Candidates who failed may seek legal recourse
The high hopes with which a majority of candidates appeared for the UGC’s National Eligibility Test in June after a change in the question paper pattern have come crashing after the publication of results earlier this week.
For the first time, NET was conducted in objective mode for all three papers in two sessions. Till then, the third paper in descriptive format was not favoured by many. However, the relief over replacement of the descriptive format with multiple-choice questions has turned out to be short-lived.
The adoption of new qualifying criteria by the UGC has denied thousands of candidates an opportunity for lectureship in universities and colleges.
The candidates blame the UGC for coming out with a last minute specification that an aggregate of 65 per cent in three papers was necessary for qualification for general category candidates. The qualifying minimum was fixed at 60 and 55 per cent for OBC and SC/ST/visually challenged/physically challenged categories.
While the NET notification stated that the scores of only those candidates who score the minimum specified marks would be considered for the preparation of result, the UGC’s new criteria for qualification required candidates in general, OBC, and SC/ST/VC/PC categories to post minimum scores (out of 350 — 100 marks each for first and second paper, and 150 marks for third paper) of 227.5, 210, and 192.5 respectively.
So far, corresponding scores of 155, 138 and 130 were accepted as passing minimum for the three categories of candidates. The NET notification stated: “Only such candidates who obtain the minimum required marks in each paper separately, as mentioned above, will be considered for final preparation of result. However, the final qualifying criteria for Junior Research Fellowship (JRF) and Eligibility for Lectureship shall be decided by UGC before declaration of result.”
The candidates are shocked. “The result has caused depression. My efforts have gone in vain,” lamented Gajendran, an Assistant Professor, who felt confident about clearing NET this year, after many attempts over a decade.
His overall score of 188 did not measure up to UGC’s new criteria. Had the UGC struck to the pattern of passing minimum it had been following so far, the pass percentage would have increased manifold, said Vijayalakshmi, a professor in a private college.
While NET/SET is the minimum eligibility for recruitment and appointment of assistant professors in universities/ colleges/ institutions, candidates with Ph.D. in accordance with UGC Regulations 2009, are exempted from clearing this examination.
But, with Ph.D. turning out to be costly and time-consuming, candidates usually devote their attention to clearing NET first before pursuing Ph.D. Hence, their disappointment is only natural, according to S. Iyyampillai, Professor of Economics in Bharathidasan University, Tiruchi, who has vast experience in training candidates for NET/SET
Candidates across the country who have not passed the NET due to the “last minute” changes in the eligibility norms have planned to get their acts together for legal recourse, Ms. Vijayalakshmi said.
Keywords: National Eligibility Test, UGC, UGC NET results, UGC- NET
Fixing cut-off 65% is reasonable only for 2 subjects (Management,
Hindi ) Because no of candidates passed, this time, from these
subjects crossed 30% of total result.
Increasing cut-off to 65% for subjects like Computer Science is
injustice and unfair. Already colleges and universities are suffering
from unavailable of eligible candidates for this subject. For these
subjects, like previous NET exams, minimum marks are enough to
qualify.
This type of inefficient decisions for fixing same cut-off mark 65%
for all subjects [favoring only 2 subjects (Management & Hindi)], will
make the candidates of other 76 subjects to lose the faith on the NET
exams. It reduced pass% of other 70 subjects. What sin we did ? We do
not want to be scapegoats.
Total Average Pass is 7.69% ( ie 43957 / 571627 x 100 ), 43957
qualified from 571627 candidates. It will be fair, fixing separate
cut-off marks for each subject that could give 7.69% of pass in every
subject.
This is a Supreme courts judgement in UPSC cut off marks case '''''
Referring to the Supreme Court's ruling that answer scripts and answer
keys are liable for disclosure after the results of the examination
are declared, the court said, "Be that as it may, though the non-
disclosure of the method devised for scaling/ actualisation till
declaration of the result may be justified, it cannot be said to be
justified after the result is declared." UGC has never informed
qualifying criteria for the exam, it has only informed minimum
criteria. Please don't waste your precious time in debating rather
prepare for NET December exam. Even if you file a case at High court,
the matter would be appealed in Supreme Court and it will be a time
consuming process. Please also note that result is already published
hence no stay can be granted in that such case. Success is not a
birthday cake which can asked for, it has to be earned.
