As India rolls out a common entrance exam for its public universities, academics have expressed scepticism that it will level the playing field for students.

This year, for the first time, all 45 of India¡¯s state universities will be required to base their admissions on the multiple-choice Common University Entrance Test (CUET), moving away from a system reliant on theory papers and practical exams judged by local examiners.

The change comes under India¡¯s National Education Policy, which is?introducing sweeping changes?meant to improve higher education in the country. But scholars say that mandating a common test does little to address?persisting inequalities?between poorer, regional students and their wealthier urban counterparts.

¡°CUET might be based on the principle of equity of access to higher education, but in practice without a common schooling system it will further disadvantage the historically marginalised students within the larger Indian context,¡± said Mousumi Mukherjee, deputy director of Delhi¡¯s International Institute for Higher Education Research and Capacity Building. ?

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

Fifteen public institutions already use the test in their admissions, but the change would bring all of India¡¯s state universities ¨C many of which are?highly competitive and well regarded?¨C under one testing umbrella. India¡¯s private universities are also being encouraged to implement the exam instead of relying on scores for Year 12 board exams, the country¡¯s equivalent of UK A levels.

But since many schools¡¯ curricula are tailored to the board exams, the change to CUET could leave their students in the lurch, academics warned. Students taking the common exam must also complete a language test in one of 13 of the 22 languages officially recognised in India.

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

¡°The curriculum, pedagogy and language of instruction (regional state language) is also different in the state board schools, where majority of the masses study,¡± said Dr Mukherjee.

Academics said that while attempts to standardise education were understandable, they failed to tackle the underlying problem of inconsistent quality of education.

N.V. Varghese, a former head of governance and management at Delhi¡¯s International Institute for Educational Planning, agreed that ¡°any form of standardised national testing may not help the disadvantaged¡± if it is not paired with other measures.

¡°That is how the eliteness in higher education is maintained,¡± he said.

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

Furqan Qamar, former secretary general of the Association of?Indian Universities and a professor of management at Jamia Millia Islamia University, was less critical.

¡°Apparently as of now the fear is unfounded,¡± he said, noting that universities will be permitted to follow existing affirmative action policies, even if all students are judged on basis of their scores on a single test.

Still, he worried that CUET would give a boost to India¡¯s ¡°cottage industry¡± of academic coaching. ?

¡°With a single common entrance?test, it provides the bulk and the critical mass for the big organised coaching industry and edtech Companies to enter into the play,¡± he said.

É«ºÐÖ±²¥

Professor Qamar also worried that requiring universities to admit students solely on their exam score would limit university autonomy. ¡°This is not in sync with the practices that the best universities in the world follow,¡± he said.

pola.lem@timeshighereducation.com