NSEJS 2018 paper full of errors and out of syllabus questions

Maths 4 to 5 questions are wrong/confusing/multiple answers/no answer,Chemistry and Physics at least 1 question wrong from each, bio quite tough. More detailed analysis later on .

NSEJS credibility at question mark

IAPT के द्वारा आयोजित परीक्षा nsejs राजस्थान मे  विवादो से घिर गयी हैं। शुरू मे जारी किए नोटिफ़िकेशन मे इस परीक्षा को KVs मे करवाने को कहा गया था। किन्तु अंत समय पे परीक्षा केंद्र परिवर्तित कर दिये गए। नए परीक्षा केंद्र विभिन कोचिंग संस्थान के द्वारा आयोजित स्कूल्स को बना गया। ये ही नहीं इन परीक्षा केन्द्रो को उन कोचिंग संस्थान मे पढ़ने वाले बच्चो को केंद्र बनाया गया। परीक्षा केन्द्रो पे इन कोचिंग संस्थानो के officials ही परीक्षा को संचालित कर रहे थे।

कुछ मुख्य बिन्दु इस प्रकार हैं।

1 एलेन के students को कोटा मे  DDPS स्कूल सेंटर दिया गया। DDPS school ALLEN कोचिंग का है।

2 Resonance के students को कोटा मे DDGS स्कूल सेंटर दिया गया। DDGS school Resonance कोचिंग का है। यही हालत उदयपुर मे रही जहा resonance की कोचिंग जिस स्कूल मे चलती है उसी को सेंटर दिया गया।

3 इन परीक्षा केन्द्रो पे बच्चो के मोबाइल नंबर भी लिए गए। जो की IAPT की दिशा निर्देशों मे नहीं आता हैं।

IAPT क्यों नहीं इतने कम बच्चो के लिए तदस्थ परीक्षा केंद्र आयोजित कर पाया।

IAPT इस तरह परीक्षा को आयोजित करेगी तो इस परीक्षा की credibility पे ये बहुत बड़ा question mark होगा 

bend it like IAPT

Bending rules of IAPT and using them to meet vested interests have become norm these days as it suits the larger interests of few people. IAPT this year clearly laid out the criterion of eligibility of NSEJS according to which students of classes 9 and 10 can only appear in junior science Olympiad. By having set this rule IAPT meant that students of Junior classes ( like 7 and 8 ) should be not exposed to this grind at very early stage which was a very appropriate logic. However IAPT and HBCSE never understood the stakes of few people in these exams because in Senior Olympiad no such things were mentioned and it is generally assumed for class 11 and 12 students in some special cases even class 9 and 10 students can appear for it. But came to know stories of class 7 and 8 students clearing the Senior Science Olympiads. It raises very important questions

1. When IAPT and HBCSE have the objections with the fact that class 7 and 8 students should not appear in NSEJS and how come the same students be allowed to appear in Sr Science Olympiads.

2.   Every state have different cutoff and few people are taking the advantage of this arbitrage and making students appear from the places where cutoff is low irrespective of the fact that where the student is studying. This is vicious trend and soon clearing Olympiad will become more manipulation game rather intelligence. 

Cheating by Center (code RJ213) in NSE

Some thing fishy with RJ213 center of NSE
1. All three toppers from the same center
2. center code details not there in the list released by IAPT
3. IAPT is not ready to divulge details about this center

from sources it has come to known that there answer key was provide to them for filling the OMRs

An appeal to IAPT and HBCSE officials for removing the irregularities

To,

The Director,

128/2 J.P. Naik Road,

I.I.E. Campus, Kothrud,

Near Solaris Club,

Pune (Maharashtra) - 411038

Dear Sir,

Sub: Request for correcting glaring inequities in the system of NSE Stage –I Examinations- mis-use /manipulation of the system by some people and institutions

Please refer to the above.

