Thanks @Arbiter. I've been seeing your posts in the section lately and they have been very educative.

I notice that nothing was said about how the OMR performs a NEGATIVE marking operation/computation or results.Pls elaborate

@seudocode

The OMR can easily be programmed to perform NEGATIVE marking. Recall i said if the scanned answer option is translated to A-E, a comparison with preprogrammed data is done. Instead of scoring zero for wrong answers as i had previously stated, -1, -2, -0.5, etc could be programmed. However, I'm not very sure if the OMR can handle decimal values (0.1,0.5,etc) (i dont know everything) but it can definitely handle integer values (1,2,10,etc). If the OMR cant handle decimal values (which i doubt) the data admins can easily process negative marking on the results.

That said, i'm not aware if JAMB implements NEGATIVE marking. I would be speculating if i say yes though, some candidates have made such accusations. Similarly, i've heard some post-UTME candidates insinuating that some institutions (sorry not mentioning names) implement negative marking but it still remains to be proven.




@francis247

Could you try to be civil with ur statements next time. I have the penchant to ignore speech below the scale of civility.

As regards ur observation. Yes, JAMB seems to have undertaken to help sloppy candidates with custom preshaded JAMB Nos on result sheets. It requires JAMB to know which candidate is allocated to which venue so as to ensure its success. It also helps to minimize cheating. But given obvious issues that could arise (damaged sheets, logistics, etc) i doubt if it has been implemented nationwide. I decided to approach the issue from the well known perspective; the candidate shades everything required. It is my believe the explanation and approach may benefit most exam candidates (WAEC,NECO,etc), including post-UTME candidates, where the dangers i had enumerated is sure to occur.

There is no harm in generalizing i hope.

francis247: super story. I did not shade any No. of mine as I was not required or told to do so. My Reg. No. Was boldly written on my answer sheet without any space/option for shading/to shade, so guy, wetin you day yarn?

---

francis247: super story. I did not shade any No. of mine as I was not required or told to do so. My Reg. No. Was boldly written on my answer sheet without any space/option for shading/to shade, so guy, wetin you day yarn?

that's the question I long waited to see. JAMB originally fills and shades your details to avoid descripancy and the question paper these days has your seat number on it.
I think what could rather apply is that if one tampered with his answer sheet, one will have no result; one who is discovered to have more than two options for a question or to have replaed his paper type with another, like one rightly mentioned here, when the human eye catches them, such results are withheld. Where mass cheating is reported, the center has cancelled results. A student who after shading boxes for 80 of 100 questions they are sure of, proceeds to shade at random the 20 they are not sure of should not expect to get 100/100. If the random shading affords them 5 correct answers, plus 80, it equals 85; the 15 lost is again subtracted from 85, which gives them 70/100. That's JAMB's marking scheme for you. Hence, the said girl could get just 148 on the average. Besides, the marks allocated to each question, you can't tell but for Eng Lang that is spelt out. Now, a question with, say, 1 mark could be failed and those with half marks gained. So, if the 15 above failed are of the higher marks rating, you can now see what harm you do to yourself as Jambite!

so hw can we cheat on cbt jamb exam help oo

If there are 50 questions and all questions carry equal marks, why should someone score 47 marks?