There is something called normal curve in statistics. If you consider an examinee population of over 9 to 12000 sufficiently large, then there is no sampling error due to the size. In that case, the May 2010 exam results % and pattern must bear a normal resemblence with the past few years' exams, if the underlying conditions did not change substantially.
Statistically, it is hard to defend 3 to 6% results of the last final exam compared to over 22 % a few years ago. Either the papers set this once were tough (which was hardly the case), or the correction standards became stringent (which again should not and cannot be the case with so many examiners spread over geographically over various zones) or, more likely, the results were artificially moderated. There is something called "moderation process" before the exam results are declared. You have to be totally logically-challenged or an already qualified insenstive CA or a die-hard believer in the system that does keeps shifting and varying the length of the finishing line or the standards of passing in a whimsical manner.
The drafting skills or presentation skills or standard of English are not dropping substantially over years - they probably have remained below par over many years, GMCS not withstanding. In CA exams, especially in Costing , MICS, the correct usage of english may not matter much. Let us not even suggest that 2 to 3 years back, the students were more intelligent than this lot. Over a long period, the syllabus may change, but if someone passed CA exam 5 years back under the old syllabus with 10 to 20% results, then to be fair and consistent, this year, next year, 10 years down the line, we must present the students with the same level of difficulty or obstacles (neither more, nor less) while setting the paper, evaluating the papers and declaring the results, because the population characteristics do not change substanitally except over a very long time. We are taught in accounts and auditing how important the consistency is there for credibility.
As a student, my pet lines were : "In life's exam when I learnt all the answers, they changed the question paper". Now, my pet peeve is : " In life's exam, when I learnt all the answers and tackled all the question papers with no options, they still failed me by changing and drastically reducing the passing percentage."
Hard not to dispair for students who did not clear or who failed due to a huge gap between their fair expectations and actual marks.Hard for them to go back to studies and believe that they will not be the victim of arbiterary thinking next time.There is a change in guard at the intitute.
My appeal to the new Council Members : Tread softly and carefully for you tread on some very tender young hearts. If you dont stem the rot, noone will hold you responsible. Except your OWN children. When they take the exam. Few years down the line. For their sake..
CAclubindia