I, as father/ ward of my son [Roll No            ], seek to bring to your notice a highly inequitable and unjust rule / basis of Stage –I selections in NSEJS , NSEB,NSEC,NSEA which will convince any impartial  person that the said Rule is not made in furtherance of the object for which the Science Olympiad competition is supposed to be conducted, but for some either ulterior motive or on the basis of a consideration which has lost its relevance in the changed circumstances.

2.         Your Organization is apparently conducting Olympiad related tests/ competition to bring the talented students of science to focus and promote the education of science in the Country for the betterment of the society and nation at large. In spite of this highly laudable object, you are still caught in the retrograde argument of reservation for various States / Regions of the country. The result is that while students with inferior talent get the opportunity to participate  in subsequent rounds  of Olympiad , the  better ones from other States are overlooked. For example: the cut off marks for students of Rajasthan is 150 and for students of Uttar Pradesh – it is 109.

3.         My son –Master                           , student of   standard at Kota Rajasthan appeared at NSEJS- Stage -I Exam from Kota and in spite of having obtained [   ] marks was not eligible for participating in latter rounds of Olympiad whereas students who got much lesser marks ( from other States) will get the opportunity to do so. Such inequity is extremely disappointing and discouraging for the students and parents alike. It was all the more shocking when it was learnt that other class mates of my son who are enrolled in schools of Kota but appeared from Uttar Pradesh to take the advantage of the lesser cut off of UP and higher  number of seats and got selected with lower marks.

4.        It has come to light that APPEJAY School Noida (Center code UP011) unlawfully enrolled students from other States (especially from Rajasthan) who appeared from their school. In fact, a detailed scrutiny will bring to light  the name of a coaching institute of Kota who masterminded this exercise.

5.          In view of the obvious manipulation, I request you to make me available the following details, at the earliest:

 (i) Please provide the copy of the registration forms of all students enrolled at APPEJAY School Noida (Center code UP011):

(ii) Please provide the details regarding the various inspections/ Checks carried out by your organization to ascertain the correctness of form filled by students.  

That I am ready to pay cost for the documents mentioned above.

6.         I am sure that as a responsible organization, you will provide the above details to me and help restoring the credibility of the system. An investigation by your organization, on above lines, will also bring to light the facts very easily, if done honestly.

7.         Further, if your organization is interested in avoiding such manipulations in future, the best course is eliminate Statewise quota, otherwise this manipulation  will spread far and wide.

7.         I understand that it is easy for a non-governmental organization to shrug off all responsibility and disown any accountability. But it is for inferior organizations and not for an organizations of TEACHERS like yours who are supposedly there to foster higher ethical and moral values in the society.  

8.         In view of above injustice, I am committed to escalate this matter  to the highest levels of  all forums of government, judiciary and social media, if not redressed at your level,  and ensure that such inequities are not perpetrated , credibility of the system is not eroded and unscrupulous people do not go home with undeserving rewards.

           

                                                                                                  Yours Faithfully

                                                                                                                       

Copy to :

1.        Prof. M. L. Oglapurkar ,  Chief Coordinator (IAPT Examinations),

IAPT Office, Sheela Vihar Colony,
7, Heramb Coop HSG Society,
Near Kimaya Hotel, Karve Road,
Kothrud, Pune 411 038
Email: iaptpune@gmail.com

2.        Prof. Anwesh Mazumdar

National Coordinator, Science Olympiads

Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education (TIFR),

V. N. Purav Marg,

Mankhurd, Mumbai 400 088

3.       Hon’ble Minister for Human Resource

Government of India

New Delhi

some thing fishy with RJ213 center

1. All three toppers from the same center
2. center code details not there in the list released by IAPT
3. IAPT is not ready to divulge details about this center

IAPT need to look in to this

The most unfortunate thing happening with talent in India in exams conducted by IAPT and HBCSE. IAPT has fixed the quota for maximum number of selections from every state.

