Institution monitor the performance of the students through Annual/ Semester exam, Trimester Exam, Midterm Exam, Continuous assessment, Final exam etc.,

Evaluation methods communicated to students at the beginning of the year

Method of evaluation followed: (Central, Door, Double evaluation, etc.,)


Double evaluation method is followed for PG courses by the university.


In case of UG exams, answer books are sent to the examiners. Valuation is done in two ways: Door valuation in which the answer scripts are sent to the external examiners. Central valuation is introduced for the first year in last academic year (2009-2010) as suggested by the Peer Team.

Mechanism for Redressal of grievances regarding evaluation:

Examination results Announcement Process:

The results are declared (Sem-end exam results) within a period of one month from the date of last examination. The results are placed in the college website also.

Institution communicate to the parents regarding the evaluation outcome, Weightages given to assignments/seminars/ dissertation/field work and written exams:

The evaluation outcome is intimated to the parents through progress cards maintained by teacher counsellors. 75:25/50:25 weightage is given to written exams/ seminars /field work/ assignments.

Controller of Examinations:

Functions of the controller of examinations are as follows….

a) Collection of Syllabus and Model papers:
b) Collecting the syllabus and model papers each BOS
c) Collecting the panel of paper setter and panel of examiners
d) Preparing the nominal rolls getting three sets of question papers from external examiners.
e) Conducting the examinations using bar coded OMR system
f) Arranging the valuation of answer scripts. The college has been following single external door valuation system. Centralized external single valuation system was introduced in March 2010 for the first year students. The same will be extended to second and final year students in the coming years.
g) Solving grievances about valuation
h) Declaring the results after scrutiny of valued answer scripts and decoding.
i) Preparing marks memos
j) Getting provisional certificate and degree certificates from Andhra University.
The current system of evaluation has been followed since the inception of the autonomous status to the college in the year 2000.

Reforms to Evaluation:

Institution carried out evaluation reforms Peer evaluation, Double evaluation, Open book examination, Question Bank, Moderation, Internal assessment etc.

Transparency in Evaluation Process:

For internal assessment, the valued answer scripts are shown to the candidates whereas the answer scripts of Semester End Exam are not directly shown to the candidate but in case of a valid grievance, the concerned teacher is allowed to look into the script and attend the redressal

Different stages of examination system:

a) Coding: Code no. is given to each answer script following OMR barcode system.
b) Dispatching of answer scripts to the external examiners: After collecting the valued answer scripts from the external exams, scrutiny of valued answers scripts is done and marks are entered by decoding / reading the bar code.
c) Preparation of award lists: Award lists are prepared after decoding and results are declared.

Malpractice cases reported and dealt with (average per year):

Malpractice cases reported so far are 43 upto April 2010. The cases are referred the Malpractice committee. Members in the committee are 3 university nominees who attended the academic council meeting, the principal and the controller of examination. The committee imposes fines and debars the students from attending the examination for a period of one year.

College provide the photocopy of answer scripts to students and best Practices:

The answer scripts of the students who scored maximum marks are photocopied and displayed in the library for reference to students for improvement of their performance in the exams.

Details regarding the computerization of the examination system:

Measures taken by the institution to ensure security and confidentiality of the evaluation system: