Dear Friends,
This is the third part of the A MUST READ
series of articles named The Injustice: A Detailed Study Of June 2012
NET written by Sam Saran. I request you to read the first and second part so that
you
can get idea. Please click on the following link below to read it.
can get idea. Please click on the following link below to read it.
You can also share your view with other readers cum victims through this blog. Feel free to write me at askyuvi2012@gmail.com.
Regards,
Yuvi
askyuvi2012@gmail.com
A letter written by Sam Saran:
Part C Model Analysis
Advanced model analysis of result of June NET Exam 2012
Dear Friends,
This is a detailed analysis of June result statistics. The statistics are based on the information given by UGC by various sources. However the analysis is based on some assumptions which will be revealed where it is used. This is made for the purpose of supporting argument points made in document with this.
Criteria analysis:
The criteria consist of two parts. The pre-exam criteria which is announced in notification as minimum qualifying criteria and post exam criteria which is announced after the main and supplementary result
* Since each question have 2 marks 75 marks are not possible and need to make 38 right answers and so 76 Marks
** Top 7% from each subject category means for each subject candidates are classified in to categories. For example- Economics general, Economics OBC NCL, Economics SC/ST and Economics PH. Like this all subjects are divided and top 7% from each of them taken
*** Since each question carries 2 Marks OBC candidates has to make 18 right answers to get 35%. If one scores 17 right answers it will lead to 34 or 34% marks and if one more right answer makes 18 right answers and automatically it will make score to 36 or 36% marks.
Result Analysis
Assumption used in the above analysis:
1. 35% of total applied candidates are from General category, 35% is from OBC NCL, 20% from SC/ST and 10% from PH. This is based on normal structure of result details provided by RTI reply. It is purely assumed one and not may be accurate. Still the total is accurate.
2. The distribution of candidates on the basis of Mark percentage is based on theory of central tendency and theory of normal distribution of statistics. Any distribution will show a tendency to concentrate round of a mid value or average. Incase of the height of people, there will be very low number who have who have abnormal height (say more than 2 meter or less than one meter). Most of people have average height between 175 cm and 150cm. In an exams who scored nearby 100% or nearby 0% will be low. If 40 (out 100) is average, then about 60% of candidates will be between 35 to 60%. For clarification see appendix
Further analytics based on aggregate category wise result analysis:
64.27% of total appeared could not score the paper minimum and failed
Only 35.27% of candidates have scored minimum
Out of total 2 04 150 candidates who scored minimum, only 57450 candidates have declared passed in total in all results including supplementary. This is 28.14% of the minimum scored candidates. This mean 71.86% of minimum scored is again excluded and eliminated.
The number of people who scored minimum still not passed amounts to 25.68% of total applied candidates.
The total number of victims after main result was 160 193. Out of this 13493 fresh candidates were declared passed in supplementary result. So the remaining number of victims reduced to 146 700
If instead of supplementary result, a 5% decrease were announced in each category, that is 60% for general, 55% for OBC and 50% for SC/ST/PH were announced, then there will be only 10 102 candidates (3023+3722+2539+818). It may include 1793 (723+722+199+149) candidates who scored high percentage in supplementary result. Thus UGC could restrict the result as well as avoid complaint that candidates with low percentage passed at the same time 64.57% failed
60% of victims may be concentrated in their lower class, just above minimum (candidates include in 44.57%- 50% class for general, 40% - 44.57% class for OBC and 37.71% - 40% for SC/ST/PH). 81% of total victims may be in the last two class just above minimum
83% of victims (41+29+13 in the table) may have scored below aggregate 50% consisting of all categories
Regards,
1. 35% of total applied candidates are from General category, 35% is from OBC NCL, 20% from SC/ST and 10% from PH. This is based on normal structure of result details provided by RTI reply. It is purely assumed one and not may be accurate. Still the total is accurate.
2. The distribution of candidates on the basis of Mark percentage is based on theory of central tendency and theory of normal distribution of statistics. Any distribution will show a tendency to concentrate round of a mid value or average. Incase of the height of people, there will be very low number who have who have abnormal height (say more than 2 meter or less than one meter). Most of people have average height between 175 cm and 150cm. In an exams who scored nearby 100% or nearby 0% will be low. If 40 (out 100) is average, then about 60% of candidates will be between 35 to 60%. For clarification see appendix
Further analytics based on aggregate category wise result analysis:
64.27% of total appeared could not score the paper minimum and failed
Only 35.27% of candidates have scored minimum
Out of total 2 04 150 candidates who scored minimum, only 57450 candidates have declared passed in total in all results including supplementary. This is 28.14% of the minimum scored candidates. This mean 71.86% of minimum scored is again excluded and eliminated.
The number of people who scored minimum still not passed amounts to 25.68% of total applied candidates.
The total number of victims after main result was 160 193. Out of this 13493 fresh candidates were declared passed in supplementary result. So the remaining number of victims reduced to 146 700
If instead of supplementary result, a 5% decrease were announced in each category, that is 60% for general, 55% for OBC and 50% for SC/ST/PH were announced, then there will be only 10 102 candidates (3023+3722+2539+818). It may include 1793 (723+722+199+149) candidates who scored high percentage in supplementary result. Thus UGC could restrict the result as well as avoid complaint that candidates with low percentage passed at the same time 64.57% failed
60% of victims may be concentrated in their lower class, just above minimum (candidates include in 44.57%- 50% class for general, 40% - 44.57% class for OBC and 37.71% - 40% for SC/ST/PH). 81% of total victims may be in the last two class just above minimum
83% of victims (41+29+13 in the table) may have scored below aggregate 50% consisting of all categories
Regards,
Sam Saran
Coming soon
Part D- Other statistics
No comments:
Post a Comment