CBSE Faces Scrutiny Over Digital Marking and Evaluation Errors
Blurred Answer Sheets, Marking Discrepancies, Portal Glitches Trigger Nationwide Concern Among Students and Parents
The Central Board of Secondary Education is facing intense scrutiny after thousands of students and parents raised concerns regarding its newly introduced On-Screen Marking (OSM) system for Class 12 board examinations. What was projected as a major digital reform aimed at improving transparency and reducing human error has instead sparked allegations of evaluation mistakes, technical failures, answer-sheet mismatches, and security vulnerabilities.
The controversy intensified after students who accessed scanned copies of their evaluated answer sheets reported blurred pages, unchecked answers, missing sections, and in some cases, receiving another student’s answer book. Social media platforms were flooded with complaints from students claiming their board marks did not reflect their academic performance or competitive examination results. Several students who reportedly qualified in engineering entrance examinations alleged unexpectedly poor board scores, leading to demands for independent verification.
CBSE’s digital evaluation system was implemented on a massive scale in 2026, with nearly 98 lakh answer books being scanned and assessed electronically. The Board argued that the system would eliminate totalling mistakes, standardize marking, and enhance transparency. However, government sources later acknowledged that approximately 20 answer-sheet mix-up cases were detected, while more than 13,000 answer books had to be evaluated manually because scanned copies were unreadable or technically unsuitable for digital assessment.
Further criticism emerged after repeated crashes of the post-result verification portal. Students attempting to obtain answer-sheet copies or apply for re-evaluation reported payment failures, duplicate deductions, delayed access, and system outages. In response to mounting pressure, CBSE reduced verification and re-evaluation fees, extended deadlines, and sought technical assistance from IIT experts to stabilize the system and improve transparency.
Adding to the controversy, a teenage researcher publicly claimed to have discovered vulnerabilities in the OSM portal that could potentially allow unauthorized manipulation of marks. Although CBSE clarified that the alleged breach involved a testing website and not the actual evaluation platform, the incident amplified concerns regarding cybersecurity and data integrity within the examination ecosystem.
Political attention has also focused on the issue. Questions were raised regarding the award of the digital evaluation contract to Hyderabad-based Coempt Eduteck, with allegations about transparency in the tender process. CBSE has strongly rejected these claims, describing them as misleading and maintaining that all procurement procedures were properly followed.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan has acknowledged that discrepancies occurred during the rollout of the OSM system and assured students that legitimate grievances would be addressed. Following review meetings with CBSE officials and technical experts, the Ministry has promised corrective measures, accountability, and improvements to the digital evaluation framework.
Education experts note that while digital evaluation remains the future of large-scale examinations, the CBSE controversy highlights the risks of implementing technological reforms without extensive pilot testing, infrastructure readiness, and robust grievance redressal mechanisms. With university admissions and scholarship opportunities often hinging on marginal score differences, the accuracy and credibility of board examination results remain a matter of national importance.
As re-evaluation requests continue to surge and scrutiny grows, the episode has become one of the most significant challenges faced by CBSE’s examination system in recent years, raising broader questions about balancing technological modernization with reliability, transparency, and student trust.
