Students alleging discrepancies in NEET-UG (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test. - Undergraduate) 2023 question paper have found some support.
Regarding the same fiasco, AIJNSA (All India JEE NEET Students Association), a students' organisation, has written a letter to Dr Suresh Chandra Sharma, the Director of the National Medical Commission (NMC).
AINJSA, in a tweet, claimed that a total of six questions from Zoology, eight from Chemistry, four from Botany and almost nine questions from Physics had been featured in Section A of the paper that was not in the prescribed syllabus.
Why the letter?
The letter says that students are left in a lurch as the guidelines clearly state that questions will be based on the "reduced" syllabus. It goes on to say, "Furthermore, to rationalize the decision of reduction in the syllabus by various School Education Boards, the NTA has taken a decision to provide choice in Section “B” for each of the 4 (four) Subjects."
They also protested against the alleged flouting of a guideline that stated that Section B of the paper might contain questions that are not directly related to their syllabus or can be based on the non-rationalised syllabus, instead, the questions were given in Section A of the paper which is the compulsory section.
NEET, not for the less privileged?
Contradicting the statement, a NEET aspirant, who wanted to remain anonymous, states, "The hypocrisy of their statement is apparent when we look at how they have specified in the Information Bulletin about the exclusion of a few chapters from the syllabus, and yet, such questions were given in Section A."
Vishwanath Kumar, National Vice-President of AIJNSA, hints at the difficulties that a lesser-privileged student might face, someone who cannot access additional tuition support from the coaching centres monopolising the market. "Coaching institutes cover the entire syllabus and have access to more information as compared to a student preparing all by themselves," he claims.
The discrepancies and the gaps in information might be a hefty price that a student has to pay, the student implies as he says, "The loss is ultimately ours. There are lakhs of students appearing and then there is limited availability of seats. The competition is cut-throat and losing even one mark would cost us immensely."
Making students burden-free?
The confusion with which the students have had to live since the pandemic has created an atmosphere of anxiety. The government has deemed that the "rationalization" of the syllabus is an attempt to reduce the burden of the students and yet, such incidents hint at another perspective, where students live under uncertainty, they claim.
