Under the present set-up the evaluation system of students suffers from one major drawback. Although the level of intelligence is evaluated under this system, what is tested mainly by way of five questions in a paper is a student's performance during three hours and not his/her performance throughout the year. What if an intelligent student is not able to attempt all the questions in the allotted time?

Another evil of the present system is that it tries to limit the scope of studies. We only study what is prescribed in the syllabus and what is important from the examination point of view. Generally, neither teachers nor students care to go beyond the curriculum. As a result, the spirit of inquiry suffers.

When students so evaluated apply for admission to some course of higher study, they need to be tested again for their worth. For the level of their awareness and general knowledge. For their overall development. Moreover, for their genuine interest in the course. Mere dependence on marks obtained in the qualifying examination won't do.

Every course has its own requirements. For instance students studying management course must possess good public relations skills. Therefore, they must be tested for these specific needs.

Now what kind of an entrance test should be there? Broadly speaking, there should be three areas which should get attention: Written test, personality test and performance in the qualifying examination. They should together make up an entrance test or can be conducted in different stages. For example, academic performance of only those candidates will be considered who pass the written test. Weightage of each of these areas should be in accordance with the nature of the course.

If you want to continue with the prevalent educational set-up, then entrance tests are a must. If you want to do away with these tests, then first discard the present system of education. Then move elsewhere. Where students are not told: answer the questions; pass the exam; your future is at stake.