A recent order passed by
Justice R. Mahadevan of the Madras High Court on the plea moved by a JEE (Main)
2013 candidate is indeed a very interesting and surely a pragmatic lawful
procedure. The order states that negative marking bars a candidate from wild to
mild intuitive guessing and actually affects the creativity of the candidate.
Negative marking has always been regressive and doesn’t provide for any basis
for efficient performance nor proper molding of the intellect. It is nothing
but a draconian act of unreasonable filtering process that gives an agency a
sadistic approach to exams and students and unbridled power to make even a possible
future good brain into a mass of hopeless decadency.
In fact, negative marking as
carried out by National Testing Agency, in this case, is nothing but plain
stupidity. It should be removed at once and so also with all other agencies
that carry out these practices. If at all the agency is not convinced of an
answer then the candidate may get zero mark for that particular part of the
question and no negative marking or deduction should be made from the rest of
the answers.
Why is this so? In the
practical world there are no humans who are plain perfect in sharp contrast to
examinations that are likely to determine and emphasize this particular point
alone. The possibilities of a human to move from one area of work to another
and the potentials that he or she may possess to pave way for a good career is
limitless. Under no circumstances should the mind be binding to certain
stereotyped way of thinking and acting so long as the acts and the way of
thinking is, by and large, quite positive for the society.
Needless to say exams are
important as they bring out the best from a student yet they are not to be used
as a deliberate tool for moderating intuitive guesses and practical reasoning
based on hunches.
Guessing Intuitively and Analytical Reasoning
The future of all our
thoughts begins with guessing intelligently and then taking recourse to end the
argument with analytical reasoning. This may not be that easy as it sounds
although the whole process may be not that daunting if you were to understand
how it is done. When you start a process of thinking especially when there are
no possible solutions in sight and when there are nothing but limitless
possible answers and when any answer may either appear possibly as a good one
or a bad one you need to stretch your imagination a bit more and take a path
that you think may possibly bring out best return for a solution or possible
solution.
Needless, to say when one
trek through imagination doesn’t yield the solution you naturally take another
trek on yet another path and so on till you get somewhere around a possible
solution, if not stumble upon one right away. This is the arduous task and
perhaps the most important one. Now, it should be borne in mind that when you
trek a path you do this by analytical reasoning and resorting to vertical
thinking in the end. Guessing is actually intuitive thinking if not randomly or
clumsily done. This means that you know through your own feeling or intuition
that the probability of something being there or doing an act that has hitherto
not acknowledged or found and is not quite likely in the usual way of
sequencing of information, yet you believe it to be quite obvious as a hunch,
triggers that rare intuitive feeling in you to look at the object or the acts
of the object such that you formulate a basis of your further deduction and
reasoning with the assertive belief that the fact of the matter or its solution
lies there and no where else.
Lateral Thinking and Vertical Thinking
When you look at
possibilities for a problem or an issue then there are perhaps numerous such
ways that a solution to it can be ascertained. This however do not mean that
these number of solutions actually paves way of solving the problems rather it
triggers a necessity to go deeper into the understanding of the problem or the
issue such that the best of the ways could be generated in order to bring about
the best possible solution.
Both lateral thinking and
vertical thinking has to co-exist so that the society marches forward
positively. Too much of vertical thinking may not be right (as in an exam) as it
tends to make student adhere to one or few stereotyped way of thinking only.
Again, too much of lateral thinking process may not be right as there is no
consensus in solution that is very much wanted by the society. Here, lateral
thinking is of no use unless it gives out solutions to problems. Above all if it
is a societal problem then a general consensus without prejudice should be
formed. This means out of all lateral thinking a vertical thinking process
should be adopted that serves the whole society without any prejudice so that
no large part of section is left out or which in turn gives rise to other
pockets of opportunities for yet a whole lot of others to take advantage of
such division.
Sitting on possibilities (lateral
thinking) may not be the right thing if a societal need is to be addressed. It
spews forth unprecedented confusion which may eventually turn out to be a bane
for the whole society. Naturally, this too is the basis of marriage, to serve
as an example, where a lot of possibilities may emerge and biologically there
is no end to the possibilities as to how many children one can have in the
process through sexual proximity with anyone including ones own parents, siblings,
progenies’ and near relations. Nature or God may not stop this. But from the
societal point of view this may be a bane and not something to be vied upon.
Hence the vertical thinking gives reason to emphasize the point through marriage
of two individuals, while the lateral thinking, in this case, is done away with
or proved fatal for the society.
So out of the possibilities
you need to select the best outcome that holds some understanding to the
problem at hand. This is what is called intuitive knowledge. This is quite rare
and therefore a system should be evolved so that even in an examination
students may carry out their intuitive responses to a question as this is
towards the greater interest to the future society. The examiners may give a
fine zero if they want to, but under no circumstances should they resort to
negative marking.
All researches are carried
out by segregating the several possibilities to arrive at a just solution or
probable solution so that the next stage of research could bear even better
fruit. One shouldn’t try to mix the guessing done in the examination as something
not in tune with vertical thinking that a student is forced to do. Instead they
should aim to bring out better possibilities through lateral thinking process
such that a vertical possibility may emerge later on. Again, if there are no
vertical conclusions to the several possibilities that emerge out of such
intuitive guesses, then the value of the written essay or answer doesn’t score
any points too. This is factual outcome of the guesses. Naturally, this isn’t a cake walk. Rather you
need to have good knowledge about the subject and a few bits more.
The same is the case here too
for the students gives off wild to mild guesses based on their gut feeling or
intuition and may be wrong for the most part yet this doesn’t warrant any
negative marking. If the court of law has acted in accordance to the wishes of
few coteries of individuals called examiners then it thwarts the intuitive
talent formation of the society at large and in particular to the students. In
future, intuitive guesses based on certain systematic reasoning holds the key
to the innovative strength of the society and its overall positive
transformation. But that is a subject which educational institutions must
deliberate upon.
