The stone-hearted board evaluators of yore

The ignominious 20% pass result of our school located amidst posh South Delhi in 1970s was camouflaged by our mathematics teacher quoting the failure percentage (80%). Prospective admission seekers don’t ask further, and we don’t lie, he told us.

Tight-fisted evaluators of yesteryears:  Unlike the sky-high marks of board students results now, in 1970s it was a different scenario. The reflexive parsimony of evaluators in marking the board answer sheets remains etched in memory of those in late sixties and above now, like me. They explored wherever a mark or two, if not more, could be deducted. After doing the needful they sought a sigh of relief, apathetic that the niggardly practice could diminish the students’ chances of entry into desired stream or college. Overall, they were stone-hearted. Apologies to say, a sadist streak was reflected in some reverend teachers in evaluation.

In English language, some unwritten law disallowed giving beyond 60% or more marks even to the outstanding answer sheet. One wonders, could they find an answer sheet, or script their own that deserved say 80% marks! Well, they could be defended on the specious plea that hard marking motivates students to put in still more efforts next time.

To me, students achieving 95% or above in board exams remains a riddle. Compare it with past trend of ‘Distinction’ holders i.e. achieving 75% aggregate marks being honoured by national dailies that published their brief profile with photo and brief statement on what inspired them, at times parents’ views as well. And why not, since in entire Delhi, such numbers hardly touched double digit. Even those achieving Distinction in 3 or 4 subjects (out of 5) found their names in print. What a sea change? Now, those in 90% upwards bracket are unsure of admission in desired stream or institution despite much wrestling. Some not making it undergo depression.

A South-Delhi school of its own category:  Without delving into the debate of whether impressive board percentages are fair indication of the scholastic gravitas of students or just reinforce the false superiority of high scorers and their doting parents, I am reminded of how things fared during my school days in heart of South Delhi. In class 9, when one had to opt for Science or Arts stream, I was transplanted from one school to another that offered Sanskrit as option in place of biology or mechanical drawing in science stream. My father believed that grounding in Sanskrit with science would be an excellent combination. After much hunt, he finally settled for one school convenient to commute though not otherwise worth, which was revealed later. I accepted my father’s decision as usual, without second though like an obedient son.

The 80% result:  In the school, teachers took little or no interest in their job, lab conditions were deplorable, the drift of students anti-academic. The only positive feature was a swimming pool under construction, and pathways adorned with messages replete with wisdom and high thinking. Some of the classmates were usually in pyjama-kurta with playing cards in pockets, and never attended prayer session. In the chemistry lab period, naughty fellows indulged in mixing contents of different bottles, thanks God nothing amiss happened. Not strange, the overall pass percentage in board exams hovered around as low as 25. When interacting with parents of prospective admission seekers the carefree mathematics teacher, one Mr Pitam Singh told them, “It is 80%”. The jovial teacher later told us, “They dare not suspect whether we are quoting the failure or pass percentage. We understand, it is blasphemous to tell a lie!”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The earlier version of this article was published in daily Hitavada with the caption ‘Now and Then’ on 12 July 2024, the Friday on Edit page in the Middle Space column. Link of newspaper: https://www.ehitavada.com/article.php?mid=Mpage_2024-07-12_8d250835dd80368d2208675384f0cfec6690885e7fc25&JSON

…. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. ….