Regardless of a student’s IQ level in studies, everyone endeavours to give their best during examinations. Every student works extra hard to get the highest grades. At one specific institute, students received marks that exceeded their hard work and expectations. This happened with the B.Sc Nursing course students of Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Health Sciences located in Bengaluru, Karnataka.
As soon as the examination was over in the institution, students were eagerly waiting for the results (Nursing Results 2024). But when the results were finally out, students of Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Health Sciences were shocked. According to a report published in TOI, the B.Sc Nursing paper of 300 marks was held in Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Health Sciences, Bengaluru. Many students scored 310 and 315 marks in it. The students were shocked to see the results of the nursing course as they had scored more than the total marks.
Upon discovering this anomaly, university officials conducted an investigation. It was revealed that the mistake had occurred due to some marks of internal assessment being mistakenly added to the final result. The institute officials rejected the B.Sc Nursing result and then announced the result afresh.
However, as per sources, there was an extra subject in B.Sc Nursing. Its marks were not supposed to be included in the final result. However, the teacher who checked the copies also added those numbers, causing a discrepancy in the results of all the students. Due to this, while some students were shocked to see marks more than the full marks, some were later troubled. When the results were re-released correctly, many students failed due to lower scores.
Meanwhile, a few days ago, the National Testing Agency released the results of session 1 of JEE Main 2024 on the official website at jeemain.nta.ac.in. After the release of the results, some students claimed that there was a huge difference in the estimation of their JEE Main marks and percentile. Many candidates appearing for JEE Main are calling it an “error” by NTA.
Comments
0 comment