SC flags 'frustration' of students in CBSE’s digital marking system

Hindustan TimesIndependentCenter8 hr. ago

The Supreme Court of India expressed concern over student frustrations related to the Central Board of Secondary Education's (CBSE) digital on-screen marking (OSM) system during a public interest litigation (PIL) hearing. The court, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, requested the assistance of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to address complaints regarding the digital evaluation process. The court noted systemic issues in the OSM system and emphasized that the government is taking these concerns seriously. A one-member commission has been established to review the evaluation system and suggest improvements. The PIL was filed by Rakesh Binjola, seeking regulatory guidelines for the OSM system and requesting relaxations in minimum qualifying marks for affected students.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced account of the Supreme Court's concerns regarding the CBSE's digital marking system and the government's response. It includes statements from both the judiciary and the Solicitor General, highlighting the ongoing dialogue between different stakeholders without overt偏

The Indian ExpressIndependentCenteryesterday

The Indian Express reports that the Supreme Court (SC) has agreed to hear a challenge regarding the assessment formula used for evaluating students from the Gulf region who appeared for the CBSE Class 12 examinations. The case centers on whether the current method of calculating grades for these students is equitable and compliant with educational regulations. The issue has sparked debate among educators and parents, with concerns raised about potential disparities in evaluation standards. The court's decision to take up the matter indicates that the legal challenge has significant implications for the fairness and transparency of the examination system for international students.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the legal challenge as a matter of equity and compliance, without overtly favoring any particular political stance. It focuses on the procedural aspects of the Supreme Court's involvement and does not frame the issue in a clearly left or right ideological manner. The tone is non