Max plaints about physics corrections from CBSE students in re-evaluation process

Pune: Photocopies of evaluated Std XII CBSE answer sheets that thousands of students have accessed for re-evaluation show that physics is their Achilles heel. The subject has drawn the maximum complaints.

Aggrieved students across social media platforms, particularly X, have alleged missing marks, strict checking, uncredited step-marking and, in some cases, answer-sheet mismatches, raising fresh questions about the board’s evaluation process amid the ongoing On-Screen Marking (OSM) controversy.

Numerous students have claimed that complete answers or correctly attempted numerical problems received either partial credit or no marks at all. Several posts on social media described instances where students expected scores in the 50-70 range but received marks in the 20s or 30s, prompting them to seek re-evaluation. Others said derivations, formula-based questions and stepwise calculations were not awarded proportional marks despite showing the required working.

CBSE counsellor Vishal Mehta said, “The complaints come at a crucial time when students are racing to complete admission formalities for engineering, science and other undergraduate programmes. Many students who sought photocopies of their answer books after receiving unexpectedly low marks as per their reviewed scripts have deepened rather than resolved their concerns after the CBSE re-evaluation issues came up in the last few days.”

School principal Madhavi Shetty said, “One of our students in our school who said his answer sheet uploaded under his roll number was not his. He pointed to differences in handwriting, answer presentation and writing style. When it gained attention online, CBSE acknowledged the error and provided what it described as the correct answer sheet.”

Students have also reported missing scanned pages and supplementary sheets in the subject. “I got 18 in physics but scored above 80 in every other subject. I found complete answers marked zero,” Ansh Shrivastava from Gurugram said.

Mumbai student Diana D’Souza said, “Physics evaluation was extremely strict. Even when formulas and steps are correct, marks have not been awarded.”

“After checking my photocopy, I found entire pages where attempted questions had hardly any marking,” Avni Sharma, a Delhi student said.

Vanshika Krishna from Bengaluru said her numerical answers were correct but she received no step marks. That shocked me the most.”

The data table shared by CBSE shows that in mathematics, the A1 grade now begins at 85 marks, down from 86 in 2025 and 88 in 2024. Physics shows a sharper slide, with the A1 threshold falling to 79 marks from 82 in 2025 and 84 in 2024. Chemistry too reflects a decline, with the A1 cut-off at 87 marks, compared to 89 last year and 92 in 2024. Biology remained stable, with the A1 grade holding at 91 marks, unchanged from 2025.

Mathematics has generated the second-largest volume of complaints. Students reviewing their scripts have alleged that intermediate steps were not credited adequately and that lengthy solutions received lower marks than expected. Chemistry complaints have focused on specific questions where students claim answers matching the marking scheme were awarded zero or reduced marks.

Biology students have reported comparatively fewer grievances, but some have alleged that detailed explanations, labelling and diagrams were not fully credited. Parents and students posting online have argued that evaluation standards appear to vary considerably across examiners, particularly in descriptive subjects.

Vaidehi Joshi, principal of a school from Pune, said, “A recurring theme across subjects is the perception that this year’s checking was unusually strict. Students say the application-oriented nature of the papers was expected, but many believe the evaluation did not sufficiently reward method, reasoning or partially correct responses. Several students have also questioned why they must pay verification and re-evaluation fees to correct what they believe are evaluation errors.”

CBSE has maintained that all genuine concerns will be examined through the prescribed verification and re-evaluation process and has reiterated its commitment to fair evaluation. The board recently opened the re-evaluation window and is processing requests amid continuing scrutiny of the OSM system.

Figures from CBSE show that in mathematics, the A1 grade now begins at 85 marks, down from 86 in 2025 and 88 in 2024. Physics shows a sharper slide, with the A1 threshold falling to 79 marks from 82 in 2025 and 84 in 2024. Chemistry too reflects a decline, with the A1 cut-off at 87 marks, compared to 89 last year and 92 in 2024. Biology remained stable, with the A1 grade holding at 91 marks, unchanged from 2025.

Maths trails in second spot

Students reviewing their mathematics scripts have alleged that intermediate steps were not credited adequately and that lengthy solutions received lower marks than expected. Chemistry complaints have focused on specific questions where students claim answers matching the marking scheme were awarded zero or reduced marks.

Biology students have reported comparatively fewer grievances, but some have alleged that detailed explanations, labelling and diagrams were not fully credited. Parents and students posting online have argued that evaluation standards appear to vary considerably across examiners, particularly in descriptive subjects.

Unusually Strict

A recurring theme across subjects is the perception that this year’s checking was unusually strict. Students say the application-oriented nature of the papers was expected, but many believe the evaluation did not sufficiently reward method, reasoning or partially correct responses.

Several students have also questioned why they must pay verification and re-evaluation fees to correct what they believe are evaluation errors, said.

Board Allays Fears

CBSE has maintained that all genuine concerns will be examined through the prescribed verification and re-evaluation process and has reiterated its commitment to fair evaluation. The board recently opened the re-evaluation window and is processing requests amid continuing scrutiny of the OSM system.