When the Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC) exams were cancelled in the face of intense student protests, it seemed like a swift and empathetic solution to an urgent crisis. After all, the protests were marked by significant trauma and loss, and many students were left physically and emotionally scarred. On the surface, offering an automatic pass might appear to be a compassionate acknowledgement of their struggles. Moreover, the decision aligns with the desire to avoid exacerbating the students’ stress and discomfort. However, as someone who experienced the “auto-pass” phenomenon first-hand during the pandemic, I can attest that such decisions are rarely as simple as they seem. The “auto-pass” trap—though it may provide immediate relief—carries hidden costs and long-term consequences.
To begin with, a major drawback of the auto-pass system is its potential to undermine the academic integrity of the examination process. HSC exams are designed to assess students’ knowledge and preparedness at a critical juncture of their academic journey. By cancelling these exams and relying on past results or alternate assessments, we risk diluting the standards that make the HSC a meaningful benchmark. Another critical concern is the issue of fairness. Using SSC results as a stand-in for HSC exams feels like being measured by a ruler that is too short for the task. The HSC exams are meant to challenge students at a higher level, reflecting their progression and readiness for higher education. By bypassing these exams, we risk creating an inequitable situation where some students are unfairly advantaged or disadvantaged based on their past performance.
There must be students who have prepared diligently for their exams, especially those who previously struggled and hoped to improve their grades. The auto-pass system overlooks their hard work and sacrifices. This not only impacts their academic journey, but also their sense of achievement and self-worth. I have many friends from the 2020 HSC batch who were unable to apply for admission tests due to average grades. Some of them had to take a gap year before applying abroad, while my English-medium peers opted for the next session of A Levels.
The “auto-pass” label can also have a lingering impact on students’ futures. The tag sticks for longer than one would think—through university applications, job interviews, and even casual conversations. It might imply to others that these students did not earn their qualifications through traditional means, potentially leading to doubts about their capabilities. The social and psychological impact of this stigma can be significant, affecting their self-esteem and how they are perceived by peers and potential employers.
Moreover, we need to acknowledge the fact that the protests leading up to the cancellation of the exams were far from orderly, and the decision to cancel the exams under the pressure of a mob-like protest raises serious questions about administrative decision-making. It suggests that significant policy changes can be achieved through long marches and mass mobilisation, rather than through thoughtful analysis and consideration. Effective crisis management requires a balance of empathy and fairness, along with decisions that uphold the integrity of systems while addressing immediate needs. This is a classic case of how the immediate demands of a vocal group can sometimes overshadow a more balanced and considered approach. Decisions like these should be made through representative discourse and after consideration of all sides.
Instead of opting for a blanket auto-pass policy, several alternative approaches could have been taken to balance compassion with fairness. For instance, providing special provisions for students who were directly affected by the protests—those who were injured or deeply traumatised—could have been one solution. These students could have been given the option to take their exams later when they were ready to perform at their best. Alternatively, implementing modified assessment methods could have provided flexibility for students facing exceptional circumstances. For example, offering project-based evaluations or oral exams could have allowed students to demonstrate their knowledge in a different format. The authorities could have also prioritised mental health support and counselling for the affected students to help them cope with their trauma and stress.
Quick fixes rarely lead to lasting solutions, especially when it comes to education. The auto-pass decision sets a concerning precedent for how crises are managed in our education system. While student voices are crucial and must be heard, decisions impacting large numbers of individuals should be made based on comprehensive consideration and long-term implications, rather than immediate pressure. As students, we deserve a system that values our hard work and gives us the chance to prove ourselves in a level playing field. Anything less is a disservice to us all.
daily star
