Education University Lahore Result
Lahore: The University of Education (UoE) has allegedly made a mockery of examination system as the results of different examinations have been revised on various occasions instead of conducting special examinations.
Documentary evidence available with The News reveal that dozens of students who otherwise were failed were declared pass through the revised results creating strong doubts about the whole process. In some cases the results were found revised more than twice.
According to details, result of BSc Hons (Part-IV) Chemistry Session 2004-08 was declared through notification No 316 on 06.02.2009 according to which only two students had appeared for the exam and both had failed in paper II. However, both students were declared pass after revision of result through a notification No 384 on 05.05.2009.
The notification of revised result reads "In supersession of this office Notification No. UE/CE/2008/316 dated 06.02.2009 regarding BSc Hons Chemistry Part-IV, Session 2004-08, Annual of Fall 2008, held on August 26, 2008, the result of following candidates is hereby declared after removing the objection concerned."
According to sources, the UoE Vice Chancellor had constituted a committee on 05.05.2009 to address grievances of the students of programmes BS (Hons) Chemistry BEd Part-I, Paper-II, BSc (Hons) Chemistry BEd Part-I (Medical/Non Medical) Papers I, II, III, BS Ed Part-II, Paper-I, MSc Chemistry BEd Part-I Papers I, II, III and BSc BEd Part-I.
They added that instead of conducting exams again to address their grievances in true spirit the students were awarded extra marks. "The answer sheets were re-evaluated despite the fact the same was not allowed under any rule," sources added.
A study of the documents also reveals that a number of notifications of revised results were issued much before constitution of the committee by the VC creating further doubts over the whole process of "addressing grievances of students."
According to the documents, the result of BS (Hons) Chemistry Part-I was declared through Notification No 317 on 09.02.2009. However, afterwards three notifications of revised results were issued which were notification No 362 (06.04.2009), 381 (04-05-2009) and 385 (05.05.2009).
Similarly the result of MSc Chemistry Part-II was declared through notification No 327 on 18.02.2009 however three different notification of revised results were issued afterwards which are notification No 336 (26.03.2009), 366 (10.04.2009) and 395 (14.05.2009).
The result of MSc BEd Part-I was declared through notification No 294 on 05.01.2009 while the result was revised twice afterwards through notifications No 347 (13.04.2009) and 388 (08.05.2009).
Likewise the other programmes that witnessed revised results include BSc BEd Part-I first notified on 18.03.2009 (notification number 334). The result of the same programme was revised on 02.05.2009 (376), 02.05.2009 (380), 04.05.2009 (382) and 12.05.2009 (393).
The result of BS Ed 2nd Prof was declared through notification No 302 on 17.01.2009 while the revised results were issued on five different occasions through notifications numbers 322 (12.02.2009), 379 (02.05.2009), 383 (05.05.2009), 389 (09.05.2009) and 391 (12.05.2009).
Similarly the programmes of BS Ed 3rd Prof (result announced on 29.12.2009), MSc Mathematics Part-I (09.02.2009) and MSc Chemistry BEd Part-I (11.03.2009) witnessed revised results.
Officials of the University of Education insisted that everything was done as per rules to provide relief to the students who had grievances over the exams.
When contacted, UoE Vice Chancellor Prof Dr MS Mirza said since the matter was a year old she could not recall the exact details. She, however, added that students had pointed out that the papers were out of course for which a committee was constituted.
She said that after thorough review relevant teachers and paper setters were asked by the committee to suggest solution so that students' genuine grievances could be redressed.
When asked whether the results could be revised without conducting exams, the UoE VC said the committee after thorough deliberations had decided to adjust the students. "This is something which is practiced in other universities as well," she claimed.
Dr Mirza said the results revised did not involve a single individual rather dozens of students were involved adding proper procedure was followed to issue the revised results.
She said the university had also blacklisted the examiners who had prepared out-of-course papers.
UoE Controller of Examinations Prof Dr Shaban Ali Bhatti said the students had not only pointed out the out-of-course question papers but they had expressed concerns over strict marking for which two separate committees, one representing Division of Science and other Division of Arts, were constituted by the VC.