Tuesday, 8 October 2013

The Injustice: A detailed study of June 2012 NET : Part Second

Dear Friends,

                  This is the second 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 part so that you
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
 
A letter written by Sam Saran: Part B-Supplementary result and doubts
Supplementary results for NET June 2012 and some unasked questions
Dear Friends,
                   UGC NET exam June 2012 was a controversial one. Even after the SC order, there exist some unanswered questions about that exam. UGC after publishing a normal notification conducted the exam and after the role of students completed, increased the criteria and published the results on 18th September 2012. Grievance sought by students and then published a supplementary result. There were serious complaints against the supplementary result for decreasing the criteria up to the minimum to some subjects and retaining the aggregate 65% for general, 60% for OBC NCL and 55% for SC/ST/PH candidates for some other subjects. This resulted in passing candidate of some subjects with near minimum (40%) and at the same time even candidates who scored 64.57% failed in some other subjects. This is already discussed and examples were cited from ugc mark display
    Look the following


(Name is hidden- you can get the original from mark display section of www.ugcnetonline.com)

Marks Analysis:

Compare the performance of both students:

           Who is better? If such a question is asked to an LKG boy, his answer will be the second candidate. The second one has scored more in all three papers than first one. In common Paper I he has 56% while the first has only 48%. In his subject paper II he scored 60% while first could score only 48% and in Paper III, there is huge difference. The second scored a mammoth 71% in paper III while the first scored only 44%. And the first has scored only 162 marks out of 350, but second scored 222 and so there is difference of 17% in aggregate between them.
 Friends……! For UGC and expert bodies, first man is better and has quality with him. When second man is given eligibility, the quality of teaching profession will face a threat….! Please look the two result pdf published for June. You can’t see the register number of second one in any result. You can see the register number of second man among supplementary result. Here I am not saying the first one lacks quality or he should be declared ‘disqualified’. But if he had declared passed, then what is the problem with second who is very brilliant? How ‘’brilliant’’ is the expert committee who took this decision….?

There will be harsher example like this. If you provide some register numbers who has not passed with 64.57%, I can make a picture album of injustice.

 Now I am inviting to you another side of supplementary result which was I think not very discussed. UGC has justified the supplementary result in terms of subject inequality. They kept the cut off for some subjects like management, philosophy, Hindi, Sociology and Geography at 65%, 60% and 55% itself, but lowered the cut off up to 44% or less to some subjects like Computer Science and Mass Communication & Journalism etc. UGC later in courts submitted that the fixed 65% like cut off caused to pass 30% of applied candidates in some subjects and it was lower than 1% of total applied in some other subjects(with category) and so they declared supplementary result. They never told which were the subjects having top30% results. But cut off is not lowered for some subjects and we can understand in such subjects, there were top 30% ( or more than top 7% of applied and appeared) results. Management, philosophy, Hindi, Sociology and geography for which cut off is not lowered may be that subjects. The first anomaly in this is that if there was already top30% passed in main result for some subjects, why they restrict the supplementary only up to top 7%?. If all subjects were equal, they should either declare top 30% for all subjects or cancel the main result and restrict all subjects to top 7% only. (some passed may be become failed) Both is not implemented means still there exists some anomaly. If top 30% of candidates are already passed from Management and so cut off is fixed in 65% itself, commerce is the subject with almost same content of management. To include top 7% from commerce cut off is reduced to 64% to general and 59.43% for OBC- For SC/ST and PH the commerce cut off is 55% itself. This means there were not even top 7% of applied candidates in general as well as OBC category in main result for commerce and so to make top 7% they reduced cut off. In management and SC/ST/PH category of commerce, there was no change in cut off means either top7% or more than (upto top 30%) already passed in those categories. Then why can’t they make such a facility to other categories. If 30% of one category is declared passed in same subject, why do they restrict the other categories to top 7%? If top 30% from management has passed why commerce is only top 7%? If SC/ST/PH category of commerce has got top 30% result, why the general and OBC NCL is restricted to top 7%? – I am just revealing another side of anomaly. It is not to hurt the candidates of management or any category of commerce students.

    Then another curious thing is that among the 13 493 candidates who is declared passed Lectureship only in supplementary result contain about 2000 students of the same subjects in which cut off is not lowered. I checked some of the mark sheet and found they have more than 65% or 60% or 55% for their category and no problem in their mark. Then my doubt is that if they have scored more than 65% why don’t they declared as eligible in main result? If they have scored more than final criteria for their category, their register number would be published in main result. UGC has habit of withholding e certificate: not result for non-submission of PG certificates. If it was a clerical mistake how this huge number of candidates came. It shows how carelessly they deal with result preparation. Another possibility is that some of them will not have scored the required % and later when they heard UGC is going to declare supplementary result , they have used political pressure and bribed officers to increase their mark and declare them passed- This is only a possibility and not to harass anyone. I really appreciate those who passed and congrats for their brilliance. But the possibility I referred may have occurred in some cases. 


According to UGC they kept the 65% criteria and not lowered for supplementary result because there is already top 30% result. Then why do they declare 1507 candidates from management again in supplementary result and 367 candidates from Geography? This also reduce supplementary original to 11 481 (13493- 2012) for which UGC claims that they have lowered the cut off for 13493 candidates as the above 4 subjects there is no lowering in supplementary also. The details are below. Please check supplementary result for more subjects.
You can check mark sheet and result of subjects by following method.



So, download the result pdf. Select the find option. If you want to get the total number of computer (code 87) candidates passed in supplementary type 0187, 0287…… and so on in find column, you get it is highlighted. Following is some of my findings. 

Center wise supplementary result of certain subject :







Regards,
Sam
Coming soon: 
Part C Model Analysis
Advanced model analysis of result of June NET Exam 2012
 


No comments:

Post a Comment

Featured post

hi