Since the inception of public examinations, answer scripts have travelled physically from exam centres to assessment centres where they have been checked under the supervision of a Center In-charge in accordance with well-established norms for supervision, moderation and quality control.

The advancement in technology has modernised and transformed this conventional process of evaluation by converting the answer scripts into digital files that can be electronically distributed, remotely evaluated and results can be digitally compiled. This process is commonly known as on-screen marking (OSM).

This writeup does not seek to discourage adoption of technology for the purpose of assessment. Rather it critically examines the gaps in the process of implementation of On-Screen Marking (OSM) by CBSE and draws useful lessons so that educational institutions can plan, pilot, build stakeholder readiness and institutional capacity while introducing reforms. The objective is to understand how educational institutions can successfully introduce large-scale technology integration while preserving public confidence and trust.

Readiness before rollout

Integration of technology in assessment systems offers many advantages -from greater efficiency to speed, transparency, scalability and improved monitoring of the evaluation process. However, when introduced in a high-stakes public examination system it is not merely the digitisation of a process, but a complex transition from well-established practices to new systems and work processes.

The question before us therefore is not whether OSM adopted by CBSE is desirable but whether the transition to new system was sufficiently planned, tested and supported by adequate oversight mechanisms and safeguards before nationwide implementation.

A review of the pre-launch activities by CBSE suggests that the limited pilot conducted by the Board in the National Capital Region (NCR) did not sufficiently represent the diverse school ecosystem of India’s largest examination board. Consequently, its feedback provided limited insights into operational challenges that could be faced by the teachers and schools across diverse geographical locations, varying levels of digital readiness and differing levels of digital infrastructure. A broader and more representative pilot would have provided a clearer insight into the challenges associated with digitisation enabling the Board to make important modifications before deployment at the national level.

Building human capacity for change

Successful change management requires all stakeholders to be prepared for the transition. As primary users of OSM, teacher-evaluator required in-depth orientations, hands-on practice sessions, mock evaluations and regular online interactions with Head examiners to understand the new system and clarify their doubts.

Under the traditional system Head Examiners played an important role as they closely supervised evaluators at Evaluation centres and guided them in maintaining consistency and standardisation in marking. The extent to which this important support system was available to evaluators under OSM, remains unclear and merits serious consideration.

An important part of a successful rollout would be orientation of students and parents in OSM and developing clear OSM protocols that students would need to follow during their examination. In a digital examination the students are not merely examinees, they become participants in a technology-enabled assessment process.

Students should be informed well before the examination to ensure that their answer scripts, diagrams, maps, graphs and supplementary sheets were clear, legible and securely tagged. Care at this stage can help ensure no part of their answer script is inadvertently missed during scanning.

Creating a digital examination ecosystem

One of the most significant changes brought in by OSM is that assessment is no longer only between examinees’ answer scripts and the examiner. There are a host of other factors such as –

• Digital Infrastructure- Scanning infrastructure, servers and networks, evaluation software, hardware and internet connectivity.

• Technology Partners – professional credibility, technical expertise, experience and service quality.

• Quality Assurance and Audit Systems- Performance monitoring, error detection, data integrity and data security.

• Evaluator Readiness- Availability of hardware, digital proficiency, and basic training to use OSM platform.

OSM has completely changed the system by creating multiple – technological and operational layers between students writing the exams and evaluators marking them online. This naturally raises important questions in the mind of students, parents and schools- how is consistency and standardisation maintained when evaluators are all working remotely? How are blurred scans, missing or cropped answer scripts and evaluation errors identified and addressed fairly? What procedures have been established to detect and correct these errors and discrepancies?

The integrity of a digital evaluation system therefore depends not only on the judgement of the evaluator but also on the entire ecosystem created to support the assessment process.

Fairness, transparency and accountability

Teacher-evaluators and stakeholders reported a range of concerns during the initial rollout of OSM. These included blurred or cropped scans, faint diagrams and handwriting, missing, incorrectly attached or wrongly sequenced supplementary sheets, internet connectivity issues, hardware related challenges and reduced opportunities for discussion and consultation with Head examiner.

The concerns were not merely procedural. Reports of students demanding grace marks, seeking waivers of verification and re-evaluation fees, and questioning the accuracy of their evaluated answer scripts underscore the need of robust quality assurance mechanisms and transparent processes for identifying, investigating, and correcting errors.

The credibility of the Board depends not only on assessing answer scripts and issuing marksheets, but on the entire system established to ensure fairness, transparency and consistency in the examination process. To build stakeholder confidence in OSM, the Board must clearly define responsibilities of vendors, schools, Head Examiners and evaluators, develop protocols for data security, accountability and transparent procedures for identifying and correcting systemic errors.

Trust, Transparency and the Way Forward

Students spend years preparing for public examinations. Since important academic and career decisions depend on the outcome of these examinations, parents and schools invest significant time, effort and resources to ensure best outcomes. Therefore, all of stakeholders are justified to desire complete transparency in the evaluation process of public examinations.

As CBSE, other school boards and universities continue to transition to digital assessment systems, they should use the experience of the first OSM rollout to focus on refining their digital evaluation processes. Digitisation of assessment is no doubt a progressive step, but how it can be implemented in ways that it strengthens fairness, reliability, transparency within the assessment system should be the way forward.

In the end, successful educational reforms are not merely about introducing new technology but managing change in ways that strengthens

END OF ARTICLE