UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

An interview schedule is a structured list of questions and response categories that guides the interviewer during data collection. It ensures that each respondent is asked the same questions in the same order, thereby enhancing comparability and reducing interviewer bias. The schedule may be used in face-to-face or telephone interviews. Thus, the list of standardised questions described in the stem is appropriately called an interview schedule.

Option A:
A frame usually refers to the sampling frame, which is the list of population elements from which a sample is drawn, and is not specific to interviewing. It does not guide question asking during the interview itself.

Option B:
A sample is the subset of the population selected for study, not the instrument used for questioning them. While a sample is necessary, it does not maintain consistency in questioning.

Option C:
The interview schedule spells out exact wording and sequence, allowing multiple interviewers to follow the same protocol. This structure ensures uniform coverage of topics and aligns exactly with the stem’s description, making this option correct.

Option D:
A pilot refers to a preliminary test of instruments or procedures, not the list of questions itself. Although an interview schedule might be piloted, that does not change the name of the list of questions.

Statements A and B correctly describe pedagogical and content competence. Statement D is true because reflective competence involves analysing and improving one’s practice. Statement E is true because communication competence includes clarity, appropriate language and sensitivity to learners. Statement C is false because professional ethics strongly influence classroom behaviour and decisions, and F is false because professionalism includes continuous professional development. Therefore, the correct set is A, B, D and E only, making option A the right answer.

Option A:
Option A includes A, B, D and E, capturing pedagogy, subject knowledge, reflection and communication. It excludes C and F, which are false. Hence A, B, D and E only is correct.

Option B:
Option B includes C (false) and omits E (true), so A, B, C and D only cannot be correct.

Option C:
Option C includes F (false), so A, B, D, E and F only is invalid.

Option D:
Option D includes F (false) and omits A, so B, D, E and F only is not correct.

Option E includes C and F (false), so A, C, D and F only cannot be accepted.

Option F includes C and F (false) and omits A and B, so C, D, E and F only cannot be correct.

Coverage in questioning refers to how widely questions are spread across the class so that many learners get opportunities to think and respond. When a teacher consciously includes students from different rows and corners,they avoid restricting interaction to a few volunteers. This enhances overall involvement. Thus,the stem highlights the coverage of questioning.

Option A:
Coverage ensures that quieter or distant students are also engaged,which helps monitor learning across the class,making option A correct.

Option B:
Difficulty relates to how hard questions are,not to who receives them.

Option C:
Redundancy would imply unnecessary repetition of similar questions,which is not the aim described.

Option D:
Secrecy has no connection with classroom questioning,which is usually open and public.

NEP 2020 views CPD as an ongoing process and recommends a mix of modes—online courses, workshops, peer learning and school-based activities—so that teachers can continuously update and refine their practice.

Option A:
One-time pre-service training is insufficient; NEP explicitly calls for regular CPD, typically at least 50 hours annually.

Option B:
This option matches the policy’s flexible, multi-mode strategy for continuous teacher development.

Option C:
Long residential courses can be useful but cannot be the only or primary mode for all teachers.

Option D:
Punitive remedial classes for “weak” teachers would discourage professional growth; NEP’s approach to CPD is supportive and developmental, not punitive.

Paksha is the subject or locus in which the probandum is to be established, such as the hill in the classic example. All discussion about the presence of hetu and sadhya is centred on this subject. Identifying the paksha is crucial for evaluating whether the reason genuinely applies to the case under consideration. Hence, in the sentence mentioned, "hill" serves as paksha.

Option A:
Option A, sadhya, is the property to be proved, namely "fiery", and cannot be identified with the subject that bears it. Confusing the two would obscure the roles of locus and attribute.

Option B:
Option B, hetu, refers to the reason or middle term, such as smoke, that is used to justify the conclusion and is not the subject in which the property is being asserted.

Option C:
Option C is correct because paksha literally means the "side" or standpoint in dispute and names the entity about which the argument is made. Nyaya’s analysis of inference always begins by specifying this locus.

Option D:
Option D, vyapti, denotes the universal concomitance between hetu and sadhya and is a relation, not a concrete subject like the hill.

A is correct because the unit covers both numerical aptitude and logical reasoning aspects. C is true as data interpretation in NET uses various graphical and tabular forms. E is also correct since exposure to diverse question types improves speed and accuracy. B is wrong because series, analogies, classification and coding–decoding are explicitly part of mathematical reasoning and aptitude. D is wrong because purely logical items fall within the same unit and are not excluded. Hence B and D only are the wrong statements.

Option A:
Option A selects only B as wrong and ignores D, even though D incorrectly narrows the scope of mathematical aptitude to numeric questions. It therefore does not capture all incorrect statements.

