The year 2024 has been nothing short of a whirlwind for students in India, particularly for medical aspirants. From sudden changes in exam formats to legal battles and controversies, the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test - Undergraduate (NEET-UG) examination has been at the centre of it all. Dubbed by many as one of the most chaotic episodes in the history of Indian education, this year saw over 20 lakh students grappling with uncertainty, their dreams hanging precariously on the edge.
As the year draws to a close, fresh developments have surfaced. A seven-member high-level panel headed by former Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Chairman K Radhakrishnan was constituted by the Supreme Court.
This committee was tasked with recommending reforms for national examinations, and has proposed significant changes to the NEET examination structure, leaving students and stakeholders speculating about their impact. While the final decision remains pending, EdexLive reached out to students to understand how they perceive these potential shifts and what it means for their aspirations.
A ‘two-part’ exam: fair game or double trouble?
Among the proposed changes, the suggestion to implement a multi-stage testing format for NEET is underway. Although there has been no confirmation if it will be implemented, the test format, similar to the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE), would enable the authorities to address several challenges.
However, several questions remain. Would it improve the exam’s overall security, or would it create additional challenges for students? How would it affect the students' preparation style?
For instance, Huma Siddiqui, a 2025 NEET aspirant, expressed concern about the potential removal of optional questions saying, “If they remove the extra five questions, it’s risky because you can’t skip something you don’t know and choose another question instead.”
Speaking about whether she expects any changes in her preparation style Huma expressed that this wouldn’t significantly change their study methods. “It’s all MCQ-based, so people will continue practising questions the same way,”
Another NEET aspirant Renu Sattur, who is going to attempt the exam for the second time next year, expressed that there would definitely be a shift in the way they prepare. “In addition to solving previous years' questions (PYQs), it would become crucial to focus on the current papers being conducted. However, this can add to the tension and anxiety about upcoming exams," she said.
NCERT focus: Simplifying or problematic?
Another proposal that has gained attention is the decision to align the exam more closely with National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbooks.
Renu explained, “We’ve always been asked to follow NCERT, especially for Biology and Chemistry, so it’s not entirely new for us. But since the syllabus has changed drastically, there is a need to follow old NCERT books, and a few topics, like the addition of new families in Botany, require information from other sources,” she said.
Huma, however, finds the reliance on NCERT limiting. “It’s better to learn conceptually rather than mugging up lines from NCERT, which sometimes lacks proper explanations,” she points out.
On the other hand, another 2025 NEET aspirant, Diya Vidiyalaya, a Class XII student, sees the change as something that might simplify the preparation for students, especially those belonging to diverse educational backgrounds, due to its unified approach.
“Following a particular book for such entrance exams is a good step. The students can adopt a more focused approach towards preparing for this entrance. For students from different schools and backgrounds, it becomes easier to follow NCERT diligently,” she explained.
AI surveillance: Watchful or worrying?
The committee has also recommended bolstering exam security through measures like advanced biometric verification, Artificial Intelligence (AI)-driven monitoring, and tighter protocols for managing question papers.
This suggested use of AI surveillance during exams might also spark concerns about privacy and technical vulnerabilities. Hum, who is particularly critical of the AI intervention, said, “AI surveillance can be hacked. If that happens, the exam isn’t secure, and we might see the same issues as in 2024, like paper leaks.” She also raised the possibility of sensitive information being compromised.
Diya supports the change, noting that it might reduce human errors during supervision. “ NEET-UG is a national-level entrance exam and stricter invigilation is a must. I don't find this to be a problem as it will help discourage students from indulging in malpractice,” she said.
Acknowledging the risks and believing AI could improve monitoring if implemented properly, Renu pointed out, “On a personal note, there are no issues; it is better than having multiple invigilators, and AI can help us monitor precisely.”
Though she recognises the fallibility of it, this particular proposition may not sit well with everyone, she suspects. “However this might not be the case for everyone, though the majority of them don't have a problem with it,” she stated.
State role: Unity or chaos?
Another contentious proposal was according to states a greater role in managing the examination process.
The panel has proposed engaging state and district-level authorities in a manner similar to election processes. It recommends forming coordination committees at these levels, including representatives from the NTA, National Informatics Centre (NIC), police, and intelligence bureau. These committees would develop strategies to ensure fair and transparent exams, select testing centres, and oversee the secure transport of question papers with police or paramilitary protection.
Huma raised concerns about potential inconsistencies, saying, “Not every state operates the same way, and partiality could become an issue.” She argues for a centralised system with exams conducted nationally on a single day to maintain fairness.
Agreeing with Huma, Renu stated, “We are aware of the fact that every state might not operate the same way, but few things should be standardised to ensure no issues are detected. For example, the usage of AI for surveillance must be made common in all the centres or states.”
NEET: The old or new version?
Reflecting on last year’s issues, when the students were asked about how they felt about the new changes, Huma argued, stating, “Instead of trying new ideas, it’s better to stick to the old plans for the NEET exam and implement them strictly.”
Renu, on the other hand, speaking on new reforms, believed that even though the computer-based testing method was a recommended option and perhaps a popularised method of testing, it had its own set of concerns.
She pointed out several potential drawbacks, such as technical glitches and difficulties some students might face in adapting to the format.
"Switching to computer-based testing is a favoured option right now, but a few problems would arise as not everyone would be able to cope with the systems, or there may be chances of technical glitches," she told EdexLive.
She further highlighted the importance of sticking to traditional methods for reliability.
"The best way is to continue with the pen-and-paper mode of examination. Along with strict monitoring, this mode is the most convenient," the aspirant stated.
What do students want?
When asked what single change they would propose for NEET-UG, Renu suggested introducing age and attempt limits. “This would upset many, but it would significantly reduce competition,” she explained.
Diya, on the other hand, proposed a more practical approach “Instead of testing the speed and accuracy of a student, they should test their application-based thinking by giving more application-based questions.” she emphasised.
Suggesting arranging exam days strategically to reduce overcrowding and minimise scams, and splitting candidates across different days could make the system more efficient, Huma raised concerns about overcomplicating the reforms. “ Conducting exams over multiple days could make the process smoother, sometimes simpler systems are better,” she says, advocating for a return to stricter implementation of the old system.
With voices like that of Huma, Renu, and Diya highlighting the diverse challenges and opportunities, students believe that regardless of the proposed changes, effective implementation will matter the most. As these changes are debated, their impact on accessibility, equity, exam integrity and student growth will remain central to the discussion.
