Last Updated:
A wide range of concerns relating to marking schemes, calculations and technical performance were reported during the CBSE OSM trial. But, several issues remained unresolved.
The CBSE On-Screen Marking (OSM) controversy erupted after thousands of Class 12 students reported drastic discrepancies. (PTI File)
CBSE OSM: What was projected as a major digital transformation in India’s school examination system is now facing intense scrutiny.
As the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) battles growing criticism over its new On-Screen Marking (OSM) system, questions are being raised over whether early warnings about technical flaws and operational challenges were ignored before the platform was rolled out for Class 12 board examinations.
The controversy has deepened after students across the country reported discrepancies in evaluation, while a public interest petition has now reached the Delhi High Court seeking an inquiry into alleged irregularities, technical shortcomings and failures in grievance handling linked to the system.
On Tuesday evening, the government removed CBSE chairman Rahul Singh and Board secretary Himanshu Gupta from their posts and ordered an inquiry into the OSM controversy.
Warnings before the rollout
The concerns surrounding the OSM system were not new. According to information emerging from a pilot exercise conducted by the Board in January, participants had flagged multiple concerns and reportedly recommended that the system required at least a year of further testing and correction before full implementation.
The OSM platform, operated by Hyderabad-based Coempt EduTeck, replaced the traditional evaluation process in which examiners marked physical answer booklets. Under the new system, evaluators assessed scanned copies of answer sheets through a secure online platform.
Participants in the pilot exercise reportedly pointed out that the system depended heavily on well-equipped evaluation centres, highly trained evaluators and extensive preparation to ensure fair and error-free marking. They also raised concerns that technical glitches could not be resolved quickly and that additional time was required to strengthen the system.
Three-day dry run in Delhi
The pilot exercise was conducted over three days in Delhi in mid-January, less than a month before Class 12 examinations began on February 17.
Representatives from five reputed schools participated in the exercise, including private institutions, Delhi government schools, Kendriya Vidyalayas and Navodaya Vidyalayas.
Principals, evaluators, examiners and subject experts appointed by CBSE were trained on the system before being asked to evaluate mock answer scripts using the digital platform.
According to official sources familiar with the exercise, a wide range of concerns relating to marking schemes, calculations and technical performance were reported during the trial. Sources said several issues identified on the first day remained unresolved even when the exercise concluded on the third day.
What were the problems flagged by evaluators?
Participants reportedly documented several technical and operational problems.
In one case, marks increased by an Additional Head Examiner (AHE) by 1.5 points were reflected by the system as a deduction of 1.5 marks.
There were also reports of significant mismatches between official CBSE marking schemes and the marks displayed on screen.
In some question papers, only marks for one sub-part of a question were reflected despite multiple components carrying marks.
Evaluators reported that the system sometimes forced allocation of 0.5 marks even when the official marking scheme did not permit such partial marking.
The platform was also reported to freeze frequently, particularly when evaluators used the “Undo” function.
Other concerns included missing marks from the evaluation interface, failure to automatically save evaluation progress and the ability to award marks to blank pages or unanswered questions simply by clicking on question numbers displayed on screen.
Student complaints echo earlier concerns
Many of the same issues later surfaced in complaints made by students after CBSE declared Class 12 results on May 13.
Students who obtained copies of their evaluated answer scripts alleged that some answers had been left unchecked, partially checked or inconsistently assessed.
Others claimed that scanned answer sheets were blurry, difficult to read or mismatched, leading to concerns that students may have been evaluated on answers they had not written.
Before their removal, both CBSE chairman Rahul Singh and secretary Himanshu Gupta were approached for comment regarding the feedback submitted during the dry run. No response was received.
CBSE Governing Body had suggested wider pilots
Minutes of a CBSE Governing Body meeting held in June 2025 show that members had recommended implementing on-screen marking only after pilot projects were completed across various regional offices and selected subjects.
That recommendation was not followed.
Instead, the Board conducted the January trial involving only five schools in Delhi before proceeding with implementation.
But, CBSE says issues were rectified
After allegations emerged, CBSE released a document titled “Know About On Screen Marking” explaining the steps taken after the pilot exercise.
The Board said teachers from Kendriya Vidyalayas, Navodaya Vidyalayas, state government schools and private schools participated in the trial and submitted recommendations.
According to CBSE, the three-day exercise provided a blueprint for required modifications. The Board said several changes were introduced before actual evaluation began.
Among them were the addition of a “Save” option, simplification of the mark-deletion process, resolution of static IP issues and repositioning of marks that had previously obscured students’ written responses.
CBSE also said colour coding for Head Examiners, Additional Head Examiners and evaluators was introduced and the marking scheme was linked directly with answer books.
There was second warning also
A second report submitted by participants reportedly identified at least 36 technical, operational and evaluation-related concerns.
Among them were warnings about the risk of “blind or superficial checking” and concerns that the platform did not allow evaluators to interact, discuss or arrive at a common understanding while awarding marks.
The report also highlighted the absence of a mechanism that would allow Additional Head Examiners to return answer scripts for re-evaluation when multiple mistakes were found before final submission.
CERT-In flagged OSM vulnerabilities four times
CERT-In, the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team, repeatedly warned CBSE about serious security vulnerabilities in its OnMark online evaluation portal months before the controversy erupted in public. According to information presented to a Parliamentary Standing Committee, CERT-In issued four separate alerts – one in February 2026 and three more in May 2026 – after verifying security flaws across three domains linked to the system.
The OnMark platform, developed by Hyderabad-based Coempt EduTeck and hosted on Amazon Web Services (AWS) India infrastructure, was used for the On-Screen Marking (OSM) of nearly one crore Class 12 answer sheets this year. During an emergency security assessment, CERT-In reportedly concluded that one of the portals was “not fit for deployment in a production environment”, raising concerns about its readiness for large-scale live operations.
The issue gained wider attention on May 25 when 19-year-old ethical hacker Nisarga Adhikary publicly disclosed alleged SQL injection vulnerabilities and claimed the flaws could provide full create, read, update and delete access to production servers. He also alleged access to examiner-level functions. While CBSE initially denied any breach and described the concerns as misleading, the Board later acknowledged vulnerabilities on May 31 and thanked ethical hackers for flagging weaknesses.
Coempt EduTeck’s troubled track record
As the CBSE’s On-Screen Marking controversy deepens, attention has turned to Hyderabad-based Coempt EduTeck, the company behind the OnMark evaluation platform. Formerly known as Globarena Technologies, the firm has previously faced scrutiny over major examination controversies, including the 2019 Telangana Intermediate results crisis that triggered nationwide outrage.
The company later handled projects for several universities and examination bodies across Telangana, Karnataka and Odisha before securing the CBSE contract over TCS. Despite claiming more than two decades of experience and receiving industry recognition, Coempt EduTeck now faces renewed questions over its technology, security standards and evaluation systems following the latest CBSE row.
As scrutiny of the OSM system grows, these early warnings are now at the centre of questions about whether concerns raised before implementation received adequate attention.
About the Author
Shuddhanta Patra, a seasoned journalist with eight years of experience, serves as Senior Sub‑Editor at CNN News 18. With expertise across national politics, geopolitics, business news, she has influen…Read More
Delhi, India, India
Read More
Source link
[ad_3]