Selection for Stage II Olympiads: Numbers from each State UT
Sr. No	States	Quota
1	A & N Islands	1
2	Andhra Pradesh	19
3	Arunachal Pradesh	2
4	Assam	6
5	Bihar	18
6	Chandigarh	1
7	Chattisgarh	6
8	D & N Haveli	1
9	Daman & Diu	1
10	Delhi	6
11	Goa	2
12	Gujarat	13
13	Haryana	6
14	Himachal Pradesh	2
15	Jammu & Kashmir	3
16	Jharkhand	6
17	Karnataka	15
18	Kerala	10
19	Lakshadweep	1
20	Madhya Pradesh	19
21	Maharastra	28
22	Manipur	2
23	Meghalaya	2
24	Mizoram	2
25	Nagaland	2
26	Orissa	9
27	Pondichery	1
28	Punjab	6
29	Rajasthan	17
30	Sikkim	2
31	Tamil Nadu	17
32	Tripura	2
33	Uttar Pradesh	55
34	Uttarakhand	3
35	West Bengal	19

States like UP has got lion’s share where states like Rajasthan has very limited seats (17) despite having very stiff competition in Rajasthan.  So for a student appeared for NSEJS from Rajasthan needs min 151 marks where as a student from UP required just 109 Marks to clear the NSEJS.

This disparity is now understood by schools and coaching and taking the advantage of this. One coaching of Kota to increase selections in NSEJS and other Olympiads asking its students to appear for exams from UP to increase chances of selections. They are resorting to illegal ways for doing this. As per rules of IAPT and HBCSE a student should appear from the same place or school where he is registered. But neither IAPT nor HBCSE checking this flaw. Students registered in kota schools are appearing from UP to take advantage of this asymmetry.

To quote the specific example APPEJAY School Noida (center Code UP011) allowing students of Rajasthan to appear from its center. This seems to be dangerous connivance of Coaching and School and IAPT and HBCSE should note of it ASAP. 

NSEJS result by IAPT gross irregularities by Andhra

In the list declared by IAPT yesterday of NSEJS from Andhra itself 384 students who are equal or more than 175 which is also MI, where rest of the India pit together is not even 60 students above 175. This is clearly indication that unfair means are being used in NSEJS exam in Andhra Pradesh

NSE registrations are open

Registrations for IJSO examination has been started few days ago & last date for form submission is 15th September'15. 

We hope you all are aware that from this year class 8 students are not eligible to appear in IJSO. Also,  from this year they have started on-line registrations too,

Students may get enrolled themselves through any school registered as test center for IJSO examination.

 

Plz find related link & attachments for IJSO :

 

http://iapt.org.in/index.php/exams/nse/nsec-b-a-js.html

Centers of Andhra Pradesh where cheating is rampant

https://www.scribd.com/doc/250972060/Iapt-Marks

These are some of the centers of andhra Pradesh where cheating is rampant and loss has to be borne by the intelligent students from other parts of the country.

Andhra leads the cheating table in NSEJS

Out of 1186 students who cleared the MAS score of 95, 489 students belong to Andhra. In AP there are more than 20 students who are above rest of the India topper which is just 170. This data proves that there is rampant cheating in Andhra for this Olympiad , this is high time IAPT and HBCSE should do some thing about this malice. all top 20 students belong to andhra and top 10 students average is 190.

such mass level cheating which is done in connivance with the school proves very demoralizing for students of other parts of the country because this pushes the MAS very high .

iapt accept corrections in 4 answers of NSEJS

http://www.iapt.org.in/images/papers_solutions/corrections_nsejs_2014

NSE schedule and changed selection criteria by IAPT

NSE schedule on 23 Nov 2014


This year IAPT will also use NTSE state quota  for deciding the state quota of NSE 



please go through the below information for details

 The aim of the first stage examination is to have a wide reach, to progressively increase this reach and to attain nationwide representation for Stage II without overly compromising on merit. Hence the selection for the Stage II examinations i.e. Indian National Olympiad Examinations (INOs) is based on the following scheme.

(a)Eligibility Clause:
To be eligible for the Stage II INO exam leading to the International Olympiad, a candidate must secure a score equal to or greater than a Minimum Admissible Score (MAS). The MAS for a given subject will be 50% of the average of the top ten scores in that subject rounded off to the nearest lower integer.

