<p>The Karnataka State School Examination and Assessment Board (KSEAB) has proposed aligning the SSLC examination pattern with the CBSE system, notably by reducing the minimum pass marks from 35 to 33 and scaling down the first language paper from 125 to 100 marks. </p><p>This follows pressure from stakeholders such as the Associated Management of Primary and Secondary Schools, who argue that state board students are at a disadvantage compared to their peers in CBSE and ICSE systems. </p><p>The intent to create parity among boards is understandable, but it also raises concerns about compromising the quality of education. With declining SSLC results – only 62% passed this year – and the poor performance in North Karnataka districts, some kind of intervention is warranted. </p><p>However, does lowering the benchmark constitute meaningful reform, or is it merely a superficial fix that sidesteps the deeper malaise in the state’s education system?</p>.<p>A closer look at the Karnataka Residential Educational Institutions Society (KREIS) schools reveals a more effective approach. Catering largely to disadvantaged students, these institutions, run by the Social Welfare Department, consistently report pass percentages exceeding 90%. </p><p>Their success stems not from diluted standards, but from comprehensive academic support, structured residential schooling, dedicated and well-trained teachers, focussed coaching, and continuous assessment. In contrast, many government schools grapple with crumbling infrastructure, chronic teacher shortages, and reliance on nearly 50,000 guest teachers. </p><p>Without stable mentorship, students are left ill-prepared. In such conditions, lowering the pass marks risks promoting rote learning and superficial evaluation.</p>.<p>Rather than shifting goal posts, the government must conduct a thorough audit of the entire education system. The focus should extend beyond pass percentages to address the root causes behind poor learning outcomes, both in public and private institutions. </p><p>Is the syllabus too demanding? Are teachers adequately trained? Are fundamental concepts being grasped by the students? Are schools providing the support needed to overcome socio-economic hurdles? </p><p>Promoting students who lack basic understanding may temporarily inflate results but could severely hamper their progress in higher education and future careers. Alignment with national boards is not inherently flawed, but it must be paired with systemic investment in quality teaching, infrastructure, and student support. </p><p>Karnataka does not need a lower bar; it needs to raise educational standards to create a strong foundation. The state must embrace comprehensive reform, not settle for shortcuts that sacrifice long-term growth for short-term gains. </p><p>The government should realise that true progress lies not in easing the path but in ensuring every student is equipped to walk it successfully.</p>
<p>The Karnataka State School Examination and Assessment Board (KSEAB) has proposed aligning the SSLC examination pattern with the CBSE system, notably by reducing the minimum pass marks from 35 to 33 and scaling down the first language paper from 125 to 100 marks. </p><p>This follows pressure from stakeholders such as the Associated Management of Primary and Secondary Schools, who argue that state board students are at a disadvantage compared to their peers in CBSE and ICSE systems. </p><p>The intent to create parity among boards is understandable, but it also raises concerns about compromising the quality of education. With declining SSLC results – only 62% passed this year – and the poor performance in North Karnataka districts, some kind of intervention is warranted. </p><p>However, does lowering the benchmark constitute meaningful reform, or is it merely a superficial fix that sidesteps the deeper malaise in the state’s education system?</p>.<p>A closer look at the Karnataka Residential Educational Institutions Society (KREIS) schools reveals a more effective approach. Catering largely to disadvantaged students, these institutions, run by the Social Welfare Department, consistently report pass percentages exceeding 90%. </p><p>Their success stems not from diluted standards, but from comprehensive academic support, structured residential schooling, dedicated and well-trained teachers, focussed coaching, and continuous assessment. In contrast, many government schools grapple with crumbling infrastructure, chronic teacher shortages, and reliance on nearly 50,000 guest teachers. </p><p>Without stable mentorship, students are left ill-prepared. In such conditions, lowering the pass marks risks promoting rote learning and superficial evaluation.</p>.<p>Rather than shifting goal posts, the government must conduct a thorough audit of the entire education system. The focus should extend beyond pass percentages to address the root causes behind poor learning outcomes, both in public and private institutions. </p><p>Is the syllabus too demanding? Are teachers adequately trained? Are fundamental concepts being grasped by the students? Are schools providing the support needed to overcome socio-economic hurdles? </p><p>Promoting students who lack basic understanding may temporarily inflate results but could severely hamper their progress in higher education and future careers. Alignment with national boards is not inherently flawed, but it must be paired with systemic investment in quality teaching, infrastructure, and student support. </p><p>Karnataka does not need a lower bar; it needs to raise educational standards to create a strong foundation. The state must embrace comprehensive reform, not settle for shortcuts that sacrifice long-term growth for short-term gains. </p><p>The government should realise that true progress lies not in easing the path but in ensuring every student is equipped to walk it successfully.</p>
