IOQM 2024-25 Controversy: A Tale of Two Examination

Boards

The Examination and its Scrutiny

The Indian Olympiad Qualifier in Mathematics (IOQM) 2024-25, held on September 8th,

2024, is a prestigious examination for mathematics enthusiasts across India. The first

stage, conducted by the Mathematics Teachers' Association of India (MTA(I)), selects

students for the Regional Mathematical Olympiad (RMO). The OMR-based exam,

featuring challenging non-standard problems, is highly respected within the Indian

educational sector.

Following the typical timeframe for national examinations, results were declared after

4-5 weeks. However, this year's announcement sparked controversy due to the

selection of a suspiciously continuous block of 100-120 roll numbers progressing to the

next stage. This uncannily mirrored a recent incident with the National Testing Agency

(NTA) and the NEET UG 2024 exam.

The Controversy Unfolds

Allegations and Initial Dismissal (September 8th - October 9th)

On September 8th, the IOQM 2024-25 was conducted across India. Complaints

regarding alleged paper leaks and cheating surfaced from a small number of centres,

but were initially dismissed due to their limited nature.

Results, Certificate Issues, and Cutoffs (October 9th - 14th)

On October 9th, IOQM scores were released on the official website. The following days

saw confusion around certificate requirements, with two types being announced

(October 12th). Finally, on October 14th, the RMO cut-offs were declared.

The Issue Emerges (October 15th)

The controversy truly began on October 15th. Teachers and students noticed a

concerning pattern: a continuous block of 100-120 students from specific centres in

states like Andhra Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand, and Chhattisgarh were selected

for the RMO. The issue of Jharkhand received the most attention. This anomaly raised

serious questions about the examination's integrity.

MTA(I)'s Flawed Response (October 16th)

On October 16th, MTA(I) attempted to address the issue by releasing a revised list of

RMO awardees. They claimed the previous list accidentally omitted eligible students

and contained minor typos. However, the institution's attempt to rectify the situation by

randomising roll numbers backfired. Spreadsheet analysis revealed that the roll

numbers remained unchanged, highlighting the transparency concerns.

Official Acknowledgement and Investigations (October 18th)

On October 18th, both the HBCSE (RMO organiser) and MTA(I) issued statements

acknowledging the allegations of malpractice during the IOQM. The HBCSE

emphasised their commitment to the Olympiad process and promised necessary action

after a thorough investigation. Meanwhile, MTA(I) announced they were reviewing all

available information and data pertaining to the flagged roll number patterns. They

promised a detailed update and final report by October 20th. Consequently, the RMO

cut-offs and selection list were designated provisional.

Action Taken and Revised Results (October 20th)

As promised, on October 20th, MTA(I) provided an update regarding the alleged

malpractices. They confirmed receiving numerous complaints, including concerns about

the unusual roll number patterns. A comprehensive analysis of the score data was

conducted to identify centres potentially involved in malpractice. Multiple criteria were

established to detect such activity, as any single criterion might not be conclusive.

Following data analysis and cross-referencing, MTA(I) placed six centres across

different regions in a "probationary" category, subject to potential future blacklisting.

Students who appeared for the IOQM at these "probationary" centres were removed

from the overall list. Revised cut-offs were implemented to admit additional students and

meet regional and category quotas. This resulted in lower cut-offs for some regions. A

final list of RMO-eligible students based on the revised cut-offs was promised shortly.

Students from the "probationary" centres who scored above the respective regional

cut-offs were placed in a separate "probationary" list. These students were provisionally

allowed to write the RMO but faced potential disqualification and further penalties if

subsequent investigations revealed misconduct. The revised cut-offs were announced

the following day.

A New List and Comparisons (October 21st)

On October 21st, MTA(I) released the revised list of students along with the

probationary list, demonstrating their attempt to address the alleged malpractices. The

contrasting approaches of the MTA(I) and the NTA (who maintained their stance until a

Supreme Court intervention).