Digital evaluation concerns spark major credibility crisis for school board.
Controversy over the Central Board of Secondary Education digital checking system intensified this week as a flood of promotional videos from school principals praised the system while student grievances remained unaddressed. Public concern continues to mount regarding the On-Screen Marking (OSM) system used for Class 12 answer-sheet evaluations. This public relations push by various school administrators stands in stark contrast to the ground reality of missing pages, portal slowdowns, and server failures that plagued the entire process prior to the result declaration on May 13.
Technology partner Coempt Eduteck of Hyderabad managed the digital transition, which critics argue was implemented too quickly without adequate field testing. Although public institutions frequently try to preserve institutional trust during operational crises, the current friction highlights a communication gap between administrators and families. Parents waiting for re-evaluation results have expressed irritation at the sudden online endorsements, describing the videos as a strategy to deflect attention from genuine technical mistakes.
Internal feedback indicates that the academic community did not anticipate the complete rollout of the digital review protocol for the 2026 examination cycle. Initial training trials occurred during pandemic-era internal assessments for lower classes, but the board paused those initiatives after encountering operational errors. The abrupt decision to deploy the platform globally this year caught multiple regional centers off guard, leaving minimal time to train evaluators on the new software interface.
A senior administrator from a private institution in Bhubaneswar confirmed that local schools missed the central training sessions altogether. This lack of institutional preparation left teachers to navigate portal delays and document rendering errors under intense time constraints. The educational ecosystem in Odisha has historically adapted to technological upgrades in public testing, yet the compressed timeline for this specific software transition limited internal trial windows.
Students note that evaluation accuracy directly affects university admissions, making procedural transparency more critical than public relation campaigns. The current dispute shows that administrative tools fail when the target audience lacks faith in their accuracy. While software glitches can be resolved in subsequent software patches, rebuilding institutional confidence among families remains a much more complicated task for the board.
