‘Affects 200’: CUET PG candidates question TISS’ normalisation formula; ‘ensures fairness,’ says institute

"A candidate ranked around 100 in sociology (HUQP22) could secure admission, while someone with a comparable rank in general paper (COQP-11) could miss out. That is not what normalisation is supposed to achieve," alleged Palak Srivastava, who appeared for the Common University Entrance Test-Postgraduate (CUET-PG) held in March this year and believes the Tata Institute of Social Sciences' (TISS Mumbai) newly-introduced score-normalisation formula has reduced her chances of securing admission.

Several postgraduate applicants to the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) have questioned the institute's decision to recalculate CUET PG 2026 scores using a new normalisation formula before preparing merit lists for programmes that accept multiple question-paper codes. They allege the formula altered admission outcomes and was disclosed only after the merit lists were published. According to the applicants, TISS uploaded the methodology on its website on July 3 following repeated representations from candidates.

Responses to frequently-asked questions (FAQ) on CUET PG score normalisation, TISS Mumbai explained, “TISS postgraduate programmes may permit candidates to qualify through more than one eligible CUET PG subject papers. Since different subject papers can have different candidate pools, score distributions, and ranges of marks, raw scores across different papers may not be directly comparable. Normalisation is therefore applied to place candidates from different eligible papers on a common scale for the purpose of preparing programme-wise merit lists.”

While applicants agree that some form of normalisation is required to account for differences across CUET-PG papers, they contend that the methodology adopted by TISS changed candidates' rankings rather than ensuring a fair comparison.

Also read VBSA Bill: Exemption to IITs ‘not desirable’; scrap deemed-university tag, plan separate funding, says panel

Applicants said they have submitted representations to the institute, visited the TISS Mumbai campus seeking meetings with officials, filed RTI applications and lodged complaints through the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS portal). Some said they may pursue legal action if they do not receive a satisfactory explanation.

TISS Mumbai’s normalisation formula

As per its FAQ answers, this is how TISS has normalised scores.

“For each eligible CUET (PG) subject paper, TISS considers the all-India score distribution and identifies the candidate’s relative position within that paper. For the preparation of merit-list, candidates above the 25th percentile are considered. Scores are then converted to a common 0 to 1 scale using the following formula:

Normalised Score = (Candidate’s Score − Lowest Score in the qualifying pool) ÷ (Highest Score in the qualifying pool − Lowest Score in the qualifying pool).

The resulting value is then multiplied by 100 to obtain the final normalised score on a 0–100 scale. This enables comparable merit preparation across different eligible papers while preserving the order of merit within each paper,” states the TISS website.

Also read ‘At Regulatory Crossroads’: Psychology courses caught in UGC, NCAHP, RCI tangle, causing confusion

‘Explain methodology,’ say candidates

"We are not asking for anything unreasonable. We only want TISS to explain the methodology it used and engage with us. There has been no meaningful response so far," said Harshit Purohit, one of the applicants leading the representations to TISS.

Purohit, a BTech graduate in electronics and communication from Ramdeobaba College of Engineering and Management (RCOEM), Nagpur, appeared for the CUET PG general paper (paper code COQP-11), used for admissions to programmes such as social work, mass communication, library sciences and public policy; and general MBA, (paper code COQP-12), used for business and management programmes.

He said students initially accepted TISS's decision to introduce normalisation, expecting it to be based on percentile scores or another method. "Instead, after the merit lists were released, we found instances where candidates ranked much lower in one paper-code secured admission while candidates ranked among the top performers in another paper-code failed to get seats in the same programme and category," he alleged.

“Our concern is that the 25th percentile-based formula is generally used for linear scaling or compressing values, not for preparing admission merit lists of entrance examinations," he said.

Also read Maharashtra hostels for SC, ST students run without wardens, overcrowded; some ‘bogus’: CAG report

Purohit said he visited the TISS Mumbai campus on Monday and met officials, including the assistant registrar, but was asked to continue communication through email. "We were told to send another email and call again for an appointment. The dean of academic affairs was unavailable, and officials in the vice-chancellor's office also asked us to pursue the matter through email," he said.

According to Purohit, nearly 200 applicants are affected and many are considering legal action.

"Candidates from many paper codes have raised concerns. This normalisation formula appears to have been devised by TISS itself. NTA does not prescribe it, and we are not aware of any other university using the same methodology," he alleged.

In its FAQ, TISS says participating universities are responsible for deciding their own admission procedures and eligibility criteria. The exam-conducting body National Testing Agency (NTA) has also clarified that it does not carry out normalisation across different CUET-PG subject papers. Unlike CUET-UG, where NTA normalised scores, no such normalisation was done by the agency for CUET-PG.

Also read NCAHP push for uniform allied healthcare education slowed by missing state councils, implementation gaps

Purohit further claimed that TISS admitted students using CUET-PG scores last year without applying a separate normalisation formula.

‘Normalisation necessary, but not this formula’

Srivastava, who appeared for COQP-11, said she supports normalisation but alleged that the formula adopted by TISS created disparities between candidates from different paper codes instead of making it fair.

A BSc Statistics graduate from Lady Shri Ram College for Women, University of Delhi, she said she worked at an NGO after preparing for the civil services examination before deciding to pursue a master’s degree at TISS. She applied for MA in regulatory policy and governance, MA development studies and MA in urban policy and governance, but has not been shortlisted in any of the merit lists.

