I worked to reform CBSE’s testing system. NTA can learn from it—Anil Swarup

CBSE has more than 16 full-fledged regional offices in the country manned by permanent employees. These regional offices monitor every aspect of exams, from transportation to selection of exam centres, custodians, invigilators, and evaluation.

Candidates in queue at an exam centre | Representational Image | Courtesy: NTA

When trust in exams crumbles, so does the future of a nation. India faces this harsh reality as paper leaks become disturbingly routine, with the events of the past few weeks being quite unprecedented. Leaks from Gujarat to Bihar, along with cancellations of coveted entrance examinations, will directly impact the future of aspirants in medical and other professions.

I recall my experience with the 2018 CBSE paper leak, when I was Secretary of School Education and Literacy. In that instance, while the CBSE was not at fault, the ire was directed at the CBSE chairperson. Against all odds, I defended her and attempted to put in place a system that has stood the test of time, resulting in no such leaks thereafter.

Not many are aware that most of the entrance examinations currently conducted by the National Testing Agency (NTA) were earlier conducted by the CBSE, which did a decent job. The decision to set up a separate agency was taken in 2017. The officers tasked with heading this agency held impeccable credentials. They included Vineet Joshi and even Subodh Kumar Singh – who was recently shifted from the NTA’s director general post.

In light of this, the key question is why the leak happened when the officers had such impeccable credentials. I distinctly recall that even in 2018, then-Union education minister Prakash Javadekar was in favour of sacking the CBSE chairperson to ‘diffuse’ the situation. That was the easy way out. However, I managed to convince him otherwise because such a step would have demoralised the entire organisation.

Understand the root of the problem

Today, an easy way out has been found without even determining the responsibility of the concerned officer. Current education minister Dharmendra Pradhan has gotten away with just taking “moral responsibility” after prematurely denying that the paper was leaked. My experience tells me that all governments resort to such easy ways out instead of understanding the root of the problem.

Whether it was the crisis in the coal sector in 2014, when I took over as Secretary, Coal, Government of India, or the paper leak crisis in 2018, my approach was always the same: identify the root causes of the crisis and develop solutions through in-depth understanding and analysis. This strategy proved effective in both instances. The coal crisis was resolved and we haven’t seen a paper leak in the CBSE since 2018.

In the context of the current crisis, though, there is a CBI investigation underway to determine the responsibility of those involved in this paper leak. I doubt that CBI is equipped to suggest preventive measures. It might instead focus on hounding officers, potentially demoralising most of them. It’s a scenario I have witnessed during my tenure as coal secretary. The consequences of CBI’s overreach can still be seen, with many honest officers suffering today. Yet, those in the audience love this drama.

The government has also set up a committee led by Dr K Radhakrishnan, former Chairman, ISRO to suggest ways to prevent such irregularities in the future. While this is a typical governmental response during a crisis, I hope the committee devises a robust formula to prevent such occurrences. It is ironic, though why the eminent members of the NTA board (headed by the former Chairman of UPSC with several IIT directors as members) didn’t look at the existing processes that led to the leak in the first place.

What CBSE did right

We will, perhaps, eventually get to why the leaks happened and who was responsible for them but it would be worthwhile to examine how CBSE implemented a leak-proof system in 2018 that remains effective today and see if there are any lessons for the NTA.

After the unfortunate paper leak in 2018, the entire examination process was scrutinised by the CBSE to plug all possible loopholes. This intensive in-house exercise involved:

• Review of the security checks to ensure that the question papers reach the examinees without tampering.
• To locate all areas of potential weakness in the transportation, storage, retrieval, and distribution of question papers from the printing presses to the examinees, and collection and transportation of the answer sheets from the exam centre to the evaluation centre.
• Utilising technology to minimise human intervention.

A detailed analysis revealed gaps. However, these gaps were external to the CBSE. Within CBSE, the highest integrity was maintained. The following steps were implemented:

1. Time and motion study:

The entire process of examination was studied, and every minute step was recorded, through an adapted version of a time and motion study.

2. Amendment of examination bye–laws:

Based on the gaps, extensive changes were made in the examination bye-laws.

3. The Secrecy System of CBSE:

• A strong system of secrecy was maintained with a carefully selected Controller of Examinations and a Secrecy Officer.
• This system is not followed by most examination bodies; therefore, all matters of secrecy are on open files and pass from one stage to another for approval.
• In CBSE, the Secret Unit has many delegated powers and the confidentiality of the process is maintained fiercely.

4. Secrecy agreement signed by Chairperson and Controller of Exams:

• It was discovered that an ex-chairperson had happily given away all the safety and secrecy aspects of question papers (QPs) on live television.
• Since many of the systems of safety and secrecy are unique to the CBSE, now all Chairs and Controllers sign a secrecy agreement for life.

