The Common University Entrance Test (CUET) is now a reality, but the arguments are still going on. Some people who support it say it will level the playing field by breaking through the glass ceiling of regional differences and monopolies on entrance exams. On the other hand, critics see worries, burdens, and new unfair situations bubbling to the surface. Who is right, then? Is CUET the great equaliser, or is it too high for many people to jump?
Without a doubt, the standardised format of CUET will give students from all boards and regions the same chances. No longer will what happens to them depend on what the school curriculum wants or what the state-specific entrance exams make them take. People from faraway places can now try to get into prestigious universities that used to only let rich people from cities in. All they need are NCERT textbooks and a permanent internet connection. There is a lot of hope in this for a more open higher education system and a system based on merit.
However, let us pause for a second. For students who are having trouble with the digital divide and cannot get access to good internet or online resources, what will happen? So if everything is the same, are they just thrown away as “collateral damage”? Also, what about the fact that standard tests put a lot of stress on people? CUET might make things fair, but will it also make people more worried, turn learning into memorization, and stop them from enjoying the freedom of discovery that real education encourages?
Furthermore, the devil is often in the details. The CUET syllabus seems to cover a lot of ground, but it makes me wonder if depth is more important than breadth. Is a one-size-fits-all approach really fair to students who have unique skills or different ways of learning? Does it mean that schools will teach students to think and act in a uniform way instead of encouraging a lot of different ideas and ways of thinking?
The answer might be somewhere in the middle of being cautious and optimistic. There are risks and issues with CUET, so it needs to be handled with care. A simple standard test is not enough to make things fair. There should be strong scholarship programmes, bridge courses for students from low-income families, and a new focus on learning as a whole, where test scores are not as important as creativity and critical thinking.
CUET can help make education more fair, but we need to know what issues it might lead to and how to fix them. Do not get too excited about one test. Instead, let us use it to rethink how we teach instead of just making everything the same for everyone. No matter where a student lives or where they come from, we can be sure that they have the chance to rise through the ranks of opportunity and reach the top of their skills.