On the Role of Scorers in Curbing Examination Malpractices

Abstract

Examination malpractices as a phenomenon cross the boundaries set by time and geography and are often an issue in Nepal as well generating a considerable amount of discourse amongst students, teachers, parents and all the concerned. In theory, subjective testing does allow scorers the room for the play of their personal judgement. Nonetheless, a thread of argument prevails in the Nepalese academic circle, the argument attempting to curtail the judgement of scorers stating that scorers are obliged to award scores for what answer sheets contain and that they lack any right to judge whether or not the examinee performances might be the result of one or the other kind of malpractices that are also the product of the dereliction of invigilators and other test administration staff responsible for overseeing the performance of examinees. This paper follows this argument and endeavors to supply evidence for reinforcing the counter-argument that stands equally strong – the argument advocating the scorer right to judge and treat any malpractices evident in examinee performances. This right is conceived as one of the effective measures to curb examinee malpractices. For this, it supplies the justification for the exercise of scorer right, if formally and explicitly conferred on scorers, to treat the instances of examinee malpractices that are evident in the answer sheets of examinees.