A high-level discussion and presentation was held in the capital last October about ways to increase the pass percentage of SEE. As much as there was a discussion about the measures to improve the results, it seemed that now the results will definitely improve. But what is the problem, what is the main reason, how can the results be improved, and more than that, many issues were debated.

In the program, the syllabus was not good, the exam questions were difficult, the specification table was not matched, the questions did not match the 'Bloom's Taxonomy', the answer book was not tested and checked properly, there was an error in adding marks, the allowance given to the head of the center and the inspector in the exam was low, etc.

Teachers do not have the skills to make questions, there is trading of question papers in school exams, there is a lack of teacher posts, there are no mathematics and science teachers, teacher training is not effective, the policy of becoming a teacher by studying only the Faculty of Education is not correct, the Education Act is not issued, salaries are not paid on time There was a discussion on the matter. A long list of things to be done to improve results was presented, pointing out that parents are not paying attention, students are not reading and spending too much time on mobile phones. However, it was not clear who was the main driver of the improvement and what was the main problem.

Many parties are responsible for the poor results, but the main aspects that need attention for improvement are teaching and learning in the classroom, teacher capacity development, motivation and accountability. The issue of accountability for student outcomes could not be included. There is a problem with our understanding that improving student outcomes is not a matter of action-reaction in physics or addition-subtraction like mathematics.

A lot of things that come to mind without any study research become the reason for the fall in our understanding. We need an improvement in results in the style of magic. However, this requires constant work and takes a long time. Due to the lack of responsibility towards the improvement, only four months are left for the exam, the results improvement work is started. One of the reasons why our education is not improving is the diversity of approaches to understanding the problem. 

Some people say easily - result is nothing, failure does not spoil anything. Talking like this will not improve the results. The examination system can be debated but after spending 10, 12 years in formal education it is mandatory to pass that level. If there is nothing to do with failure, then you have to find an answer to the question why did you go to school for 10 years? Not only the passing percentage of education is certain but after spending 10 years in school one must pass class 10th. Passing should not be viewed only by counting percentages and numbers.

When a student fails, it is 100 percent failure for him and his parents. After spending 10 years in school, if one cannot read sentences written in the medium of education, cannot write correctly, cannot do simple calculations, then the education system is a complete failure. Our other problem is to understand the broad meaning of education, formal education and its weaknesses in the same sense and interpret them accordingly. 

It is not understood that learning that is weak in the lower grades is difficult to improve in the higher grades. There is no discussion anywhere about the problem in our teaching and learning practice of increasing marks but not increasing learning. Regardless of the results of class 3, 5, 8, how meaningful and effective would it be to try to improve the results in class 10? Certainly many parties are responsible for good results but some parties are primarily responsible and some are subsidiary. Classroom teaching and learning and the school environment are mainly responsible for the different results seen between schools with similar characteristics in the same curriculum and examination system. It is the classroom itself that is responsible for the large difference in the results of two schools in the same ward with similar environment, socioeconomic status of parents, physical facilities and availability of teachers.

It is said that learning is weak due to the continuous student assessment, liberal grade promotion, no-fail system, no punishment in the class and automatic passing letter system, which are not reasons but excuses. Continuous student assessment, if implemented diligently, would ensure learning, but its actual implementation in the classroom has not yet taken place. Not only is there political instability, there is a huge gap between the policy regime and its implementation. 

The system of passing and failing was changed in the publication of results and the letter system was started. In the early stages of alphabetization, it was argued that it was necessary to improve the quality of school education. Alphabetization itself is not associated with both improving and impairing learning. It is only a matter of converting the group of marks obtained by the student into letter marks. Some of us are saying that the alphabetization method has spoiled it, but the other side is happy to keep revising it rather than changing it and making it effective.  It is understood that the

alphabet system means that students will not commit suicide by failing exams, there will be no unhealthy competition between good and bad schools, no one will announce themselves as first or second, no one will be considered as a failure and weak. These are good aspects of educational activities but we have not been able to improve on these aspects as well. This year only 2 students committed suicide.

The work of finding who became the first in the country and district is still going on. Even the schools where less than 50 percent of students have passed are saying that our school is the first school in the municipality. A competition is going on to post the details of all the students with GPS on the network. There is no time to dwell on what I or we could not do about poor student learning. Looking at social media, there is a competition to show guilt by saying that I have no weakness, and that everyone else is guilty.  Before the implementation of the

letter system, hundreds of schools had zero results. More than 50 percent of the students were given failed marks, which have started again. The results of more than 200 schools were zero. Improving student learning and ensuring learning or writing letters and numbers on certificates? The way forward for the student is to teach him or make him know or just because he didn't fail? Debate and discussion should be here. Areas for improvement should have been student learning and classroom teaching, but our focus was more on learning validation and testing. We are focusing on issues such as who will participate in the grade increase test, when to implement non-grade, who will conduct the test, which are not the priorities of learning improvement.