One more thing is to be noted. They changed the criteria but tagged
that "syllabus will remain the same". In that case we all expected
that we will have the choice of electives. But with the question paper
in hand we realized that all the Electives were merged together to
prepare 75 questions!! Why such discrimination? While writing the
English paper I had a tough time when I came across questions from
European, ELT, Indian and Commonwealth literature, although I have
been preparing the Criticism part for the last couple of years!! The
exam itself was a SHOCK!! And now the results too! What is the need of
the exam if UGC is so whimsical about criterion. No where did UGC
mention that all the electives would be taken together. If we had
known from before we would have prepared ourselves accordingly.
I have seen the criteria that have been uploaded in the UGC site.But
isn't that too high a cut off for students to get through.Where
minimum marks required for MA is 55% (for Gen Cat) to appear for the
NET exam,the minimum cut off is raised to 65% without prior
notification.A raise of 15% is no less, and quite unfair, since all
candidates with the carbon copy in hand were expecting things to be
different this time!After all passing the exam does not guarantee a
permanent job! So why play with the lives of students.At least have
some humanitarian outlook since it is affecting the aspirants
psychologically as well.I belong to the General Category and in spite
of securing 60% in aggregate, (English - PI - 62,PII - 70 and PIII -
78)failed to make into the final list;and there are many more
candidates who are being scapegoated like this.I feel UGC should give
a second thought to this matter if they really want to make things
transparent.
1) UGC as a statutory should ensure quality in higher education. 2) It should bring transparency even if no other apex institution has brought till now 3) It is clearly mentioned in notification that final criteria would decided before publication of result only for JRF + Lectureship as in all earlier notifications. The honorable court will defenitely view seriously the paradox of 'Even after raising the criteria the result have increased'. Sir/Madam success is being denied to those who work and achieve and it is being gifted to unscrupulous. Please correct UGC, my brothers and sisters improve your score through a corrected system. Remember life is a race. This is my third attempt in which I have cleared 8) In my last two attempt my score were short by 9 marks and in another attempt 6 mark. Success comes to one who is willing to pay price.
the ugc's decision to make selection for NET on the basis of newly
applied additional fourth condition of aggregate %,not notified to
students priorly seems to be unfair and unjust.because minimum % for
all the papers were notified nd known to candidates at the time of
applying for and appearing in examination.the fourth condition of
aggregate %applied in final selection is arbitrary,discretionary and
unscietific,not substatiated by any logic,reasoning and healthy legal
practices based on basic common sence.it would have been justified and
transparent only when the ugc notified the no. of selections available
in each subject in advance.if that would have been the case then
aggregate %would have been justified.in this case,both the
conditions.1-no. of selections available in each subject.2-the
aggregate % to be applied in future were not disclosed to students.
while one of the above 2 has to be cumpolsurly notified to students.to
apply both the 2 at its discretion is not understandable
whatever UGC has done this time by declaring result in a haphazard manner,is illegal.What UPSC had been asked to do by supereme court,can't be followed by UGC at all because there are no declarations about the number of seats by UGC.But do you think its valid to increase the qualifying marks to 15% suddenly whereas UGC kept us focused at 50%?had UGC declared its notions earlier,we would have better equipped ourselves.Secondly rather than talking on the cut off criteria subject-wise,it should be demanded to pass all those who scored more than 50%.
The last minute change in the qualifying decision of UGC is highly disappointing. It will effect and shatter the hopes ,aspirations and
future of hundreds of people. There is just a difference of 1 marks
for my bright future, which leaves me awestruck.
I'l fully support the people who is raising voice for it. let me know
the procedure.
This decision sholud be reviewed.
Lot of appreciation to The Hindu for giving Us the voice & considering
the matter.
UGC decision of increasing percentages for lectureship is not justified one and unreasonable. Third Paper is not necessary one because already first paper research and teaching ability and second paper will become subject paper objective when they declared third paper also objective type from June 2012 , it is not necessary one duplication work or at least consider third paper only for mere pass or like that ii paper percentage marks also for III paper ie 40% or increase at least 5% like previous years ie 45%. UGC should reconsider its decision and should fix the cut of mark for previous years and cut III Paper in the forthcoming years.