Option B:
Option B chooses only D as wrong and overlooks B, which wrongly claims that several reasoning types are unrelated to Unit 5. So it also fails to identify the full set of wrong statements.

Option C:
Option C is correct because it identifies both B and D as misrepresenting the syllabus while leaving A, C and E as accurate descriptions of the breadth and preparation strategy for the unit.

Option D:
Option D incorrectly includes C among the wrong statements, even though data interpretation indeed uses tables and graphs, and thus misclassifies a true statement along with B and D.

Jain thinkers distinguish between direct and indirect forms of valid knowledge. The direct form is called pratyaksha and the indirect form is called paroksha. This basic division underlies further sub-classifications such as empirical and transcendental perception. Thus, the pair mentioned in the stem is pratyaksha and paroksha.

Option A:
Option A is correct because pratyaksha literally means what is "before the eyes" and stands in contrast to paroksha, which is "beyond the eyes" or indirect. The Jaina framework of pramanas begins from this fundamental bifurcation.

Option B:
Option B, sabda, is verbal testimony and is usually counted as a kind of paroksha rather than as the direct counterpart to it. It cannot complete the basic dichotomy introduced in the question.

Option C:
Option C, anumana, is inference, which again belongs on the side of indirect knowledge rather than being placed opposite to it.

Option D:
Option D, upamana, is comparison-based cognition and, like anumana and sabda, is treated as a mediated form of knowing, not as the direct pole of the distinction.

Statements A, B, D, E and F express a supportive and ethical approach to learning analytics, while C is clearly inappropriate. Dashboards and early alerts can guide students and teachers, but data must be interpreted in context rather than in a mechanical way. Encouraging goal setting and being transparent about data practices align with learner-centred analytics. Using analytics solely for surveillance and punishment contradicts recommended practice, hence C is excluded.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it omits B, which refers to instructors using analytics to identify low engagement and support students. Without B, the set misses an essential supportive use.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it omits D, which stresses contextual interpretation of analytics data. Without D, the set underplays how analytics must be understood in context.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect because it omits A, which notes that dashboards can show students their progress. Excluding A makes the set incomplete.

Option D:
Option D is correct because it brings together progress visualisation, early support, context-aware interpretation, student self-regulation and ethical transparency. It rejects C’s punitive-only view, providing a balanced and learner-focused perspective on analytics.

Converting binary 1010 to decimal involves using positional weights of powers of 2. From right to left, the bits represent 1, 2, 4 and 8. The pattern 1010 has 1 in the 8's place and 1 in the 2's place, giving 8 + 2. Thus the decimal value is 10, making Option B correct.

Option A:
Option A corresponds to the binary pattern 1000, which equals 8 in decimal. While 8 is one of the place values used in the calculation, it alone is not sufficient to represent 10. Therefore, Option A is incomplete and incorrect.

Option B:
Option B is correct because 1010₂ means 1×8 + 0×4 + 1×2 + 0×1. This sums to 8 + 2 = 10. The value matches the required decimal equivalent of the given binary number.

Option C:
Option C refers loosely to 1100₂ if interpreted, which equals 8 + 4 = 12, not 10. Even if we do not map directly, 12 is clearly different from 10 and therefore cannot be the correct answer.

Option D:
Option D suggests 14, which would correspond to 1110₂ equal to 8 + 4 + 2. Since our binary number does not have three consecutive ones, 14 cannot be its decimal value.

Inter-rater reliability refers to the level of agreement or consistency between different observers, judges or raters who assess the same phenomenon using the same criteria. High inter-rater reliability indicates that scores are not heavily influenced by who does the rating, which strengthens confidence in the measurement process. It is especially important in observational research and performance assessments. Because the stem speaks about independent observers giving consistent ratings, inter-rater reliability is the appropriate term.

Option A:
Test–retest reliability deals with stability of scores over time for the same test administered on two occasions, not with agreement between different raters at one time. It does not capture the idea of multiple observers rating the same behaviour simultaneously. Therefore, test–retest reliability is not the best fit here.

Option B:
Inter-rater reliability is often quantified using statistics such as Cohen’s kappa or intraclass correlation coefficients, which adjust for agreement expected by chance. These indices provide evidence that the rating process is dependable and not idiosyncratic. This focus on agreement among observers corresponds directly to the stem.

Option C:
Internal consistency reliability assesses how well the items within a test measure the same construct, commonly estimated by Cronbach’s alpha or split-half methods. It is about agreement among items, not among raters, so internal consistency is not the correct completion.

Option D:
Parallel forms reliability evaluates consistency of scores across two equivalent versions of a test, again unrelated to multiple raters scoring the same responses. It does not address the rater-to-rater consistency highlighted in the question, which is why it is not appropriate here.

