. In this case, how does the exam conducting agency justify the fact that students who previously scored high on the test and hence gave up other confirmed admissions might now lose out their dream college.
For example, let's say I scored in the top 50 ranks in CLAT and also cracked the AILET. Secure in the belief that a top 50 rank ensures a seat at NLSIU Bangalore, I gave up my seat at NLU-D. Now, in the rejig of the results, if my rank goes to 60, which puts NLSIU beyond my reach, I would now be forced to select some other institute which ordinarily I might not have. I would have secured admission at NLU-D if NLSIU was not available to me.
Scenario 3: The exam conducting agency decided to re-conduct the exam. This is a nightmare on so many different levels. Informing all students, preparing a new question paper (which frankly speaking, most students would refuse to believe is fair), administering the test, compiling the results and so on. The entire exercise would take another month - at the least. The admission processes at other (non CLAT) institutes would be over by them. Would students be ready to appear for the test once again?
There seems to be no win-win situation for the students in the foreseeable future. It's a nerve wrecking situation and only time will tell what will be the final outcome of the great CLAT 2015.
No comments:
Post a Comment