“I quit my job after the CUET PG result was declared because I believed my score was good enough to secure admission,” Srivastava said, adding that she now plans to continue working.

Each CUET PG paper carries a total of 300 marks with four marks awarded for every correct answer, one mark deducted for every incorrect response and unattempted questions receiving zero marks.

“In COQP-11 [general paper], the highest score is around 300, but by the time you reach the top 100 candidates, the score drops sharply to nearly 235. In contrast, in easy/ less difficult papers like sociology, the top 100 candidates remained clustered much closer to the highest score, between roughly 300 and 275,” Srivastava alleged.

According to Srivastava, candidates from Sociology (HUQP-22) and Political Science (HUQP18) appeared to benefit more and COQP-11, COQP-12 and other papers with wider score distributions were disadvantaged.

TISS Mumbai: ‘Reduce unfair advantage, disadvantage’

Rejecting this claim, TISS says in its FAQs that its formula does not favour any group or place any at a disadvantage.

“The purpose of normalisation is to reduce unfair advantage or disadvantage arising from differences in subject-wise score distributions. Within the same subject paper, a candidate who has scored higher than another candidate continues to remain ahead after normalisation. Across subject papers, normalisation provides a common basis for comparison where a programme accepts multiple eligible CUET (PG) papers,” the Tata Institute of Social Sciences has said in response.

Srivastava also pointed out that as per NTA’s data, the general paper had nearly 40,000 candidates, many more than Sociology’s 7,000. She alleged that because the formula depends on the highest score and the 25th percentile, papers with narrower score distributions gained an advantage.

Also read Missing labs, teachers, entire colleges – why SRTMU Nanded cracked down on BSc admissions

In her view, TISS should instead have adopted other ways. "Examinations like JEE use percentile scores to compare candidates across different sessions. If each candidate's percentile within their own paper code had been considered, it would have created a much fairer comparison," Srivastava, said.

Formula after registration

Harsh Raj, a 2023 MA English graduate from Lalit Narayan Mithila University (LNMU), Bihar, who appeared for the COQP-11 paper, alleged that TISS changed its admission process after registrations had already begun by announcing that CUET-PG scores would be normalised. He said candidates were allowed to apply for only three programmes and because the normalisation formula was not disclosed in advance, they could not make informed choices. "If we had known the methodology beforehand, some candidates might have made different programme choices," he said.

Raj, who secured admission to MA disaster management but missed out on his first preference, MA environment, climate change and sustainability studies, also questioned the transparency of TISS' admission process. "The merit lists contain only application numbers. There are no programme-wise or category-wise cut-offs, marks or paper codes of selected candidates. How can we know where we stand?" he said.

Responding to such concerns, TISS in its FAQs says, “Individual-level data of other candidates, confidential score distributions, or personally identifiable information cannot be disclosed. Any request for information will be handled in accordance with applicable law, institutional policy, data-protection obligations, and the admissions schedule.”

CUET PG Score Normalisation: Candidate files RTI

Another applicant, Saurabh Kumar, has filed three Right to Information (RTI) applications with TISS and a complaint through CPGRAMS, seeking records related to TISS' normalisation methodology. Kumar, who appeared for the COQP-11 (General) paper, applied for MA public policy and governance, MA regulatory policy and governance, and master of public health at TISS. He has not secured admission so far, though he is on the wait list for the TISS Hyderabad campus.

"There are still two merit lists left, so I don't know whether I will get admission. But irrespective of the outcome, the methodology itself needs to be examined," he said, adding that he belongs to the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) category but believes candidates across categories appearing for COQP-11 have been affected.

Also read 'Diagnosed with SLD by accident’: Adults fighting ADHD, dyslexia, dyscalculia have neither measure nor relief

"Even if some of us eventually get admitted through later merit lists, the methodology still needs independent scrutiny. If it goes unquestioned now, the same formula could continue to be used every year," he said.

On July 1, Kumar wrote to the deemed-to-be university bureau of the University Grants Commission (UGC) highlighting students' concerns over the admission process. On July 9, the UGC asked the TISS registrar to "look into the matter and take necessary action to resolve the issue at the earliest, under intimation to the applicant and UGC", according to an email shared by Kumar, who was also copied on the communication. He said TISS has not yet responded to the UGC's communication.

Kumar's RTI applications seek different sets of records. In the first, he has sought paper-wise raw-score cut-offs before normalisation for multiple programmes, along with documents explaining the mathematical basis for adopting the min-max scaling method, committee records, minutes of meetings, administrative approvals and any evidence that similar methods have been adopted by other universities.

Also read How Samarth portal glitches plague admissions, exams, payments across universities

His second RTI seeks information on the action taken by TISS following the UGC's communication, including whether the institute acknowledged the letter, informed the relevant departments, or referred the matter to a grievance redressal committee.

Through the third RTI, Kumar has sought programme-wise cut-offs for COQP-11 and COQP-12 across all four TISS campuses for the 2024-26, 2025-27 and 2026-28 admission cycles. He said the information would help applicants compare admission trends before and after the institute introduced score normalisation.

TISS, meanwhile, has clarified that it does not alter candidates' official CUET-PG scores issued by the National Testing Agency (NTA).