Several postgraduate applicants to the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS Mumbai) have raised concerns about the institute's recently introduced score normalisation formula for the Common University Entrance Test-Postgraduate (CUET PG) 2026 admissions. Candidates allege that the formula, which was disclosed only after merit lists were published, has unfairly affected their chances of admission, particularly for programmes accepting multiple question-paper codes.
Palak Srivastava, a CUET PG candidate, highlighted the issue by pointing out that a candidate ranked around 100 in sociology could secure admission, while another with a similar rank in the general paper might miss out. She argued this outcome contradicts the purpose of normalisation, which is meant to ensure fairness across different exam papers.
Understanding TISS’s Normalisation Approach
TISS explained that its postgraduate programmes allow candidates to qualify through more than one eligible CUET PG subject paper. Since these papers have different candidate pools and score distributions, raw scores are not directly comparable. To address this, TISS applies a normalisation process to place candidates on a common scale for merit list preparation.
The formula, as detailed by TISS, considers the all-India score distribution for each subject paper and identifies a candidate’s relative position. Only candidates scoring above the 25th percentile are included in the qualifying pool. The normalised score is calculated using the formula:
Normalised Score = (Candidate’s Score − Lowest Score in the qualifying pool) ÷ (Highest Score in the qualifying pool − Lowest Score in the qualifying pool),
which is then multiplied by 100 to yield a score on a 0–100 scale. This method aims to preserve the order of merit within each paper while enabling comparison across different papers.
Applicants Challenge the Formula’s Fairness and Transparency
Despite agreeing that some form of normalisation is necessary, candidates argue that TISS’s specific method has distorted rankings rather than ensuring equitable comparison. Harshit Purohit, a BTech graduate and CUET PG candidate, noted that candidates with lower ranks in one paper gained admission over higher-ranked candidates in another, raising questions about the formula’s validity.
Applicants have sought explanations from TISS through emails, campus visits, Right to Information (RTI) applications, and complaints via the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS). Some have threatened legal action if their concerns remain unaddressed.
One major criticism is that the formula relies heavily on the 25th percentile and the highest score within each paper’s qualifying pool, which may advantage papers with narrower score distributions and fewer candidates. For example, the general paper had nearly 40,000 candidates, while sociology had about 7,000, leading to disparities in score clustering.
Why This Normalisation Debate Matters for CUET PG Aspirants
The controversy highlights the challenges universities face when comparing scores across diverse exam papers. While TISS insists its formula reduces unfair advantages and disadvantages, candidates feel it has created new inequities. The lack of transparency—such as withholding programme-wise cut-offs and detailed merit list data—has further fueled frustration.
Applicants like Srivastava and Purohit suggest that percentile-based methods, similar to those used in exams like JEE, would offer a fairer comparison by considering each candidate’s relative performance within their paper. They also emphasize the importance of disclosing such methodologies before admissions begin, allowing candidates to make informed choices about programme applications.
The University Grants Commission (UGC) has intervened by requesting TISS to review the issue, but as of now, the institute has not publicly responded to the UGC’s communication. Meanwhile, candidates continue to await clarity and resolution, concerned about the impact on their academic futures.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the purpose of score normalisation in CUET PG admissions?
A: Score normalisation is used to adjust scores from different CUET PG subject papers so they can be fairly compared, as each paper has different difficulty levels and candidate pools.
Q: How does TISS’s normalisation formula work?
A: TISS calculates a candidate’s relative position within their paper’s score distribution above the 25th percentile and scales scores between 0 and 100 using a min-max formula to prepare merit lists across multiple papers.
Q: Why are candidates unhappy with TISS’s normalisation method?
A: Candidates argue the formula changes rankings unfairly, benefits some papers over others due to score distribution differences, and was not disclosed before admissions, limiting transparency and informed decision-making.
