Less bias, more risk? CBSE on-screen marking system leaves Class 12 students, teachers cautious but optimistic

CBSE Onmark: The Central Board of Secondary Education’s (CBSE) decision to expand on-screen marking for Class 12 board examinations from 2026 has triggered one of the most layered debates amongst parents, students and even teachers. Through official documents detailing digital evaluation mock drills and live webcast modalities, the board has explained its on-screen marking system, a decisive move toward scanning answer books and evaluating them on secure digital platforms – the cbse.onmark.co.in or CBSE Onmark – rather than physically handling scripts at evaluation centres.

Live Updates: CBSE Board 2026 Exam

Board officials have explained that under the system, physical answer booklets will be scanned at designated hubs, uploaded securely and then distributed digitally to examiners. The CBSE on-screen marking portal enables question-wise marking, automatic totalling and structured moderation. Earlier this month, the CBSE board asked schools to update their teachers’ data on the CBSE Oasis portal for the purpose of evaluation.

In interactions with the media, including detailed explanations by examination controller Sanyam Bhardwaj, CBSE Onmark has been positioned as a step toward transparency, faster result processing and elimination of clerical errors. It also aligns with broader examination reforms, including two board exam opportunities for Class 10 and competency-based assessment models.

Yet the lived reactions from classrooms and homes suggest that the reform is not being received as a purely technical upgrade.

CBSE OSM and Teachers: Adjustment beyond interface

For teachers, the proposal represents both relief and disruption. The promise of eliminating arithmetic mistakes and reducing the burden of physically transporting answer scripts is welcomed. Many acknowledge that digital question-wise marking could bring sharper focus and consistency.

He added that risk is not theoretical. “In manual correction, the entire booklet is physically in front of you. You can flip back, cross-reference answers and ensure nothing is missed. In an on-screen system, you are dependent on how the script has been segmented and displayed. If a student continues an answer on another page and the interface does not clearly flag it, there is room for oversight. These are not minor issues when one mark can alter admissions.”

The teacher also raised accountability concerns. “If there is a technical glitch — server downtime, auto-save failure or mark submission error — who bears responsibility? The examiner? The board? The technology vendor? Before implementation, there has to be a clearly defined escalation and verification protocol.”

He concluded with a cautionary note. “Digital evaluation can work, but only after extensive pilot testing under real board conditions. Doing it too soon, without stress-testing every technical layer, makes the reform feel risky. When lakhs of students’ futures are involved, even a small system error becomes a very big problem.”

A Delhi-based senior teacher who attended a recent CBSE webinar said the idea appears well planned in theory but difficult to grasp in practice. The webinar, she explained, was heavy on slides and procedural descriptions but light on practical demonstration. Logging protocols, digital annotation tools and moderation workflows were explained rapidly, leaving many unsure about the actual user experience.

“The discomfort is not resistance to technology,” said a senior examiner with over seven years of board evaluation experience. “It is uncertainty about readiness. We are subject experts, not software operators. When we correct on paper, we flip pages instinctively, jot margin notes and get a continuous sense of the student’s flow of thought. In on-screen marking, everything feels fragmented. You see answers in segments. That may reduce bias, but it demands a completely different rhythm of concentration.”

On-screen marking ‘inevitable’

A younger faculty member, however, offered a more balanced view while acknowledging practical concerns. “Evaluating hundreds of scripts on a monitor is cognitively different,” she said. “There is screen fatigue. Your eyes strain and you cannot engage with the script in the same physical way. At the same time, digital marking is probably an inevitable modernisation. The key question is accountability. If there is a technical glitch or a page does not load properly, who takes responsibility? That clarity must be there before full implementation.”

CBSE OSM portal (Image: cbse.onmark.co.in)

“As school leaders, we can clearly see the administrative advantages,” said a principal from Pune district in Maharashtra. “Digital evaluation creates a traceable audit trail. Every script can be tracked, timestamps are recorded and moderation can be layered systematically. It reduces the logistical burden of storing and transporting bundles of answer books. But automation cannot replace judgement. If anything, double verification systems must become stricter, not looser. There must be random audits and a transparent grievance redressal mechanism. Technology can reduce clerical mistakes, but evaluation will always remain a human exercise, he said.

