From plagiarism to proxy exams: Galgotias and systemic failure in education

By Sandeep Pandey*  

Shock is being expressed at Galgotias University being found presenting a Chinese-made robotic dog and a South Korean-made soccer-playing drone as its own creations at the recently held India AI Impact Summit 2026, a global event in New Delhi. Earlier, a UGC-listed journal had published a paper from the university titled “Corona Virus Killed by Sound Vibrations Produced by Thali or Ghanti: A Potential Hypothesis,” which became the subject of widespread ridicule. Following the robotic dog controversy coming to light, the university has withdrawn the paper. These incidents are symptoms of deeper problems afflicting the Indian education system in general. Galgotias merely bit off more than it could chew.

The Indian education system remains largely based on rote learning, even at the higher education level. Little effort is made to develop critical thinking that matures into independent thought. Raising questions is often discouraged in classrooms, and students are expected to follow set patterns to clear examinations. The entire emphasis is on passing exams. There are institutions at the higher education level that enroll students but do not hold regular classes; students are simply expected to appear for examinations.

Examinations themselves are frequently compromised. Cheating is widely reported, and in some places it has become institutionalized. For instance, in UP Board examinations at the High School and Intermediate levels, it has not been uncommon for students, in exchange for payment, to copy answers written on the blackboard by teachers. There have also been allegations that, for higher payments, proxy candidates write examinations on behalf of students. Authorities are often accused of turning a blind eye to mass copying, while political patronage and corruption within the education department are said to enable such practices.

Malpractice is not confined to routine board examinations. Even in entrance examinations to premier engineering and medical institutions, impersonation rackets have occasionally been exposed, with candidates allegedly appearing on behalf of others for substantial sums. Private coaching centres have sometimes been implicated in such cases.

What can be expected from students who pass examinations through unfair means? They are unlikely to become original thinkers or innovators. The corruption internalized during the education process often carries over into professional life, where jobs are also sometimes allegedly secured through bribes. It is therefore unsurprising that the administrative system faces persistent allegations of corruption. The seeds of such practices are sown during the education process itself. Manipulating data and facts to produce desirable reports for administrative or political superiors becomes normalized. Intellectual ability is then spent on justifying the unjustifiable.

It is telling that the Prime Minister’s interactive programme with students focuses on “Pariksha Pe Charcha” rather than on how education can build a better society or improve quality. The message appears to be that examinations matter more than the learning process. If students or parents believe success cannot be achieved through hard work alone, some may resort to unfair means. The end begins to justify the means.

It is also troubling that academic institutions frame guidelines specifying permissible limits of plagiarism in student assignments. The assumption seems to be that plagiarism will occur; the effort is to regulate its extent rather than cultivate originality. Education increasingly relies on policing students, particularly during examinations. Some faculty members take pride in catching students copying rather than in nurturing academic excellence. Priorities appear misplaced.

Galgotias was exposed because the act was blatant. However, plagiarism in thesis writing and outsourcing of projects to “professionals” are reported across institutions, from school to postgraduate levels. The individual associated with the robotic dog episode may be made a scapegoat, but the problem is systemic.

The quality of many government institutions is also uneven. The policy of privatization in education, combined with corruption in political and administrative systems, has led to the mushrooming of substandard and sometimes fake institutions. The UGC has issued a list of 23 universities in 12 states and union territories that it considers fake, though critics argue the number may be higher. In government institutions there is at least theoretical scope for reform through administrative change; in private institutions driven primarily by profit, decline can be harder to arrest. Allegations persist that large sums are exchanged for legislative approvals and regulatory clearances, and that influence determines visibility at major public events.

With the rise of Artificial Intelligence, some argue that only a small number of innovators will be required while the majority function as consumers. In such a scenario, incidents like the Galgotias controversy risk being dismissed as aberrations rather than warning signs. The system continues because it serves entrenched interests. Comprehensive reform may not appear urgent to those in power, and programmes centred on examinations may continue.

---

*Secretary General of Socialist Party (India) and has taught at various Indian institutions of Technology, Management and Law