The normalisation is done to scale up the low performing students group and to scale down high performing group. It is a compulsory process to ensure fair assessment since the difficulty level of question papers on all days varied.
Some good students have alleged that the normalisation process to bring all students under common difficulty level was faulty, Common Admission Test (CAT) convener claimed that the method used was full proof. Students, particularly the ones who attempted the CAT on slots that had difficult question papers, claimed that their scores were not normalised.
The normalisation is done to scale up the low performing students group and to scale down high performing group. It is a compulsory process to ensure fair assessment since the difficulty level of question papers on all days varied.
According to a student who appeared on the November 14 afternoon slot, the normalisation process is not transparent at all. “If the scores were normalised, then I would not have got random scores,” said the student, who scored 99 both in quantitative aptitude and data interpretation, but a 44 in verbal ability.
According to Sai Kumar, the Mumbai director of TIME, a leading coaching institute, a little more transparency in terms of assessment is expected from the IIMs. “Though we have not analysed the results completely, we want the IIMs to make the assessment process public,” said Sai Kumar.
However, Himanshu Rai, CAT 2010 convener, said, “All these perceptions are unfounded. When we bring out the results we do a question paper-wise analysis. Students who have not performed well are blaming it on the process.” He added that the under the non-disclosure agreement that students sign, they are not able to reproduce the questions anywhere.
“They just go on random sites and announce that the paper was simple or tough. Such claims are very subjective in nature. The question papers which students claim were simple, could be easy only for them and need not be for all students. Students questioning the normalisation process are actually questioning the fundamentals of mathematics,” added Rai. Students also alleged that some questions were wrong and were corrected psychometrically could have loopholes. However, Rai said the psychometric system is perfect.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}