OSM CBSE 2026: ‘Sounds more transparent’

Among students, the reaction oscillates between optimism and apprehension. Some believe digital marking could reduce partiality. Anonymised scripts and structured evaluation screens may limit subconscious bias linked to handwriting or presentation.

“At least digitally, they won’t know whose paper they are correcting,” said a Class 12 humanities student from South Delhi district. “Handwriting, school reputation, even presentation style sometimes make us feel judged. If scripts are anonymised properly, maybe that removes subconscious bias. That part feels reassuring.”

But the optimism weakens when the focus shifts to execution, students say.

“This is boards. One or two marks change cut-offs, colleges, everything,” said a science-stream student from Bengaluru. “If a page does not scan clearly or if part of my answer gets cut during uploading, how would I even know? With paper, the booklet physically exists. With digital, we are depending on scanning being perfect.”

In Chennai, Tamil Nadu, a 10th grade student described the concern as an “invisible risk.” “If something goes wrong technically, it feels more unfair because we cannot see it. If a teacher miscalculates, we can apply for re-evaluation. But if a system misreads something, it feels like arguing with a machine amongst other concerns."

Another student from Chennai said, “What if the examiner is still getting used to the platform?” one asked. “If they are adjusting to new tools or the system is slow, will they spend enough time reading detailed answers carefully?”

A student from Delhi framed the anxiety more emotionally. “We have grown up imagining teachers sitting with stacks of answer sheets, physically reading them. Suddenly it is dashboards and screens. It feels like the system is changing in the exact year that matters most to us.” She added, “It is not that we don’t trust teachers. It is that we don’t fully understand the technology. And when your entire future depends on a number, even a small technical doubt feels very big.”

CBSE OSM Portal: ‘Packaged confusion’

Neha Kulkarni, a parent of two and a former teacher herself, did not mince words. “It felt like confusion packaged as innovation,” she said of the webinar. “We were shown how to log in, where to click and how to move between tabs. But this is not an online shopping portal. This is board evaluation. Where was the detailed explanation about safeguards? What happens if a page is mis-scanned or if marks are incorrectly recorded? For something this serious, the presentation felt very basic.”

For some families, the unease stems from cumulative reform. Shabnam Ali, a parent of two, described what she called “policy overload.” “There are competency-based papers now, discussions about multiple board attempts, new curriculum structures and constant updates. Children are already adjusting to so much. There is too much happening at once. Stability is important too.”

OSM as ‘necessary modernisation’

Yet not all parents are dismissive. Vichalan from Hyderabad offered a more measured perspective. “We cannot resist technology forever. Systems must evolve,” he said. “But this feels like it is compressing the teacher’s role rather than strengthening it. Why not design a hybrid model? Let teachers correct as they normally would and let the system cross-check totals, flag missing pages and ensure uniformity. That would feel like support, not replacement. The transition could have been phased better.”

On the contrary, Priya Nandakumar, a parent of one, said the shift to on-screen marking is “a necessary modernization.” she added, “For years we have heard about totalling errors and delays. If technology can reduce calculation mistakes and create a traceable audit trail, that is a positive step,” she said. “Every mark entered digitally can be tracked. That adds accountability.”

“From an evaluator’s perspective, digital marking can actually improve consistency,” said a senior examiner from Delhi. “When answers are displayed question-wise with the marking scheme integrated into the system, it reduces the chances of oversight. Automatic totalling removes a major area of human error. It makes the evaluation process more structured and standardised.”

A teacher from Chennai also viewed the move positively. “Travelling to evaluation centres and handling large bundles of answer scripts has always been physically demanding. With secure digital access, the process can become more efficient and transparent. If the platform is stable and training is thorough, this reform could strengthen fairness rather than weaken it.”

The first CBSE Class 12 exam date 2026 was February 17 and it was for mathematics.