88 SOCIAL SCIENTIST the selection is based on some ordinal ranking according to the numerical scores in the examination. The differences in scores have no operational significance: i.e. a person, whose score in such an examination is twice the score of another person, is not twice as competent as the latter. Moreover when the difference in scores of consecutively ranked candidates is of the order of a fraction of the total (or maximum possible) score—as is usually the case when thousands of candidates take the test—it is unrealistic to decide that the higher ranked candidate is superior. These concepts are best understood with the help of an illustration. Hence let us take the JEE for the selection to the IITs. The candidates taking the JEE are examined in mathematics, physics, chemistry. The candidates are ranked from the highest scorer downwards witJ^ respect to the aggregate score. Admission is offered from the top ranker downwards till seats are filled. We do not know much about the way in which these tests have been validated. For example, has the test been administered to groups of individuals who are now performing the functions that are most likely to be expected of the graduating students? Has it at least been administered to groups of students in similar technology/engineering education programmes of other institutions whose graduates have been in the profession for a long time? Have such students indicated with reasonable level of confidence that there is some correlation between the scores and their job performance or career progress? While I cannot establish that such validation has not been carried out, I suspect that the answer is in the negative. If we accept the possibility that appropriate validation studies may not have been carried out to establish that the JEE is both reliable and valid as an instrument to identify all those who are appropriate for the educational programme or for the career thereafter, then it follows that we must seriously consider the following proposition: JEE can also lead to the denial of opportunity to many deserving candidates. But this is what most of those who defend JEE are not willing to concede. Many defend the JEE with arguments on either of the following lines: 1) Those who believe strongly in meritocracy insist that even among all those who are appropriate or acceptable for the course of study (and the career that the study leads to) some are more appropriate than others. Hence, they argue, a mechanism such as the JEE, which enables ranking the candidates, is the most effective.6 2) Those who would like to consider themselves as pragmatists, suggest that the screening candidates are left out because the number of available opportunities is far less than the number competing: a problem that can be solved only by increasing the number of opportunities. These pragmatists would argue that