Recently in Delhi, Class 10 and 12 students protesting the CBSE results attempted to march to Parliament, with one student expressing her confusion over receiving only 21 marks in mathematics, a subject she loves. For raising such questions, she and her peers were taken away in a police van. On May 30 in Bhopal, the National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) protested against the chaos caused by the NEET paper leak, resulting in police using batons and water cannons, detaining nearly 200 individuals.
Similar protests have erupted in states including Kerala, Telangana, Odisha, Jharkhand, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh, yet these events have largely gone unreported in mainstream media. The swift handling of dissent has marked this exam-related crisis as one of the most efficiently managed in recent times.
While police actions require significant mobilization, social media allows for quick dissemination of theories and accusations. For instance, Vedant Shrivastav, a Class 12 student in Delhi, discovered discrepancies in his physics paper during re-evaluation, noting that the handwriting did not match his own. His post garnered 3.2 million views, while another student, Sanjana, found her chemistry paper was not hers, receiving only 11 out of 70 marks.
The online discourse soon turned accusatory, with some questioning whether Shrivastav was funded by foreign entities. Prominent figures in media even suggested that he might be a foreign agent. This scrutiny has been directed at students who have raised valid concerns about their evaluations.
Nineteen-year-old ethical hacker Nisarga Adhikary, who recently graduated, identified several vulnerabilities in OnMark, the grading portal used by CBSE. Despite reporting these issues to the government’s cybersecurity agency, CERT-In, in February, he received no response for over three months. When he went public, CBSE downplayed the severity of the situation, claiming he hacked a harmless platform. Adhikary later uncovered more vulnerabilities in other platforms, prompting CBSE to finally acknowledge the issues.
Additionally, 17-year-old Sarthak Sidhant questioned CBSE’s tendering process, revealing that a company with a troubled history was awarded a contract despite previous failures that had serious consequences. His inquiries have led to media investigations into the tendering process and the implications for students.
These students, not yet of voting age, have held the education system accountable, demonstrating more responsibility than the institutions designed to uphold standards. The education ministry, responsible for overseeing these exams, has struggled with leaks and errors, while students have taken it upon themselves to demand transparency.
This situation raises critical questions about the roles of adults and children in the education system. The education ministry, with its resources and authority, has failed to deliver, while students, equipped only with their internet access, have shown remarkable maturity and resolve.
However, this newfound maturity offers little comfort. Many students cannot afford to retake exams or seek re-evaluations. Behind those who can voice their concerns are countless others who lack the means to challenge the system, left to accept whatever outcomes are handed to them, which will significantly impact their futures.
