As we approach the end of 2024, the University Grants Commission -National Eligibility Test (UGC-NET) exam has become a focal point of heated debates, controversies, and growing concerns, casting a shadow over its credibility and relevance.
From paper leaks to the introduction of a new admission criterion for PhD programmes, this year has seen a series of events that have shaken the foundations of one of India’s most significant academic assessments.
With the growing tension surrounding these issues, we spoke to key stakeholders — including professors, students, and educators — to understand the underlying problems, the resulting impact, and potential solutions.
Paper leaks and re-exams: A crisis of trust
In 2024, the UGC-NET exam faced significant setbacks due to a major paper leak incident. Initially, the examination was conducted in June 2024 in an offline mode, deviating from the expected online Computer-Based Test (CBT) format.
This sudden change, announced just one to two months before the exam, created widespread confusion and anxiety among students, especially those who had prepared for the CBT format.
As if this wasn’t enough, the paper leak led to the cancellation of the exam, forcing a re-exam that disrupted students' schedules and timelines.
Students were left in limbo, with authorities delaying the release of re-exam dates and creating uncertainty around the exam process.
Cherukula Srinivas, a Junior Research Fellowship (JRF) qualifier from the June 2024 cycle, emphasised how the incident tarnished the credibility of the University Grants Commission (UGC) and National Testing Agency (NTA).
“The paper leak has completely ruined the image of UGC-NET,” he remarked, adding that the exam, once seen as a hallmark of academic rigour, has now become synonymous with mismanagement and chaos.
Exam pattern changes: A move away from research-oriented evaluation
The decision to use the UGC NET exam as the sole qualifying criterion for PhD admissions has sparked considerable debate.
Professor Ramdas Rupavat, an academic from the University of Hyderabad, raised concerns about the fairness of relying on a multiple-choice objective exam to evaluate a candidate's potential for research.
"How can a few hundred objective questions truly evaluate the knowledge needed for research-oriented study?" he questioned. Rupavat advocated for a return to the old system of descriptive exams, which he believes better assessed critical thinking and analytical abilities, qualities essential for a PhD program.
The shift towards using UGC-NET scores for PhD admissions also raised concerns about increasing biases in the interview process.
With 70% of the weightage now assigned to the JRF score and only 30% to the interview, Rupavat pointed out that this new system has made the interview round more of a formality. He highlighted how certain universities, both state and central, were prone to biases based on personal connections, with pre-decided candidates often securing positions despite a weaker performance in the interview.
This trend, he warned, would only worsen with the centralisation of the admission process.
Commercialisation of exam preparation: A growing industry
The commercialisation of coaching for the UGC NET exam has surged, with an increasing number of students seeking guidance from coaching centres and online resources.
Rupavat expressed his concern about how this trend is disproportionately benefiting students from more privileged backgrounds, especially those from cities with access to coaching infrastructure. This commercialisation, he noted, has created a stark divide between students from humble backgrounds and those already part of established institutions.
“Students from less privileged backgrounds are at a disadvantage,” said Rupavat, adding that a fairer, more decentralised approach to exams would ensure equal opportunities for all.
This shift towards privatised coaching has made it harder for genuine researchers to emerge, he argued, as many students enter the exam merely to secure the fellowship, not out of a genuine interest in research.
The decline in exam quality and research prospects
There is a growing concern that the UGC-NET exam, once a rigorous test of knowledge, is now deteriorating in terms of quality. Cherukula Srinivas, who successfully cleared the June 2024 JRF cycle, noted that the exam, particularly in Political Science, had become overly simplistic.
“The questions were below the undergraduate level, focusing more on rote learning than testing analytical abilities,” he said. The ease of the exam, particularly in areas like Polity, has led to questions about its suitability as a PhD qualifying exam. For researchers, these kinds of assessments do not help showcase their critical thinking or research potential.
Srinivas also pointed out the growing trend of students preparing for competitive exams like Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) dominating the UGC-NET exam scene. He lamented that students who are primarily interested in securing fellowships rather than pursuing genuine research are clearing the exam, taking away opportunities from those who are passionate about academic inquiry.
This situation has led to concerns about the future of research in India.
Biases in PhD admissions: A barrier to inclusivity
The recent centralisation of the UGC-NET exam has led to a shift in how universities select students for PhD programs. Dushyant Yadav, a former candidate, raised concerns about how centralisation disproportionately favors students from certain regions. He noted that universities like the University of Hyderabad (UoH), with their rich legacy, now face growing anxiety among local students who feel sidelined by an influx of students from North India, who are better prepared for competitive exams like the UGC-NET.
This shift, according to Yadav, is creating a sense of regional disparity, leaving local students feeling excluded.
Yadav also pointed out the challenges faced by interdisciplinary research centres, such as those at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU).
Previously, students clearing the NET in one subject could apply to multiple departments, but with the current restrictions, students are now limited to one subject or department. This narrowing of options, he argued, severely limits the academic freedom and diversity that these institutions are known for.
Management failures: Exam delays and students’ mental health
The management failures of the UGC-NET exam have further compounded the anxiety faced by students. Dr Lokesh Bali, a UGC-NET educator, spoke about how the last-minute decision to change the exam from online to offline mode added to the confusion.
He criticised the delay in announcing exam dates, especially for the December 2024 cycle, where the last date for applications was December 10, just weeks before the exams were set to begin on January 1.
Bali expressed concerns about the lack of clarity surrounding the exam, which has led to immense stress and mental health challenges for students.
Bali also highlighted how logistical issues, like the unavailability of exam center changes for students who had moved home after their master's exams, led to further financial and emotional strain.
“Many students could not attend the re-exam because they couldn’t afford to travel back to their original centres. It was a horrible experience,” he said.
A false hope? The PhD eligibility issue
One of the most controversial aspects of the 2024 UGC-NET exam has been the introduction of a third category for PhD eligibility. Dr Bali, while acknowledging the growing number of students qualifying for this category, warned that this has created a false sense of hope.
With over one in five students now holding a certificate for PhD eligibility, he noted that many may never be considered for PhD admission due to systemic issues such as biased interviews and limited spots.
This, he claimed, has led to unrealistic expectations among students, adding to their frustration.
Preparing for the future: Tips for aspirants and researchers
As the UGC-NET exam continues to evolve, students looking to navigate its challenges in the future can take valuable lessons from those who have experienced the process.
Cherukula Srinivas, suggests that focusing on mastering the basics of the Master’s curriculum is key, especially for the subject-specific Paper 2.
While rote memorisation of facts like dates and events may be necessary for scoring well, he emphasises the importance of developing a deeper understanding of the subject's core concepts.
Dushyant Yadav, who expressed his concerns about the exam's ability to assess critical thinking, recommends that students prioritize analytical thinking and be prepared to showcase their research-oriented mindset.
Dr Lokesh Bali, advises students to stay focused on what matters most for their success. He encourages aspirants to carefully curate their study materials, identifying what to study and, perhaps more importantly, what to avoid, given the nature of competitive exams.
Additionally, Dr Bali underscores the need for resilience, advising students not to be swayed by the uncertainties surrounding exam dates or rumours. His advice is clear: Stay focused, adapt to the changes, and remember that quality preparation will always outshine the noise.
