Proponents of a major overhaul argue that the current testing framework is outdated and vulnerable to organized criminal networks that profit from paper leaks. By calling for the system to be rebuilt from scratch, advocates suggest that the government must move beyond superficial fixes and invest in a robust, technology-driven infrastructure that minimizes human intervention. This approach is seen as the only way to restore the credibility of national entrance exams in the eyes of the public.
Supporters of this view emphasize that the stakes are too high to accept incremental changes. When millions of students compete for a limited number of seats, even minor lapses in security can have devastating consequences for merit-based admissions. A complete restructuring would allow for the implementation of advanced encryption, better monitoring of examination centers, and a more transparent grievance redressal mechanism that holds officials accountable for lapses.
Furthermore, those backing this reform argue that the current reliance on centralized testing agencies needs to be re-evaluated. They suggest that decentralizing certain aspects of the process or introducing multi-layered verification could prevent single points of failure. By prioritizing the integrity of the exam over the convenience of the current administrative model, the government could ensure that the most deserving students are the ones who secure medical seats, thereby strengthening the quality of the nation's future healthcare workforce.