(b)Merit Index Clause:
There will be a high score called the Merit Index (MI) associated with each subject in Olympiads. The MI in a subject is defined as 80% of the average of the top ten scores in that subject rounded off to the nearest lower integer. All students with a score greater than merit index MI for the subject will automatically
qualify for INO Stage II examination in that subject. For example, if the average of top ten scores in a certain subject is 92, then 80% of this is 73.6. Then the MI in that subject will be 73. All candidates with a score equal to or above 73 in that subject will automatically qualify for INO stage II.

(c)Proportional Representation Clause:
Students from all States and UTs need to be encouraged to appear for the first stage examination and a nationwide representation for INO Stage II is desirable. The quota for each State/UT used in National Talent Search Examination
(NTSE) 2013-14, a nationwide competitive examination will be used as the baseline for calculating the number of students qualifying for Stage II INO in every subject from centres in that State or UT. Suppose the NTSE quota is S for a State, and the total for all States and UTs is T, then the total number of students to be selected to INO Stage II from that State would be S/T times 300, rounded off to the nearest higher integer. This number will include those selected on the basis of the Merit Index. In the event of tie at the last position in
the list, all students with same marks at this position will qualify to appear for the INO Stage II examination. The selected students must nevertheless satisfy the eligibility clause. The number to be selected 8 from all the centres in each State or UT will be displayed on the IAPT and HBCSE websites.
(www.iapt.org.in; http://olympiads.hbcse.tifr.res.in)

(d)Minimum Representation Clause:

Notwithstanding the proportional representation clause the number of students selected for INO from each State and UT must be at least one, provided that
the eligibility clause is satisfied.
The above criteria are illustrated with the following examples:
i.Let the quota on the basis of the Proportional Representation Clause (c) for a State S1 be 20. Suppose the number of students satisfying the Merit Index Clause (b) in a subject is 10. These 10 students will qualify for the second stage INO exam in the given subject and an additional 10 students from the State S1 in the given subject will be selected merit-wise, provided they satisfy the Eligibility Clause (a).
ii.
Let the quota on the basis of the Proportional Representation
Clause (c) for a State S1 be 20. Suppose the number of students
satisfying the Merit Index Clause (b) in a subject is 30. In this
case, all 30 students will qualify for the second stage INO exam in the given subject, and there will be no further selection from the State S1

for more details
http://olympiads.hbcse.tifr.res.in/uploads/ino-broucher-2014-15

IAPT accepts the mistake

It seems IAPT has partially accepted the mistake done by it. Yesterday on 15 Jan it has issued a additional list of NSEC selected students. In this new list 71 more students are selected from India and from Rajasthan 18 are selected. IAPT has earlier checked the answer sheets of all these students with the wrong answer key. IAPT has done the reevaluation after receiving lot of complains , however still it failed to deliver the justice. Many students from Kota who was getting more than the cutoff are still not there in the list. HBCSE should ensure that IAPT does the reevaluation of all students who have sent the complain not only to selected students. 

In NSEC OMRs checked with wrong answer key for many centres by IAPT

IAPT has used different paper codes this time. There are lots of centers which are completely missing this time from the IAPT result, especially in NSEC.  In fact cities likes Kota and Jaipur which contribute more than 30% of Rajasthan quota are completely missing from the list. There seems to be a problem in checking the OMR sheet with wrong answer key, for example OMR of paper code A is checked by Answer key of paper code B. Three years back SIERT Udaipur has done the same mistake when they checked the OMRs with wrong answer key and every student who was hoping to get qualified did not figure out in the list. However that time it was easy to figure out because not a single student was selected so when we pointed out the mistakes SIERT accepted and within 7 days, the new results were announced. This time the problem with IAPT is more tricky, wrong OMR checking happened with selected centres that too in few cities. So it is difficult for IAPT to comprehend the problem. What IAPT can do it do take random checking of complains received by it.

It will be prudent thinking to accept the mistakes rather than denying the information. Students working hard has right to know the marks. IAPT and HBCSE will do justice with the talent of the country.