Universities, particularly the public universities in Bangladesh, still follow the age-old practice of allowing students the choice to select and answer a specified number of questions from the available total (say 4 out of 6 questions). Elsewhere, at home and abroad, there are variations in the practice. In the USA and Canadian universities, this choice is uncommon. In UK, Australia, and Japan there is a mixed system. In international GCSE, all questions have to be answered. In some cases, there is a variation, there is an option to answer either this or that (e.g., this essay or that essay). In professional and civil service examinations in our country, all questions have to be answered. Even the choice system in our public universities is internally inconsistent as the departments allow choice in regular examinations but in the university entrance examinations there is no choice system and all questions have to be answered. So far known, this choice system exists in practice in all the faculties in all the public universities in Bangladesh. And, it is also the officially accepted policy of the examination system. One exception is the Institute of Education and Research (IER) at Dhaka University with some variation though. Here also, choice is given in in-course examination which has 30 per cent of the total marks. And in another 40 per cent of the final marks, in same categories, there are options to answer either this or that. In the private universities however, the practice depends upon individual teachers; there is no official policy on this.
Curving: Grade does not depend on choice. In the public universities, this choice system is
compulsory and very much structured. We have a bureaucratic tradition. Decisions are relatively centralized, there is lesser freedom for individual teachers. There is resistance to changes and rules and regulations are mandatory. With the privatization of universities around the world, there came more freedom to individual teachers (not to be confused with academic freedom). There came a new system of evaluation of students’ grade by ‘curving’ that is curving the grades upward and downward according to average performance of students. In this system, students’ grade does not depend on whether choice is given or not rather it depends on the average performance of the whole lot, and then individual grades are adjusted upward and downward compared to this average performance. If the average performance is low because majority students could not answer some questions, then individual grades are curved up whereas if the average standard is very high because the questions were too easy, the individual grades could be curved down, keeping that average as a reference point. This relative grading system has not yet been practiced in our universities. The idea that grade can be better even if students cannot answer some questions has not yet been explored.
Problems in selective system. Different students answer different bundle of questions. As a result, evaluating students is like evaluating apple with orange. While grading scripts, the teachers cannot keep track of the various standards by which the different sets of questions are evaluated. Second, students may not go through the entire syllabus rather, they may go for selective chapters and ignore some other chapters. A broader syllabus is consistent with better knowledge. One content of the syllabus is very much related to another content. One complements and supplements another. Here comes better internal consistency. Teachers do not start a chapter before completing its related and prerequisite chapter.
Choice for assignment. There is, however, assignment part where choice is given to students who work on a topic they choose from some alternatives. This part is more of evaluative and research-oriented where effort is made to create new knowledge. Whereas examination part usually is more skill-based where standards, rules, information, formulas, models etc. are asked. This part falls within the main stream syllabus, and students are expected to know these structured issues before they pass out. If choice is allowed here, students may skip some of these basic contents of the subject.
Prospective employers. In some areas, universities design syllabus in collaboration and consultation with various prospective employers. For example, business faculties, particularly Accounting Departments consult with professional bodies like the Institute of Chartered Accountants, and Institute of Certified Public Accountants. These professional bodies want their students know the various contents of a subject, and they in particular require that the question covers the entire syllabus. Answering selective questions is inconsistent with this rational justification.
Theory of choice: freedom, justice and responsibility. Human being mostly flourish and develop with choice rather than rigidity. In a competitive market there is choice whereas in a monopoly market there is little or no choice. People get good value of their money when they can choose from among alternatives. But when one has sat for a competitive examination he or she has to deal with some responsibilities like time, syllabus, and some benchmarks or standards. Expansion of knowledge, complying with syllabus, and level-playing field are the responsibilities of the examination system. Again, a student getting a grade with all questions deserves more credit (justice) than getting the same grade with selective questions. Amartaya Sen (1997) argues that more freedom of choice can bemuse and befuddle, and make one’s life more wretched. If choice is given, children can make mistakes in choosing the right questions to answer.
Students do not attempt strange and unseen questions. When choice is given, a student picks up common areas and delivers the materials which he has already studied and prepared for. He does not have to think further, that is, it is not a challenging task for him. But when he has to answer all and finds both seen and unseen questions, then his job is more challenging and innovative. He has to handle new situations and this objective is a part of an education and examination system, particularly in universities. A teacher may want to see whether students can handle one or two strange questions or new situations. If choice is given teachers do not find students who will attempt these new situations.
Tendency for ‘suggestions’ In our country, because there is choice system, students and parents request their teachers for ‘suggestions’ meaning some selective chapters more likely to appear in the examination. This is a common problem in the education sector from primary to university levels. If choice system is withdrawn this behaviour should go and students have to prepare for the whole syllabus.
Difficult questions in choice system. When choice is given, teachers have a tendency to design questions difficult; they make these more technical, bigger, and sometimes devoid of reality. They think that since choice is given students must work hard to find answers in total. Whereas if choice is not given and students require to answer all questions from the entire syllabus, teachers keep it in mind that the purpose is not to examine the students for their technical skill but to examine whether the students have the reasonable knowledge about all the topics (which are deeply related to each other) of the subject. Here the purpose is to see if the students can think anyway rather than answering in the perfect way. Here the teachers design questions as simple as possible, keeping the basic theme, its reality and real world application.
Grade can be better in whole syllabus system. In choice system since fewer number of questions are to be answered, each question carries higher marks, and if students cannot answer a question, they lose higher marks. Whereas, in the whole-syllabus system, there are large number of questions and each question carries smaller marks and if the students cannot answer a question they lose less. In the choice system, the teacher usually looks for a definite answer and he can be rigid. Whereas in the all-system, the teacher looks for a ‘closer answer’. This argument however is more appropriate in higher education rather at school and college levels because here answers are more or less of definite nature.