Wednesday, August 26, 2020

NEET/JEE Examinations during the Pandemic in India: Whose interest will it really serve?

This article is by

Share this article

Article Contributor(s)

Syed Ahmed Uzair

Article Title

NEET/JEE Examinations during the Pandemic in India: Whose interest will it really serve?

Publisher

Global Views 360

Publication Date

August 26, 2020

URL

Students at an examination

Students at an examination | Source: Indian Express

India currently is the third worst-hit country globally in terms of the total number of COVID-19 cases which is still on the increasing trend. The country had imposed one of the toughest lockdowns across the world to counter the threat of Corona in the initial phase itself. Apart from the economic activities, the lockdown has impacted the education sector in a big way.

All the education institutions from pre-nursery schools to the professional colleges and universities were closed down in the month of March 2020 itself. These institutions are still closed for the physical presence of students and the classes are happening only through online modes which doesn't require students to venture out from their homes.

The schools and colleges cancelled the pending examinations of last academic year and gave general promotion to the students for the next class. Many examinations for admissions to various college programs in the country were also done away while some are still on.

Two of the biggest national level entrance exams, the NEET and the JEE, which have been postponed multiple times in the light of the increasing number of COVID-19 cases are now in the spotlight. This is due to the fact that the Ministry of Education recently stated that both the JEE and the NEET will be held in the upcoming month of September. The NTA has issued public notices citing that the JEE (Main) April 2020 is scheduled from September 1-6, while NEET-UG 2020 exam is scheduled for September 13.

The Supreme Court had responded to a plea filed on 17th August seeking postponement of the exams, while dismissing it, that the precious year of students “cannot be wasted”. The plea that had been filed through advocate Alakh Alok Shrivastava via 11 students from different states sought the quashing of the notices issued on July 3rd by the National Testing Agency (NTA), which set the dates for JEE and NEET in September next month.

The Medical Council of India (MCI) in response to the plea has submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court stating that further postponement of the NEET would be a “drastic deviation” from the academic schedule which “may affect the subsequent academic years” of the students. It also ruled out the possibility of conducting NEET online owing to the “paper book format” of the exam. It further stated that conducting the exam at the same time everywhere is imperative and hence it cannot be organized in countries like Qatar and UAE which attract significant applicants.

With the centre looking adamant to organize the exams, student organizations like the National Students Union of India (NSUI), the student wing of the Indian National Congress, and the All India Student’ Association, student wing of the CPI(ML) have come together to protest against the decision. Both the outfits demanded cancellation of all first and second-year exams and giving promotion to the students, holding final year exams in a way such that students across the country can write them, and most importantly postponement of both the NEET and the JEE.

Dr. Ramesh Pokhriyal Nishank, Minister of Human Resource Development, India | Source: IndiaTVNews

An argument in favour of conducting the exams as given by Education Minister Ramesh Pokhriyal Nishank was that the majority of the aspirants had already downloaded their admit cards for the exams. However, it is quite easy to see that students do not have a choice. One can argue that if we put ourselves in the applicant’s shoes, even we would do the same and download the admit cards. This by no means is an indication that students are willing to appear in the exams.

My personal experience in appearing for the JEE and AMU-EEE back in 2017 and 2018 is more than enough for convincing me in favour of postponing the exams. For JEE alone nearly 15 lakh students appear annually. The examination centres are usually overcrowded both before the beginning and after the culmination of the exam and it is nearly impossible to maintain social distancing. Also, the students are normally accompanied by parents or guardians which further adds up to the crowd. Further due to the large number of applicants it will be impossible to maintain distance in the examination halls unless and until the number of examination centres is increased tremendously. Due to various financial and logistical reasons, this will be an uphill task to accomplish.

Students across the country have reacted strongly to the decision of the Court on social media. Most of them are worried about contacting COVID which will put their own as well as the family members’ at risk. Manish Chaubey, one of the 11 petitioners in SC, said, “My hometown is in Gorakhpur in Uttar Pradesh and I am in Mumbai at present. It will be a hassle and immensely risky to travel now. Why should I have to put my parents through this?". While some pointed out the irony of the SC using a virtual mode to conduct hearings for making students appear in the exams, others chose to blame the BJP for being inhuman in forcing students into crowded examination centres.

