It has become a common sight, students coming out of examination centres totally lost and dejected, questioning why they even wasted so much time studying complicated topics when the exam was based on rote learning and luck.

Just three days into the University Grants Commission - National Eligibility Test (UGC-NET) June 2025 cycle (running from June 25-29), this heartbreaking scene is already playing out across examination halls nationwide.

UGC NET serves as the gateway for PhD admissions across India and stands as a crucial eligibility criterion for aspiring researchers and assistant professors. Yet, the very test meant to identify scholarly potential has become a barrier to genuine academic talent

Picture this: A student who spent two years diving deep into original works, understanding complex theories, and developing analytical skills, walks out of the exam hall with a lost hope in their eyes. Meanwhile, someone who crammed dates and chronologies for a month walks out confident. 

This isn't just unfair, it's soul-crushing for those who genuinely care about their subject.

What type of scholars are we expecting and producing? No wonder there's nothing great about research in India, and why students who are genuinely interested in a PhD wish to move abroad, because here, your knowledge and passion don't seem to be respected.

Gone are the days when UGC-NET was an exam that actually tested whether you understood your subject. Now, it's become a cruel joke where your two years of hard work during your master's, your late nights reading original texts, your efforts to grasp complex concepts, none of it matters.

Instead, the exam asks you to remember which vice president or president took office first, completely ignoring whether you understand the policies they approved or their constitutional significance. It's almost laughable, except it's destroying dreams. A student who has never opened a book has the same chances as someone who lived and breathed their subject for two years. Everything comes down to luck and how well you can memorise random facts.

Student voices: The reality on ground

Aastha's experience with mass communication

Aastha, who appeared for the UGC-NET Mass Media examination held on June 25, 2025, describes the current state of affairs: "It is all about rote learning, mugging up things, all the chronological answers and learning dates, because in journalism and mass communication, there are so many dates and newspapers there is no option but to mug up."

She emphasises the mechanical nature of preparation: "You have to remember those dates and just go and write whatever they ask. So it is all rote learning."

While Aastha notes some improvement in the June 2025 mass media paper compared to previous cycles, with more conceptual questions appearing, she acknowledges a fundamental flaw in the system: "There are people who have qualified for the exam just by doing previous year questions. I know people who have cleared the exam by memorising things from the question banks, which is not at all fair and, more importantly, is bad for academia."

Political science scholar's disillusionment

Niraj Sahu, who appeared for the Political Science examination on June 26, 2025, provides an even more damning assessment of the current system. 

According to him, "The exam is just based on rote learning and anyone with no knowledge of the subject, with no analytical skills, can qualify for it by studying for just one month, memorising the dates and solving previous year questions. There is no need to be focused and study well during your master's degree. This exam just tests the candidates on how much they can remember and swot up. So, performing well and studying properly in your master's has no value."

Sahu points out the tragic irony in the current system: "My classmate who has won a gold medal for his master's degree will not be able to clear JRF because we do not study like this and nor are we taught in this way during our master's because even our professors with years of experience in research understand well that this will won’t help in the long run as anyone can learn dates and chronology and produce it in the exam."

He emphasises how core subjects are being neglected: “Important topics like political theory, Western thought, and International Relations ideologies have seen a drastic decline in weightage, despite being foundational to political science and crucial for exams like UPSC PSIR.”

The commercialisation of academic preparation

The current system has given rise to a cottage industry of question banks and coaching materials that promise success through memorisation rather than understanding. As Aastha notes, “It’s all about selling question banks and crash courses. You take the exam, and that’s how the system works."

This commercialisation has created a perverse incentive structure where genuine academic preparation is discouraged in favour of pattern-based studying. Students are learning that two years of rigorous master's degree coursework holds less value than a month of memorising previous year questions.

The PhD eligibility paradox

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this crisis is that UGC-NET serves as the eligibility criterion for PhD admissions across India. This means that the very test meant to identify potential researchers is systematically excluding those with genuine analytical capabilities while admitting students whose primary skill is memorisation.

As Sahu rhetorically asks: "If we ask ourselves whether this is going to help us be a good researcher or a good teacher, for which this exam is an eligibility criterion, the answer is clearly no."

The answer is clearly no, yet the system continues to perpetuate this flawed evaluation method.

The implications are far-reaching. When the foundation of academic selection is based on surface-level knowledge rather than deep understanding, the quality of research output inevitably suffers. This explains why Indian research often lacks the depth and innovation found in institutions where analytical thinking is prioritised.

The deteriorating standards

The decline in examination quality has been particularly evident since the June 2024 cycle, which was cancelled due to irregularities and paper leaks. Rather than using this crisis as an opportunity to reform the examination pattern, authorities seem to have doubled down on the problematic approach.

Students report that the examination pattern has shifted so dramatically toward memorisation that even those who have studied the subject in depth find themselves disadvantaged. The test now rewards those who can regurgitate facts rather than those who can apply knowledge creatively or analytically.

A system in crisis

The tragedy of the current UGC NET system extends far beyond broken dreams and individual setbacks. We are witnessing the systematic dismantling of academic excellence in India, one examination at a time. When merit is redefined as memorisation and analytical thinking becomes a handicap rather than an asset, we create a generation of scholars who excel at regurgitation but fail at innovation.

Consider the broader implications: if our future PhD scholars are selected based on their ability to remember dates rather than their capacity for critical thinking, what kind of research can we expect? If our assistant professors are chosen for their memorisation skills rather than their understanding of complex concepts, what will they teach the next generation? The answers are as disturbing as they are obvious.

This crisis reflects a deeper problem in India's approach to education, one that prioritises quantity over quality, conformity over creativity, and surface knowledge over deep understanding. We have created an ecosystem where coaching centres thrive by selling shortcuts to success, where question banks become more valuable than textbooks, and where genuine academic curiosity is punished rather than rewarded, and that’s why India's brightest minds consistently choose foreign universities for their doctoral studies. In this process, they take with them not just their talent but also their potential contributions to Indian research and academia. We are essentially exporting our intellectual capital while importing mediocrity into our own institutions.

Perhaps most tragically, we are sending a clear message to young scholars: passion for your subject doesn't matter, understanding complex theories is irrelevant, and years of dedicated study are worthless. What matters is your ability to cram facts and regurgitate them on command. This is not just an educational crisis, it's a cultural one that threatens the very foundation of intellectual growth in the country.

The voices of students emerging from examination halls, dejected despite years of dedicated study, serve as a clarion call for reform. Their experiences remind us that academic excellence cannot be measured by one's ability to memorise dates and chronologies, but by the depth of understanding and analytical thinking that forms the foundation of genuine scholarship.