1) UGC is a statutory body entrusted with the object to ensure quality in higher education. 2) It has brought transparency which no other apex institution has brought till now 3) It is clearly mentioned in advertisement that final criteria would decided before publication of result. The honorable Supreme court in UPSC case given decision that CUT OFF can be published after publication of result. Please note criteria may from year to year depending on percentage of number passing each other. Even after raising the criteria the result have increased. Sir/Madam success does not come easy you have work and achieve it is neither gifted nor donated. Please instead of correcting UGC, my brothers and sisters improve your score and remember life is a race. This is my third attempt in which I have cleared. 8) In my last two attempt my score were short by 9 marks and in another attempt 6 mark. Success comes to one who is willing to pay price and the price is hard work.
Only 184 candidates (9 JRF + 163 LS) (0.40%) have been qualified for Computer Science subject in all over India. It is less than 1% of total result. From this, same cut-off marks for all subjects is unfair. Only 7 candidates have qualified Lectureship for Computer Science from entire TAMILNADU (4 centres). But 57 candidates (31% of 184) passed from the Centre No: 17, Guru Govind Singh Indraprastha University alone. This type of mass pass percentage in few particular centres have raised the cut-off marks to very high. Candidates from rural side of India and backward community suffered lot.
Whatever the subject / state be , we need UGC to go back to its
earlier minimum qualifying mark scheme for the selection of
lectureship . On what basis they put this 65% aggregate for general
etc. ? For JRF some financial commitment is there . But what about
lectureship ? If UGC think that 40% + 40 %+50% is not a standard score ,
Why did they consider this as the minimum qualifying marks?
CSIR is making not making any such false promise in their notification
( read the notification CSIR December 2012 )Minimum qualification marking scheme was only a trap laid down by UGC.If it was not so, prove it by sticking on this earlier promisedcriteria .
The anticipatory bail statement by UGC ( However , the final criteria will......... ) is only a stock one .UGC knew that this stock statement would not be taken seriously by the candidates. The candidates never thought that UGC would apply this to lectureship. UGC first underestimated the candidates and then cheated them.
The result of UGC-NET underlines the reality that it was not a cat walk since even the
reservation categories too had a higher scaled up marks for reckoning with.The wide
optimism/confidence that every Tom,Dick and Harry can crack it with ease, as the multiple
choice questions sans negative marks had been a booster , turned to be a myth to many. UGC
had categorically stated in the Notification that there was such potentiality of shift in the criteria
prior to the announcement of the result.The 'Answer Key' published has been incorrectly
depicted as a "result" while the fact was on the contrary.I urge all the aspirants not to lose
heart but to prepare for the ensuing exam of Dec 30, 2012.The proposed litigation will be a
waste of time, money and energy as the writing is crystal clear. Similar surprises can be
expected in the Test mode in future without doubt.Statements like that this is a eligibility test
and not a competitive exam like the civil services, does not hold water any more.Times have
changed-the heat and the rigor are on ---the best among the best wins the laurels ultimately to
enter into the portals of the noble profession of Teaching/Research/Guidance:)
UGC decision of fixing common cut off for all subjects is irrational and
unreasonable. Since there is high scoring in some subjects like
Management and Hindi due to easy question on that subjects. So there
should be different cut off marks for different subject.UGC should
reconsider its decision and should fix different cut off marks for
different subjects and publish additional results of UGC Net June 2012
result.
The artificial scarcity that UGC has created by manipulating the NET result and thus earning the abuse of every kind to the noble teaching community of higher education has now got exposed. The good intention of The Hindu in publishing this article therefore has to be appreciated. At the same time I appeal to all those aggrieved to not to react emotionally and thus prove the decorum of a teacher in your postings. There are people who are bent upon casting aspiration on us by trying to make us react emotionally. Though The Hindu will not publish it, the same is not true about others. For going to the Court, please check with the elders in your family and the other seniors around you and file your own petition in the Court. Court will do the grouping. A good advocate who is convinced of your ground will file your petition for the fee that you can afford initially and will charge his entire fee only at a later convenient date. There are several such advocates and so try around you please.
Please Email the Editor