In an open letter to the HRD ministry and education minister Dr Harshvardhan, MadhuPurnima Kishwar, founder of human rights organization, MANUSHI, sought to address the countless appeals regarding various issues and concerns of applicants nationwide received by her. Most of the appeals revolved around safety concerns and fear of contracting the coronavirus disease and thus jeopardizing the safety of family members.

In the letter, she pointed out how the recently organized KCET and B.Ed exam in UP were a clear indication of how it would be nearly impossible to implement the distancing and safety guidelines in the overcrowded examination centres. The overwhelming shortage of examination centres in the light of distancing norms was also mentioned in the letter. She also stated how many IIT and AIIMS directors were of the opinion that the exams could be conducted in November without significant academic loss.

Another very important fact mentioned in the letter was regarding the applicants from countries like the UAE and Qatar. Due to the mandatory 14-day quarantine period for anyone arriving in the country from overseas, it will be very tricky for these applicants and their parents to travel under the current scenario. Parents of nearly 4000 applicants in these countries abroad had filed a plea for either postponing the exams or conducting them abroad. However, the NTA, after consulting with the MCI, ruled that conducting the exams overseas is not a viable option which means that all these candidates will be left stranded. Even if they manage to fly to India for appearing in the exams, they will then be subject to various guidelines issued by their parent countries abroad.

Multiple politicians also voiced similar concerns regarding the decision. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi urged the government to consider the concerns of the students appearing for the entrance examinations. Manish Sisodia, Aam Aadmi Party leader and the deputy CM of Delhi also echoed similar thoughts. BJP leader Subramanian Swamy on Sunday came up with 13 points concerning logistical issues as well as safety concerns in the argument for the need of postponing the exams.

Another very strong argument in favour of postponing the exams was the lack of public transport services due to lockdown in many districts and states of the country. While those who had arrangements for private vehicles would not face any issue, the others would be left stranded in the absence of the various means of public transports. Lastly, many states are still under various degrees of lockdown as the overall situation of the country is still not very great in terms of daily coronavirus cases. This would also make movement for those applicants with examination centres away from their native places very difficult.

The debate surrounding the NEET and JEE exams has become quite a heated issue around the country. With so many applicants and their parents asking for the postponement of the exams due to various safety concerns, it remains to be seen if the government would still go ahead in organizing these exams as planned.

Support us to bring the world closer

To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.

Support Us

Share this article

Read More

February 28, 2021 11:13 AM

Parler Shutdown, Big Tech, and Liberal Politics

Controversial social media site Parler, has been facing some problems regarding spreading of misinformation and the influence of several far-right groups. The platform became the most-downloaded free app in the Apple App Store on the weekend of November 8 - the day major media outlets called the election for Joe Biden. It was deplatfomized by Silicon Valley giants Apple, Google and Amazon after the storming of Capitol Hill. This article explains what is parler, how it influences people and what is the controversy about it.

What is Parler?

Parler is a social media website founded by Rebekah Mercer, John Matze and Jared Thomson. The platform refers to itself as an “unbiased social media” where people can “speak freely and express yourself openly without fear of being 'deplatformed' for your views," according to its website and App Store description.

The app mainly attracts conservative users—some of the Parler’s active users among public figures include Fox News host Sean Hannity, far-right activist Laura Loomer, radio personality Mark Levin, Senator Ted Cruz, and Congressman Devin Nunes. Eric Trump and Donald Trump's presidential campaign also have accounts on the platform.

With big tech companies like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram taking strict actions against the ex-President Donald Trump, and flagging misinformation, Parler became the free for all space for the conservatives.

Problems and influences

According to some reports, members of the Proud Boys, adherents of conspiracy theory QAnon, anti-government extremists, and white supremacists all openly promote their views on Parler. Holocaust denial, anti-Semitism, racism and other forms of bigotry can also be found among their ideas.

The co-founder of the website, Rebekah Mercer and her family came into national politics in 2016 elections when they donated more than $23 million to groups backing conservative candidates.

