Aashish Mishra

E-learning has well and truly become part of the pandemic life here in Nepal. Schools, colleges and universities have all implemented some form of e-learning to conduct classes and complete the courses. And so far, this model has worked, at least in the cities. Virtual platforms have allowed educational institutions to run classes smoothly and teachers and students to maintain some vestige of normalcy and have regular interactions. However, things have not been that simple when it comes to giving and taking exams and academics have struggled to devise a method to administer exams without mandating the physical presence of students while still preserving their integrity. Part of this struggle comes from the way we, as a society, view examinations as a measurement of the performance of the learners, teachers and institutions.
The West’s educational models perceive examinations as a way to evaluate the knowledge gained by the pupils in a particular period (the emphasis being on the knowledge). This evaluation can be and is done through various oral, written or mediated ways. Since the focus is not on the method, the digital and distant examination methods that come with the e-learning framework fit perfectly into the array of their pre-pandemic practices. That is to say, online exams are not something unfamiliar to them. Hence, the struggle is minimal in western societies.
However, in our country and much of the Eastern world, the mainstream view of exams is that they are closed-book, invigilated and conducted in a formal environment. The pupils are required to be under the supervision of a higher authority to make sure they do not engage in any behaviour that is perceived as unethical. The focus in our system is on the method of examinations. We are concerned not about what our students present but how they present it – they must not review or copy from any external sources to answer exam questions – this is the first and foremost priority in our society.
And this is why we keep facing questions of credibility and trust. With our system placing so much importance on the practice of formally regulated assessments, the fact that e-learning would allow learners to use the internet or be present in an informal and potentially unsupervised environment seriously dampens its credibility in the eyes of the community, hence bringing resistance.
Furthermore, a huge component of e-learning is that the exams will be administered and the papers will be submitted through computers which are not always reliable. Special considerations may have to be made for certain pupils in certain conditions depending on their access to technology. This may raise questions about privilege and advantage and call into question the fairness of exams and the subsequent grades obtained. These are the questions being debated in the west where, as mentioned above, virtual exams are not an entirely alien concept. It is almost unimaginable the fierce arguments that this will create when introduced into an educational system like ours which has never favoured informal examinations. All this will ultimately end up diminishing the public’s trust in the system and dissuade educational institutions from adopting it.
Another point to consider is the culture of communication that guides our entire teaching-learning process. Our culture views education as a collective activity and the authority of the teacher is very important. They are the central figures of our classrooms. That is why people feel that e-learning has not been effective in our country because the teacher is not directly present with his/her pupils. And when people feel that their children have not been taught properly, how will they accept the administering of exams?
This is why e-exams have been such a contentious issue for us.