5. Development of QPs

Decisions taken on –

• number of QPs
• changing the predictability of QPs by introducing exam pattern changes (though changes are announced beforehand)
• reviewing the pool of paper setters and moderators
• capacity building of paper setters and moderators
• review and re-engineering of every single safety and security aspect of the question paper
• review and re-engineering of the safety and security aspects of the answer sheets etc.
• the unique packaging of QPs and answer sheets – if tampered with, it was easy to detect which QP of which exam centre was tampered with.

The committee set up to examine various processes of examinations conducted by the NTA should look into the steps taken by CBSE post-2018:

1. Identification of external sites; this is really the crux

• Earlier, exam centres were chosen based on who offered to become a centre. Post-reforms, mandatory criteria for the selection of exam centres were laid down.
• Disallowed the system of self-centres (that is, students of a school have an exam centre in the same school). Such self-centred private schools were found to have excellent results pre-reform, but post-reform, their results came down substantially.
• Only remotely located Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas (JNVs) were allowed self-centres with outside o
• The majority of the exam centres were in private schools. A thorough review of exam centres was done, and it was decided to first exhaust examination centres in central govt institutions – Kendriya Vidyalayas and JNVs – and then proceed to give to private schools after a thorough background check and history of holding exams.
• For the selection of QP custodians, the Ministry of Finance was contacted, and CBSE entered into MoUs with HQs of c Earlier, CBSE signed an MoU with the concerned branch office only. All storage facilities also received a letter from MoF for ensuring the integrity of exams.
• Mandatory criteria for the selection of storage facilities were laid down. Basic facilities, such as CCTV cameras, senior and experienced managers, approachability, strong room facilities, etc. became the criteria for the selection of storage facilities.
• Specific directions, such as a bank branch located on the premises of a school that is an examination centre cannot be selected as the custodian bank for that centre.

2. Delivery of QP

• The whole process of transportation was Real-time information was maintained.

3. Identification of external stakeholders

• Mandatory SOPs and criteria laid down for the selection and appointment of centre superintendents, invigilators, observers, etc.
• The Chief Secretary and DGP of every state addressed concerns before every examination.
• The DMs and SPs of every district were informed in advance about the exam centres in their jurisdiction.

4. Pattern of exams

• Complete review of the pattern of exams and introduction of the element of unpredictability.

5. Use of technology

• A huge amount of technology was deployed. But unlike NTA, CBSE does not depend on third parties for preparing its software. CBSE has in-house expert teams that prepare all the sensitive software. The teams consist of permanent employees.
• On examination day, time/date-tagged and location-tagged photographs of the storage place are received.
• Even if one QP package was found even slightly damaged, the observer and centre superintendent had to report and the online delivery of the new QP would kick in.
• Except for a few of those subjects where the number of examinees was very large, almost all the other QPs were delivered online in real time through an encryption-decryption process. These QPs were printed on the spot in the school with the help of fast-speed printers and under the observer’s supervision.
• Same-day action was taken against teachers/principals who were found to have opened the QP packages even five minutes earlier than the stipulated time. All this could be monitored on account of real-time information made available for each and every centre with the use of technology.

6. The cost of mistakes:

• SOPs issued to each stakeholder. The dos and don’ts were made very clear.
• Every mistake could lead to the disaffiliation of a school in case it was a private school, or severe and fast action if the person concerned was a govt servant.

7. The funding of examinations:

• The CBSE was subsidising the examinations at a huge cost that could impact the integrity of the examinations.
• The examination fees were raised to accommodate improved logistics, safety and security of the exam process.
• The NTA also needs to look at the heavy cost they are bearing.

8. Advantage CBSE

• CBSE has permanent employees, recruited through a very transparent and structured process. NTA runs mainly with the help of consultants.
• CBSE-affiliated schools, therefore, have total control over their exam centres. In contrast, the NTA has no control.
• CBSE has a very systematic set of examination bye-laws, which have been upheld by the courts. This system is not there in NTA. There are hardly any SoPs in the
• CBSE has more than 16 full-fledged regional offices in the country manned by permanent employees of CBSE. These regional offices monitor every aspect of exams, from transportation to selection of exam centres, custodians, invigilators, evaluation, etc. The NTA has no regional offices despite the fact that it caters to many more examinees than the
• The system of secrecy and Controller of Examinations does not exist in the
• The NTA does not have in-house tech capability like the For every aspect of its functioning, it has a vendor.
• The NTA was not set up to help every individual university have its own unique entrance exam.
• The NTA was set up to devise a singular common entrance exam for all higher educational institutions (HEIs). It would be left to the HEIs to use the results of these tests for their admissions.

We have this habit of focusing totally on penalising people, many times even before conclusively determining who is at fault. What actually works is a systemic improvement, as was brought about by CBSE’s former chairperson, who would have otherwise been sacked. Ironically, the trust in exams conducted by the NTA in higher education was created by a distrust of everyone else: the CBSE cannot be trusted, state boards and governments cannot be trusted, and universities cannot be trusted. However, a centralised agency conducting exams can be. Now, this trust has also been shattered, ruining the lives of millions of students, proving that the higher the pedestal, the harder the fall.

The author is a retired civil servant and former secretary in the government of India. Views are personal. 

(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)