The Central University Entrance Test (CUET) was announced this year to meet the obligation of complying with the new National Education Policy 2020 promulgated by the government of India. The decision was also taken since the earlier system of admissions based on cut-off based calculation had got completely exposed last year by a particular state education board that had very liberally assigned hundred percent marks to a large number of students. It is true that there was no other way left to deal with the situation but to switch on to a common type of entrance test.
However, what has followed since then is not very encouraging
and is far from being acceptable as satisfactory. Those who know the extremely
complex admission process of Delhi University would agree that our admission
process is arguably one of the most complex one in the world. It deals with hundreds
of academic and non-academic subjects, core and elective classifications,
hundreds of courses and thousands of combinations therein to seek admission
into. I have always found it very difficult to make anyone understand the cut-off
based admission method who had never followed the process very closely. Only
with a great difficulty and some luck on our side, we were somehow used to limit
the admissions within the sanctioned seats. But crossing the sanctioned seats
and unable to maintain the exact reservation proportions for SC/ST/OBCs and
others were also a usual part and parcel of this process. We needed a prophetic
vision, statistical expertise and a shrewd calculative mind in each of the
colleges and in the University to deal with such a gigantic exercise. Admission
process of DU was never a smooth one and we had collectively succumbed to its
complexity till about half a decade ago by allowing local freedom within the
process. In the era of the earlier VC, Prof. Tyagi, who always lacked the
desired administrative skills to run this complex University, an attempt was
made to implement a university-wise uniform procedure to straighten the
admission exercise using a centralized software. We did achieve some uniformity
but we had to pay a huge cost for that. Admissions under the ECA and Sports has
almost lost its earlier relevance. They are all now admitted as individuals and
not as a team member leading to difficulties in building teams for better
performances. While we were struggling with this centralized software, last
year the cut-off based admission also lost its relevance in view of a large
number of admission seekers having unbelievable and inexplicable level of hundred
percent marks.
The decision of opting for a Common Test was indeed a welcome
one and it was the only way to deal with the new challenge. But somewhere, we
lost the plot probably because decisions were taken by those who did not have the
complete knowledge of the complexity involved in our admission process and those local advisors, who were supposed to advise them honestly, turned blind implementers. Switching
over to an entirely new and unexplored method and that too completely, was never
advisable. The National Testing Agency is indeed the best available agency to
carry out this very demanding task but the expectations were beyond their
comprehension. The agency that has proven its capability on several other
occasions failed to make realistic assessment of all the aspects of this task.