The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) defended its On-Screen Marking (OSM) system following concerns over a dip in Class 12 pass percentages.
The dispute centers on whether digital evaluation is accurately reflecting student performance. Because these results determine university admissions and future career paths, any perceived systemic error creates significant anxiety for millions of students across India.
The board addressed social-media criticism alleging that technical glitches within the OSM system led to lower marks. In an official statement on X, CBSE said, "The OSM system ensures stepwise marking while auto-calculating totals to minimise error" [1]. This digital process is designed to replace manual totaling, which the board suggests reduces human oversight errors.
Despite these assurances, some media reports flagged technical issues during the marking process [2]. The board said these claims were refuted, maintaining that the system remains reliable and transparent.
To address student grievances, the CBSE announced that a re-evaluation window will be available for those dissatisfied with their scores. This allows students to request a formal review of their papers if they believe the digital marking was inaccurate.
Sanyam Bhardwaj, the Controller of Examinations for CBSE, provided a timeline for the release of the final grades. Bhardwaj said, "Students can expect results in the third week of May" [3]. This timeframe aligns with the board's efforts to finalize the evaluation process while managing the influx of inquiries regarding the OSM system.
The board continues to urge students and parents to rely on official channels for updates rather than unverified reports circulating on social media platforms [4].
“"The OSM system ensures stepwise marking while auto-calculating totals to minimise error."”
The tension between the CBSE and students highlights the friction that occurs when traditional academic evaluation shifts to digital systems. While the board views OSM as a tool for precision and efficiency, the dip in pass percentages has created a trust gap. The provision of a re-evaluation window serves as a critical safety valve to maintain the legitimacy of the certification process during this digital transition.
