CBSE Online Marking Glitches Were Flagged Before Class 12 Rollout, Reports Say
- Kamaleesh Don
- Jul 17
- 6 min read
The Central Board of Secondary Education reportedly received warnings about technical and evaluation-related problems in its new On-Screen Marking system before using it for the 2026 Class 12 board examinations.
Participants involved in a dry run of the digital evaluation process reportedly recommended that the system be tested and improved for at least another year before a large-scale rollout. They also raised concerns about technical glitches, insufficient evaluator training and the need for properly equipped evaluation centres.
Despite these concerns, CBSE introduced On-Screen Marking for evaluating Class 12 answer scripts. Under the system, teachers assessed digitally scanned copies of students’ answer sheets on computers instead of checking physical booklets.
What Is CBSE’s On-Screen Marking System?
On-Screen Marking, commonly known as OSM, is a digital method of evaluating examination answer scripts.
Under this process:
Students write their examinations on physical answer sheets.
The completed answer scripts are scanned.
Digital copies are uploaded to a secure online platform.
Examiners log in to the platform using computers.
Marks are entered electronically while evaluating each answer.
The system was introduced to modernise the evaluation process, improve tracking and reduce errors linked to manual mark calculation and transfer. However, concerns raised after the 2026 Class 12 results led to questions about how effectively the system was implemented.
Dry Run Conducted Before Class 12 Exams
A two-day trial of the On-Screen Marking system was reportedly conducted in Delhi in January 2026.
The dry run took place shortly before the Class 12 board examinations began on February 17. Teachers and other participants tested the platform and submitted reports describing the problems they experienced.
According to the reported findings, participants believed the system required more testing, corrections and preparation before it could be used for evaluating answer scripts on a large scale.
Major Problems Flagged During the Trial
The feedback submitted after the dry run reportedly identified several concerns that could affect the reliability of digital evaluation.
Technical Glitches
Participants reportedly faced difficulties while using different features of the online platform.
These included problems connected with entering, saving, changing or deleting marks. Technical delays could interrupt the evaluation process and make it difficult for examiners to complete their work smoothly.
Internet connectivity and server capacity were also major concerns because the system depended on stable access throughout the evaluation period.
Marks Could Cover Written Answers
One concern reportedly involved marks or digital annotations appearing over parts of a student’s written response.
If an annotation covers the answer displayed on the screen, it can affect the examiner’s ability to read and evaluate the complete response properly.
Difficulty Correcting Entered Marks
Participants reportedly pointed to problems in changing or deleting marks after an incorrect entry.
An evaluation platform should allow authorised corrections while maintaining a proper record of every change. A complicated or unreliable correction process can increase the possibility of marking errors.
Random Changes in Marks
The trial feedback reportedly referred to instances in which marks appeared to increase or decrease unexpectedly.
Any unexplained change in marks is a serious concern because examination scores can affect university admission, scholarship eligibility and students’ academic records.
Problems With Scanned Answer Scripts
Digital evaluation also depends on the quality and completeness of scanned answer sheets.
Poor-quality scans, unclear diagrams, content written outside the scanning area or missing pages could prevent examiners from seeing the student’s complete response.
Panel Reportedly Recommended Delaying the Rollout
Participants reportedly recommended that the On-Screen Marking system should not be introduced immediately across the Class 12 evaluation process.
The feedback suggested that the system needed at least a year of trials and corrections. Some participants believed an even longer testing period might be necessary to ensure that technical problems were resolved and evaluators were fully prepared.
The recommendation reflected the scale of the task. CBSE evaluates a large number of answer scripts across different subjects, regions and evaluation centres. Even a small technical or procedural weakness could affect many students when the system is used nationwide.
Evaluator Training Was a Major Concern
Digital marking requires examiners to do more than subject-based assessment. They must also know how to navigate the online platform, enlarge scanned pages, enter marks, review responses and report technical problems.
Participants reportedly stressed that better training was essential for fair, transparent and error-free evaluation.
