University Students Protest Grading Discrepancies Amidst Failing Scores

Kohima, India Jul 25, 2026 ALN: Over a thousand final-year undergraduate students of the University (NU) are reportedly at risk of losing an academic year due to suspected grading discrepancies in their 6th semester Four-Year Undergraduate Programme (FYUGP). This issue arises from the provisional examination results declared on July 13, which have sparked widespread concern and unrest among the student body.

The significance of the FYUGP cannot be overstated, as it represents a critical phase in the academic journey of students pursuing their undergraduate degrees. The program, which was introduced to streamline education and enhance learning outcomes, has faced multiple challenges since its inception. The recent grading discrepancies are the latest in a series of issues that have plagued the program, leading to calls for a comprehensive review of the evaluation system.

As previously alleged by the Dimapur Naga Students’ Union (DNSU), the History paper recorded an unusually high number of failures, with many students reporting significantly low scores. This situation is further complicated by a university policy that restricts students who score low marks from applying for re-evaluation of their grades. The policy, which only allows students who secure a minimum of 20 percent of the total external marks—equivalent to 15 out of 75 marks—to apply for re-evaluation, has raised eyebrows among students and educators alike, as it effectively sidelines those who may have been unjustly evaluated.

On July 25, a group of five students held a press briefing at the DNSU office, revealing what they believe to be scoring discrepancies and urging the university to intervene before the July 31 re-evaluation deadline. All five students requested anonymity during the briefing, highlighting the fear of potential repercussions from the university administration for voicing their concerns. This secrecy underscores the tense atmosphere surrounding the issue, where students feel compelled to protect their identities while advocating for their rights.

According to the current NU evaluation guidelines, students who score below the 20 percent threshold are denied the opportunity for re-evaluation, leaving many students feeling hopeless and frustrated. One student expressed shock at receiving only single-digit marks in the external examination despite achieving 21 out of 25 marks in internal assessments. This discrepancy raises questions about the reliability and fairness of the grading process. Another paper, the Political History of the Nagas, allegedly recorded a high number of low scores, further fueling suspicions that systemic issues may be at play. Described as a relatively “easy” paper, one student remarked that such a pattern could not be dismissed as mere coincidence. “Most of the students from the History department got a backlog in this one paper. This is not a mere coincidence,” he stated, emphasizing the need for a thorough investigation into the grading practices employed by the university.

The DNSU had previously submitted a representation on July 22 to the NU Controller of Examinations. In this representation, the union pointed out that under FYUGP guidelines, backlogs from earlier semesters do not prevent promotion. However, a backlog in the 6th semester halts progression to the seventh and eighth semesters, and a single backlog in the final semester can delay graduation by an entire academic year. This policy creates a precarious situation for students, as they are left in limbo, uncertain of their academic futures due to factors beyond their control.

Financial strain has also emerged as a significant grievance among the affected students. While university regulations stipulate a fee per paper for re-evaluation, students have reported that individual colleges are charging varying rates, ranging from Rs 450 to Rs 900. This inconsistency not only adds to the financial burden on students but also raises concerns about the transparency and fairness of the re-evaluation process. Furthermore, students claim that the university does not refund fees to those who pass after re-evaluation, which many view as an unjust practice that further exacerbates their financial woes.

Students recalled a similar incident during the second semester in the Political Science paper, where many initially failed but subsequently passed with A or A+ grades after re-evaluation. This pattern has raised further questions about the accuracy of the initial evaluations and the integrity of the grading process. The fact that students who were once deemed to have failed were later awarded high grades casts doubt on the reliability of the university's assessment methods and has fueled demands for reform.

Under current rules, the only alternative for students who score below 20 percent is to file a Right to Information (RTI) application, a process that many find cumbersome and intimidating. This limited recourse has left students feeling powerless and frustrated, as they seek to challenge what they perceive as unfair treatment. The DNSU and the All College Students’ Union have both called for a review of the results declared on July 13, urging the university to adhere to the prescribed Rs 450 fee per paper for re-evaluation.

With the July 31 deadline approaching, colleges have reported an inability to take action without directives from the NU. This lack of clarity and direction from the university administration has only heightened tensions among the student body. The affected students and the DNSU have warned of potential democratic agitation if the university fails to address these grievances, signaling that the situation could escalate if not handled appropriately. The threat of protests underscores the growing frustration among students, who feel that their voices are not being heard.

In a separate media briefing, DNSU Education Secretary Kevin Gonmei stated that since the introduction of the FYUGP in 2023, undergraduate examinations have faced recurring issues, including grading errors and excessive backlogs. He criticized the university administration for not addressing these concerns, asserting that the current evaluation policy is unfair to students who receive single-digit scores due to circumstances beyond their control. “If the concerned authorities and leaders cannot take responsibility, they shouldn't be in charge,” Gonmei stated, emphasizing the need for accountability within the university administration.

The implications of this situation extend beyond the immediate concerns of the affected students. The credibility of the university's evaluation system is at stake, and the potential for widespread unrest could have lasting effects on the institution's reputation. As the university grapples with these challenges, it must consider the voices of its students and take meaningful steps to address their grievances to restore trust and confidence in its academic processes.

In conclusion, the ongoing protests and demands for a review of the grading discrepancies reflect a broader struggle for fairness and accountability within the educational system. As students rally together to advocate for their rights, the university faces a pivotal moment in its history, one that could shape the future of academic integrity and student welfare within its halls. The outcome of this situation will not only impact the current cohort of students but also set a precedent for future generations, making it imperative for the university to act swiftly and decisively in response to the concerns raised by its student body.