[AI] Exam - writer guidelines

techy fox techy.fox at sify.com
Fri Sep 3 07:04:35 EDT 2010


as per my knowledge tactile  cannot be produce of
3d digital cerkits and object modeling     graphs, because   tactile
daigrams can be possible with 2d  cerkits  and if we  make the single
layer  object modeling  graph  on tactile, that will big like a 60 by
90 inches  chart of a simple project.   .
as per MCA and b.tech  slaybus  in exams mostly questions  are base on
multi level modeling graphs .


On 9/3/10, Srinivasu Chakravarthula <srinivasu at srinivasu.org> wrote:
> I will write my opinions later today. But I just want to share a view
> from Apoorv's email. He said authorities should provide alternate
> questions instead graphs, maps etc. Why should we need that? Instead,
> why can't we ask them to provide the same in accessible formats like
> Tactile? In today's technology era, is it not possible? Of course,
> same must be taught at school level itself.
>
> On 9/2/10, Kulkarni, Apoorv <apoorvkulkarni at kpmg.com> wrote:
>> Dear Kanchan Mam,
>> I second Rajesh sir's recommendations and am of an opinion that their
>> incorporation in the guidelines would be of immense benefit. In addition
>> to them, I would like to recommend the following provisions:
>> 1. there should be no restriction on the writer being from the same
>> stream (arts, commerce or science) or taking the same course (CA, MBA,
>> BSC etc.) as the VI. In fact, if some how the guideline acknowledges the
>> benefits of having a writer from the same stream or course and is
>> expressly supportive of the same, the VI would have an important legal
>> document in their arsenal.
>> 2. An expressed provision allowing a writer to be elder to the candidate
>> provided the writer is not eligible to take the same exam at the given
>> time would be helpful.
>> 3. The guidelines may allow the school and colleges to allow  an over
>> qualified writer for internal exams only. To avoid a possibility of any
>> malpractice the school and college authorities may be advised to appoint
>> proper supervisors.
>> 4. The examination authorities should be required to provide alternative
>> theory questions for questions like maps, graphs etc requiring use  of
>> eyesight. Further, the candidate should have an option to attempt either
>> of the alternatives and should be given full credit for the same.
>> 5. The candidate should have a right to demand the question paper in an
>> accessible format like braille or enlarged font or, soft copy in format
>> of choice like Microsoft word etc. Also the candidate should have a
>> liberty to answer the questions in the way comfortable like self written
>> with the help of a reader, written with the help of a writer, written
>> with the help of compatible computers etc. Where a candidate wishes to
>> use a computer to answer the questions, it must be ensure that the
>> computer is able to host the necessary softwares, is not prone to
>> crashing or hanging and is of good speed. As many of us may have
>> softwares with a single machine license, the candidate should be allowed
>> to use his/her own machine like laptop or desktop. To avoid any
>> malpractice, the authorities should make appropriate arrangements for
>> supervision.
>> 6. It would be great if the guidelines allow at least half of minute of
>> extra time for every 1 minute of the regular exam duration i.e. 50%
>> extra time. At a minimum, this should be implemented for practical
>> subjects like accounts. Very frankly, I think for practical subjects a
>> VI with severe disability should be allowed 2/3rds extra time i.e. 2
>> hours for a 3 hour paper as many of these exams certainly require the
>> same. Additionally, this would help in cases where the writer and the
>> candidate may for whatever reasons are actually meeting for the first
>> time in an exam hall and have never had an earlier opportunity of
>> practicing.
>> 7. All exam authorities should be required to display the complete
>> writer guidelines. Preferably, the home page of the websites if any
>> should have a direct link with a standard nomenclature to the said
>> guidelines.
>> 8. The permission for allowing a writer may be disclosed on website
>> along with the admission card for major exams like standard 10th, 12th,
>> graduation, CAT etc.
>> 9. The authorities should be required to disclose the procedure for
>> requesting a change in writer along with the required documentation and
>> name and all contact details of the concerned person. Further, in cases
>> of major exams like the boards, graduation, CA MBA etc, there should be
>> at least two centrally designated authorities who may be approached in
>> case of any difficulty like harassment at the examination centre. Their
>> full contact details including mobile number and email id should be
>> disclosed on the websites of the examination authorities and should be
>> replicated in the permission letter.
>> 10. The guidelines should clearly mandate that no authority can impose
>> additional restrictions than those envisaged in the said guidelines.
>> To conclude, I am of an opinion that supervision should be used as a
>> tool for preventing and detecting any malpractice. Needless or avoidable
>> restrictions should not be resorted to as an easy solution for the same.
>> Best Regards,
>> Apoorv Kulkarni
>> Mob: 9833423344
>>
>> BSR allows reasonable personal use of the e-mail system. Views and
>> opinions
>> expressed in these communications do not necessarily represent those of
>> BSR.
>>
>>
>> ************************************************************************************************************************************************
>> DISCLAIMER
>> The information in this email is confidential and may be legally
>> privileged.
>> It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone
>> else
>> is unauthorized.
>> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
>> distribution
>> or any action taken or omitted
>> to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
>> Any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the terms
>> and
>> conditions expressed in the governing client engagement letter.
>>
>> Voice your thoughts in the blog to discuss the Rights of persons with
>> disability bill at:
>> http://www.accessindia.org.in/harish/blog.htm
>>
>> To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-request at accessindia.org.in
>> with
>> the subject unsubscribe.
>>
>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes,
>> please
>> visit the list home page at
>>
>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
>>
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
>
> Best regards,
>
> Srinivasu Chakravarthula
> Mobile: +91 990 081 0881
> Website: http://www.srinivasu.org | http://www.learnaccessibility.org
> Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/VasuTweets
>
> Voice your thoughts in the blog to discuss the Rights of persons with
> disability bill at:
> http://www.accessindia.org.in/harish/blog.htm
>
> To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-request at accessindia.org.in with
> the subject unsubscribe.
>
> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please
> visit the list home page at
>   http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
>




More information about the AccessIndia mailing list