Even as day three of the computer-based Common Admission Test (CAT) continued to add to the anxiety of the student community, academicians have shifted the blame game from Prometric to the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) and NIIT, accusing them of adopting a highly casual attitude.
Prometric bagged the contract from IIMs to conduct computer-based CAT this year in partnership with NIIT. "The IIMs could have done more than just outsourcing the exams to Prometric. By blaming Promertic, IIMs can't acquit themselves. If one-sixth of the 304 test labs fail, it's an absolute joke of an examination. A little control on part of the IIMs could have helped," said a professor from a B-school which accepts CAT scores for admissions.
Experts say CAT which generates up to Rs 50 crore (Rs 500 million) annually for the IIMs could have been better, had IIMs kept a check on the entire process post outsourcing it.
Also, the CAT committee went overboard attaching frills like biometric identity systems, online video and audio screening, etc., which burdened the systems.
MBA test preparing institutes feel that academically too, IIMs have failed. These institutes are of the opinion that while the question paper this time was easier as compared to CAT 2008, many questions were taken from past question papers which are in the knowledge of general public.
Students who would have practiced it, stand to gain while students who did not, stand to lose.
"Prometric should have carried out a month of vigorous checking at all the test centres. If MBA-test preparing institutes can successfully administer such an examination for their students, we fail to understand why a professional company like Prometric failed," said a source from Career Launcher.
Experts said that the agencies should have taken some steps like conducting a "dress rehearsal" before the day of the actual CAT, which would have shown up the flaws in the system straightaway. Ulhas Vairagkar, Director, TIME, said: "It seems that no thorough checking was done regarding the factors that could interfere with the exam. Our investigations showed that the servers were unable to take the load of so many people taking the test at the same time and hence we hired additional servers while conducting mock exams ourselves."
He added that organising a more comprehensive training programme/sensitising the "invigilators" about their etiquette/ behaviour at the exam centre would have ensured a much more comfortable testing environment for the test takers.
Moreover, having multiple check in counters would have made life a little more comfortable for the candidates who have to wait in the cold for hours before they are shown to the lab besides providing more helpline support for the students.
