CBSE's OSM System Sparks Row Over Low Marks in 2026 Results

When Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) released its Class 12 results for 2026, the expected celebration was quickly overshadowed by a growing storm of discontent. Students across India are questioning the board’s new On Screen Marking (OSM) system, citing significantly lower scores than anticipated. The controversy has ignited a fierce debate on social media platforms, with students alleging technical glitches, blurred scans, and incomplete evaluations.

The backlash intensified rapidly after results were declared, turning what should have been a milestone moment into a crisis of confidence. While the board maintains that the digital process is transparent and error-free, the ground reality described by students paints a different picture. Here’s why this shift to digital marking matters more than just grades—it strikes at the heart of trust in India’s largest examination body.

The Core of the Controversy

The issue isn't just about low marks; it's about how those marks were awarded. Under the new OSM system, answer sheets are scanned and evaluated by examiners on computer screens rather than physically handling paper copies. Theoretically, this should reduce human error and increase transparency. In practice, however, many students report that their answers were either missed entirely or marked incorrectly due to poor scan quality.

Reports from ABP Live highlight a surge in complaints where students claim their answer books were not checked thoroughly. Some allege that entire questions received no ticks, crosses, or marks, leading to suspicions that the evaluation was rushed or automated without proper scrutiny. The frustration is palpable—students who studied diligently feel penalized by a system they didn’t choose and don’t understand fully.

"It feels like my hard work vanished because of a blurry pixel," said one student from Jaypur, often referred to as the Pink City. This sentiment is echoed across social media, where hashtags criticizing OSM trended within hours of the result declaration. The disconnect between the board’s promise of precision and the students’ experience of ambiguity is widening.

Board’s Defense: Transparency and Technology

In response to the mounting criticism, CBSE issued an official statement defending the integrity of the OSM process. The board emphasized that the system was designed to enhance fairness and reduce bias inherent in manual checking. According to officials, every answer is evaluated step-by-step against a pre-defined marking scheme, ensuring consistency across all candidates.

The board argues that digital monitoring allows for better oversight. If any deviation or anomaly is detected during the marking process, it can be flagged and corrected immediately. "The process is completely impartial and reliable," a CBSE spokesperson stated. "No discrimination is practiced against any student." To address grievances, the board has introduced online facilities for rechecking and re-evaluation, allowing dissatisfied students to request copies of their marked answer sheets digitally.

This approach aims to empower students with visibility into their grading. By providing access to scanned copies, CBSE hopes to demonstrate that every mark was awarded according to protocol. However, critics argue that seeing a blurred digital copy doesn’t necessarily clarify whether the examiner saw the same thing—or if the technology failed to capture the answer clearly in the first place.

Student Grievances and Regional Impact

The dissatisfaction is not uniform but particularly acute in certain regions. In Jaypur, reports indicate that numerous students faced difficulties accessing clear images of their answer scripts. Many complained that text appeared illegible or that sections of the page were cut off during scanning. These technical issues have led to accusations that the infrastructure wasn’t ready for such a massive rollout.

A specific case highlighted in news reports involves a Physics student whose answer sheet showed significant discrepancies in marking. The student claimed that complex derivations, which typically carry substantial weight, were overlooked or marked wrong despite being correct. Such instances fuel the narrative that the system lacks the nuance required for subjective subjects.

Teachers and parents are also voicing concerns. Post-Graduate Teachers (PGTs), who serve as examiners, reported receiving login credentials and training materials only shortly before the evaluation began. A tutorial video circulating among educators revealed that while the interface offers options for 'Main Assessment' and 'Step-wise Marking,' the preparation time was insufficient. Critics suggest that adequate training should have started months earlier to ensure examiners were comfortable with the digital tools.

What Happens Next?

As the re-evaluation window opens, the pressure is on CBSE to handle these requests efficiently. The board has promised a transparent online process for corrections, but the volume of applications could test the system’s capacity. For now, students must navigate the portal to request their scanned copies, review them for errors like total score miscalculations or unchecked questions, and then apply for re-checking if necessary.

The broader implication extends beyond this year’s results. If OSM is to remain the standard, CBSE will need to invest heavily in improving scan quality, examiner training, and technical support. The current controversy serves as a stress test for digital transformation in education. Failure to address these systemic flaws could erode public trust further, forcing a potential rollback to hybrid or manual methods.