Institute of Management Sciences, Hayatabad has changed the results of its MBA entry test, raising questions about the fairness of the exercise.
The test was conducted by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Educational Testing and Evaluation Agency (ETEA) on March 16 and its results were displayed on the institute’s notice board the next day.
However, a revised list of results was displayed on Monday to the surprise of candidates.
“I was stunned when one of my friends informed me about my failure in the entry test after seeing new results,” said a candidate, who wished not to be named.
He said the first list showed him getting 59 out of 100 marks but in the second, his marks were reduced to 30. The candidate said marks of several other candidates had also been revised.
“Marks of two candidates have been increased from 40 and 41 to 53 and 54 respectively, while those of one decreased from 52 to 41.
“My parents were very happy when they heard about my success in the test but now after my failure due to a change in results, I simply can’t face them,” he said.
He said when he and other candidates asked the IMS and ETEA administrations about the change in results, they held each other responsible for it. When contacted, Dilshad Khan, in charge of the admission section of IMS, said the problem was caused by a candidate, who submitted two entry test forms and was therefore issued two roll numbers.
He also said during the computerised checking of papers, some candidates were found absent. ETEA manager (technical) Dr Asim Ali Shah told Dawn that the IMS administration had issued two roll numbers i.e. 184 and 185 to a candidate for reasons best known to it.
“The candidate appeared against one roll number and therefore, the other seat remained empty. When the results were prepared, the IMS administration asked ETEA to delete the column where name of that candidate and his status as absent was written because in another column, he was shown present. And when the column of absent was deleted, changes occurred in the results,” he said.
However, the IMS and ETEA administrations failed to convince this reporter about how marks obtained by candidates changed with the deletion of a column in the list. A candidate asked if it was necessary to delete that column which caused trouble, that could have been done with the help of a marker on the list of results.Dawn.