Proper training should help examiners understand:
How to access and navigate the platform
How to check every page of the scanned script
How to evaluate diagrams, graphs and calculations
How to enter and revise marks correctly
How to save completed assessments
How to report missing or unclear pages
What to do when the platform stops working
Limited training or rushed practice sessions may leave evaluators unprepared for problems during actual marking.
Evaluation Centres Needed Better Infrastructure
The success of On-Screen Marking also depends heavily on the facilities available at evaluation centres.
Centres require:
Reliable computers
High-speed internet connections
Backup power supplies
Secure servers
Suitable screen sizes
Technical support teams
Comfortable working conditions
Strong data-security measures
A system may function well during a small trial but face difficulties when thousands of examiners use it at the same time. This makes infrastructure testing and server-load assessment important before a nationwide rollout.
CBSE Introduced the System Despite the Warnings
CBSE proceeded with the digital evaluation system for the 2026 Class 12 examinations despite the reported concerns raised during the trial.
Instead of receiving physical answer booklets, examiners evaluated scanned scripts on computers through a secure platform.
CBSE reportedly later explained that changes were made to address some technical issues. These included improvements to saving marks, deleting incorrect entries, preventing marks from covering written content and increasing server capacity.
However, concerns raised after the declaration of results suggested that questions remained about the system’s implementation and reliability.
Students Reported Marking Discrepancies
After the Class 12 results were declared, some students and parents reportedly raised concerns about unexpectedly low marks and possible evaluation errors.
The complaints included allegations of:
Answers being left unchecked
Diagrams or graphs not being evaluated
Missing step-wise marks
Poor-quality scanned pages
Unusually low scores
Differences found during verification or re-evaluation
Problems accessing post-result services
Not every low score proves that the digital system made an error. However, the nature of the complaints increased demands for transparency and a careful review of the evaluation process.
Why Accurate Evaluation Is Important
Class 12 marks play an important role in a student’s academic future.
They may be considered for:
College and university admissions
Eligibility for professional courses
Scholarship applications
Entrance-examination requirements
Admission counselling
Academic records
A delay in correcting marks can also create problems when university admission or counselling deadlines are approaching.
For this reason, any new marking technology must be thoroughly tested before it is applied to high-stakes examinations.
What CBSE Can Do to Improve On-Screen Marking
A digital evaluation system can offer benefits when it is properly designed and implemented. However, technology should support examiners rather than create additional risks.
Possible improvements include:
Conducting longer pilot programmes
Introducing the system in phases
Providing compulsory hands-on training
Improving the quality of scanned scripts
Testing servers under maximum load
Providing immediate technical assistance
Creating a clear process for reporting errors
Maintaining detailed records of mark changes
Conducting independent quality checks
Reviewing samples of evaluated scripts
Offering a faster grievance-resolution system
Introducing the system gradually would allow CBSE to identify problems before expanding it to more subjects and evaluation centres.
Transparency Is Essential
Students should be able to trust that every answer has been seen and evaluated properly.
CBSE can strengthen confidence by clearly explaining:
How answer scripts are scanned
How scan quality is checked
How examiners are trained
How marks are saved and transferred
How technical failures are recorded
How unchecked answers are detected
How evaluation centres are monitored
What corrective action is available to affected students
Publishing clear information about improvements made after the dry run could also help students, parents and teachers understand how the Board addressed the reported warnings.
Conclusion
The reported findings from CBSE’s January 2026 dry run indicate that participants raised concerns about technical glitches, evaluator training, infrastructure and the reliability of the On-Screen Marking system.
They reportedly recommended giving the system more time for testing and correction before introducing it across the Class 12 evaluation process. However, CBSE proceeded with the digital marking method for the 2026 examinations.
Digital evaluation can improve efficiency and traceability, but only when the platform, scanning process, infrastructure and training are reliable. A transparent review of the reported problems and timely corrections will be essential to protect students and rebuild confidence in the examination system.
Comments