How Ph.D. admissions are also driven by coaching classes

For Simran Mudgal, attending coaching classes all week became important for succeeding in the University Grants Commission National Eligibility Test (UGC NET) examination to pursue a Ph.D. in Hindi cinema. “I wanted a more organised routine,” she said.

For her, qualifying the UGC NET examinations meant studying every day, managing her Master’s classes, competing with other aspirants, and avoiding a ‘gap’ year. Many aspirants preparing for the UGC NET exams relate to 24-year-old Simran, who studies intensively and uses a structured approach.

In 2024-25, the Ph.D. examination process in India has been based on the NET examinations. The examination is conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the University Grants Commission (UGC). A NET candidate qualifies for eligibility under three criteria: those eligible for Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) admission with Junior Research Fellowship (JRF) and assistant professorship; those eligible for Ph.D.

admission without JRF and for assistant professorship; and those eligible for Ph.D. admission alone. The UGC NET examinations cover a broad spectrum of subjects that include Humanities, Social Sciences, Sciences, Languages, and professional courses.

The June 2025 exam comprised 85 subjects, whereas the June 2026 exam consisted of 84 subjects, as per the National Testing Agency (NTA). Earlier, students had to apply to different universities and take various entrance exams.

Every step involved separate application fees, examination centres, and travel costs. This made the whole Ph.D. process expensive and inaccessible for scholars from rural areas and underprivileged backgrounds. The UGC NET was said to further ‘simplify the application process’.

While a single national examination can standardise admissions, concerns persist regarding rising student competency, the growing coaching culture, and shifts in exam patterns. Students like Simran are preparing for UGC-NET through coaching classes even when they have already studied much of the syllabus in their undergraduate and postgraduate courses.

“I have already studied the subjects they teach in my classes, I just want to refresh my concepts,” she says. For her, attending classes also provides a fixed routine. Being punctual and attending classes regularly, she says, gives her the discipline to revise concepts and stay on schedule.

Each class consists of more than 30 people, and classes are held for two to three hours each day. The classroom, in this case, is no longer merely a place where learning occurs. It offers a structured platform for aspiring candidates who want to sit an examination that is now becoming crucial for admission to Ph.D.

programmes. In Simran’s case, the coaching offered will not be aimed at helping her learn a new subject but rather at revising what she has learnt. “But the additional baggage for classes only comes with the change of pattern in MCQ-based questionnaires,” Simran adds.

She feels that if the pattern had been like the previous one, she would not have had to attend coaching classes to prepare like other entrance exam aspirants. The UGC-NET examinations primarily evaluate skills based on reasoning, aptitude, and communication via a multiple-choice question (MCQ) based examination.

Critics, however, argue that while a test can assess one’s retention of information, it cannot fully capture skills such as developing an argument, analysing evidence, formulating a research question or a hypothesis, defending your ideas, or showcasing a specialisation in a subject in a whole.

Tilak Jha, a Ph.D. supervisor and Associate Professor at Bennett University said, “MCQs measure certain aspects of the discipline, but cannot fully assess research potential.” Mr. Jha’s argument is essentially that these are the skills doctoral research eventually demands; Ph.D.

scholars are expected to identify gaps in the literature, formulate research questions, and produce sustained written arguments. “No matter how well an objective examination exists, performing well in one does not necessarily qualify one to demonstrate their ability,” he said.

The Bennett University professor said that doctoral research is much more than this, and the research process involves the ability to formulate a question, identify gaps in the literature, develop an original argument, interpret and integrate evidence, and ultimately deal with uncertainty.

He further added that while MCQs can assess certain aspects of disciplinary knowledge, they cannot be treated as a comprehensive measure of research potential. “MCQs may assess some of the discipline-related knowledge, but that is certainly not a test which can be deemed adequate for Ph.D.

research. It may be retained as a screening mechanism, the shortlisting stage, but to treat it as a principal instrument of assessing someone’s research potential, I think, is a pity. I don’t think that is a fair way to do it,” he said.

However, Abhishek Srivastava, Ph.D. supervisor of the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, presents an alternative point of view. According to him, the MCQ entrance exam does not require evaluating all the research skills at the time of admission.

“There is ample time even after admission, and a year of coursework to develop research skills and learn techniques,” he added. As a supervisor of NET-JRF candidates, he added that after two to three years, candidates are able to understand research quality and techniques.

Ph.D. supervisors argue that the 70% weightage for the UGC-NET examination and 30% for the college interview is unfair, as universities have less discretion to differentiate among students. “This 70% score is something that needs to be taken as a screening mechanism.

A cutoff can be applied to it. But the questions that it assesses need to be much more nuanced, much more rigorous, much more concept-based. It should test understanding and application of knowledge,” Dr. Srivastava said .