Rebekah Mercer is widely reported to have persuaded then-candidate Trump to reshuffle his campaign organization and hire Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway to help run his presidential bid in the final stretch of the 2016 election.

The shutdown: opinions on Parler and the monopoly of tech giants

The social networking site went dark when Amazon stopped providing it cloud hosting services after it was revealed the platform was used to help organize the Capitol Hill attack on January 6—which left five people dead. Amazon's actions were followed by Apple and Google that banned the Parler mobile app from their respective stores.

After the app went offline, it made a comeback after several days, registered with Epik as its provider. But Epik denies in an official statement that the company had any “contact or discussions with Parler in any form regarding our becoming their registrar or hosting provider.”

A Reuters report, citing an infrastructure expert, pointed to a Russian tech firm as supporting Parler's return online. It said that the IP address Epik used is owned by DDos-Guard, which is “controlled by two Russian men and provides services including protection from distributed denial of service attacks.”

The united Silicon Valley attack began on January 8, when Apple emailed Parler and gave them 24 hours to prove they had changed their moderation practices or else face removal from their App Store. The letter claimed: “We have received numerous complaints regarding objectionable content in your Parler service, accusations that the Parler app was used to plan, coordinate, and facilitate the illegal activities in Washington D.C. on January 6, 2021 that led (among other things) to loss of life, numerous injuries, and the destruction of property.”

It ended with this warning: “To ensure there is no interruption of the availability of your app on the App Store, please submit an update and the requested moderation improvement plan within 24 hours of the date of this message. If we do not receive an update compliant with the App Store Review Guidelines and the requested moderation improvement plan in writing within 24 hours, your app will be removed from the App Store.” The next day, Apple removed it from its App Store.

This was a kind of monopoly and alleged misuse of power by the tech giants to ban the website, but, in October, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law issued a 425-page report concluding that Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google all possess monopoly power and are using that power anti-competitively. According to the report, iOS and Android hold an effective duopoly in mobile operating systems. However, the report concludes, Apple does have a monopolistic hold over what you can do with an iPhone. You can only put apps on your phone through the Apple App Store, and Apple has total gatekeeper control over that App Store.

Not only did leading left-wing politicians not object but some of them were the ones who pleaded with Silicon Valley to use their power this way. After the internet-policing site Sleeping Giants flagged several Parler posts that called for violence, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez asked: “What are @Apple and @GooglePlay doing about this?” Once Apple responded by removing Parler from its App Store — a move that House Democrats just three months earlier warned was dangerous antitrust behaviour — she praised Apple and then demanded to know: “Good to see this development from @Apple. @GooglePlay what are you going to do about apps being used to organize violence on your platform?” The same steps were taken by Google later.

These actions showed the amount of power the Silicon Valley giants have, which can actually control the other company’s fate. The powers which were revealed by the steps taken by these companies were dangerous but at the same time helpful when done for the good. The liberal New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg called herself “disturbed by just how awesome [tech giants’] power is” and added that “it’s dangerous to have a handful of callow young tech titans in charge of who has a megaphone and who does not.” She nonetheless praised these “young tech titans” for using their “dangerous” power to ban Trump and destroy Parler. Her opinion shows that liberals are happy until Silicon Valley censorship is used to silence their adversaries, not on themselves.

As put by Glenn Greenwald “Liberals like Goldberg are concerned only that Silicon Valley censorship powers might one day be used against people like them, but are perfectly happy as long as it is their adversaries being deplatformed and silenced (Facebook and other platforms have for years banned marginalized people like Palestinians at Israel’s behest, but that is of no concern to U.S. liberals).”

Clearly, the way Parler was misused for spreading propaganda had to be stopped as it led to one of the worst days in American history – the storm of the Capitol Hill – but the way they were censored and banned from the internet by the virtual unity of Silicon Valley giants Apple, Google and Amazon, has brought forth another dangerous fact to the world regarding how much power these companies hold. And if misused, they can prove to be more dangerous than Parler itself. But as long as they are using the power and censorship to maintain peace and lawfulness, even the liberals don’t have any problems with it, at least for now.

Read More