45. Platitudinous praise in place of paranoia

[Kerala University English Teacher Educator’s Forum - KUETEF]

The current BEd Practical Examination Sep-Oct 2011,  conducted by the University of Kerala is likely to go down in history as the one which has caused the least  anxiety for Internal Examiners.

Thanks to the decision taken by the ‘Board  2010-11’,  the  External Examiners have been directed to award marks  based entirely on the observation of classes and  verification of Practical Records submitted by the candidate. This is similar to the system followed in the  University of Calicut. There, the Chairman of the Practical Board would hand over the Internal Marks awarded by  a college to a member of the Practical Board, only after the examiner conducts an objective assessment based on class observation and verification of Practical Records.

One obvious outcome of the decision by the new Board is that it has put an end to the practice in some colleges where External Examiners  used to be invited to offer comments  regarding  performance of the trainees. 

What is your opinion in this regard?

Personally I would say that inviting comments from the External Examiner  is good  if it is taken in the right spirit. It is also important that the External Examiner should have sufficient experience and a mature frame of mind. But during the Practical Examination 2009-10,  an unfortunate incident was reported from a reputed college:

An External Examiner,  after the Practical Examination, was asked to comment on the performance of the trainees. The inexperienced Examiner, flashing the Lesson Plan written by an average trainee,  screamed that not a single trainee taught by the Internal Examiner  knows how to write a Lesson Plan! When the trainees of the college learned about this ‘irrational behaviour’,   it led to a  protest. The trainees demanded the immediate removal of the Examiner from the Board. Only after it was confirmed that the  External Examiner had a  history of  psychosis, did the trainees drop their demand!

As an External Examiner during 2009-10, I too  was placed in a ‘nasty’ situation  when asked to comment on the performance of the trainees of the college after the Practical Examination. I shall narrate the incident briefly:

Last year, I was the member of  Board of External Examiners in an unaided college. When the marks awarded by the college was handed over to me, the Chairman of my Board insisted that she  should be intimated when the trainee who  has been  awarded the highest marks  for English,  engages class for the Practical Examination. So when the trainee commenced teaching,   both  the Chairman and myself, observed the class meticulously to verify that the trainee deserves the marks awarded by the Internal Examiner, which was above eighty percent.  But when the class was over, like my Chairman,  I too felt  that  the trainee in no way deserves a distinction.  But giving the  Internal Examiner  the benefit of doubt,  during the face to face interview, I  thoroughly scrutinized the Records submitted by the trainee. I was shocked to find that the Internal Examiner  had entered in the Diary of  the candidate :  “Communication skill need to be improved”.  This  made sense for my poor rating and so I pointed it out to Chairman. As this was a serious flaw, the Chairman demanded that I bring it to the notice of  the  Internal Examiner.   But,  believe it or not,  the Internal  Examiner was all sound and fury and  attempted to justify the marks awarded! Now, such paranoiac defence is understandable because Internal Examiners in unaided colleges are usually under tremendous pressure from the management to boost the marks of the students to ensure that all  of them pass with high marks. A high pass percentage is essential for such colleges as they are  now experiencing  a huge fall in the number of students who join for the BEd  course. 

So two cheers for the decision of the ‘Board’!! 

Another outcome of the decision  is that, this year in many colleges, after the Practical Examination,  the management and the staff of colleges,   showered platitudinous praise on the External Examiner for visiting the college. The ‘praise’ obviously was tongue in cheek,  for they knew for certain that  however hard the External Examiner tries,  the result of the college would never be affected. Thanks to the new assessment practice which has given the freedom to Internal Examiners to award marks between 85 and 95 percent for all the students of the  college. 

And so,  today we have platitudinous praise in place of paranoia!!

Any comments??

Dr. C. Praveen

Secretary, KUETEF