Green computing seeks to minimise the environmental impact of ICT through energy-efficient use, responsible procurement and safe disposal. Using power-saving features like sleep mode reduces electricity consumption, while certified e-waste recycling prevents toxic substances from entering the environment. Together, these actions contribute to sustainability without sacrificing functionality.

Option A:
Keeping devices powered on unnecessarily wastes energy and contributes to higher carbon emissions and electricity costs. It contradicts the goals of efficiency and conservation.

Option B:
Printing every document increases paper consumption and may lead to storage and disposal problems. Digital archiving and selective printing are more sustainable approaches.

Option C:
This option correctly combines energy management with environmentally sound end-of-life handling. It reflects an institutional commitment to both operational and ecological responsibility in ICT use.

Option D:
Rapidly discarding gadgets in regular waste streams increases e-waste and exposes workers and ecosystems to hazardous materials. It is the opposite of green computing.

Beneficence is an ethical principle that obliges researchers to promote the well-being of participants by designing studies that have favourable risk–benefit ratios. It requires careful assessment of potential harms, such as psychological distress or privacy breaches, and steps to reduce them as far as possible. At the same time, beneficence encourages researchers to pursue knowledge that can yield meaningful social or scientific benefits. Consequently, the requirement to maximise benefits and minimise harms is accurately captured by the principle of beneficence.

Option A:
Autonomy refers to respecting individuals’ rights to make informed, voluntary decisions about participation, typically operationalised through informed consent procedures. While it is crucial, it emphasises decision-making freedom rather than balancing harms and benefits, so autonomy is not the correct completion.

Option B:
Beneficence guides the design, conduct and monitoring of research, encouraging features such as debriefing, support services and careful inclusion/exclusion criteria to protect participants. It also supports ongoing ethical review when new risks are identified. These functions match closely with the description in the stem.

Option C:
Justice is the ethical principle concerned with fairness in the distribution of the burdens and benefits of research, ensuring that no group is systematically exploited or excluded. It does not primarily address the overall level of harm or benefit for individual participants, so justice is not appropriate here.

Option D:
Fidelity refers to maintaining trust, honesty and faithfulness in professional relationships, ensuring that promises made to participants are honoured. While important for ethics, it is not the principle specifically focused on risk–benefit balancing, so fidelity is not the best answer.

NEP 2020 warns that if technology-based education expands without addressing access to devices, connectivity and skills, existing socio-economic inequalities may become worse rather than better.

Option A:
Assuming that technology automatically benefits all learners equally ignores differences in income, geography and digital literacy that NEP explicitly highlights.

Option B:
This option is correct because it captures the policy’s caution that edtech must be planned with equity in mind so the digital divide is narrowed, not widened.

Option C:
Arguing that only urban students should use technology contradicts NEP’s aim of bridging rural–urban gaps through inclusive digital infrastructure.

Option D:
Suggesting that technology should replace teachers conflicts with NEP’s view of teachers as central actors, with technology supporting rather than substituting them.

Statements A, B and C describe the standard logical notions of validity and soundness in deductive reasoning, so they are all true together. In a valid deductive argument, true premises guarantee a true conclusion, and validity is a matter of form rather than factual correctness of premises. A sound argument must be both valid and have all true premises, which is exactly what C states. Statements D and E are false, because deductive conclusions do not always go beyond the information in the premises, and an argument can be valid yet unsound if its premises are false. Therefore the combination containing A, B and C only is correct.

Option A:
Option A includes A and B, which are both true, but it omits C, which correctly defines a sound argument as valid with true premises. Because C is also true and is left out, this option does not capture all the correct statements and is therefore incomplete.

Option B:
Option B selects B and C but leaves out A, so it fails to mention the fundamental guarantee that in a valid deductive argument true premises ensure a true conclusion. Since A is a correct statement about validity and is missing, this combination cannot be considered fully correct.

Option C:
Option C includes A, B and C but adds D, which is false because deductive reasoning need not extend beyond the information in the premises; often the conclusion is logically contained in them. Including D alongside the true statements makes the overall set incorrect.

Option D:
Option D is correct because it lists exactly those statements that are true: A about the truth-preserving nature of validity, B about structure, and C about soundness. It excludes D and E, which misrepresent deductive reasoning by suggesting that every valid argument is automatically sound and that conclusions must always go beyond the premises.

Proof by contradiction is an indirect method of proof where we assume that the statement to be proved is false and then logically deduce a contradiction. This contradiction shows that the assumption of falsity cannot hold, so the original statement must be true. It is often used in proving results that are difficult to handle directly. Hence, the method described in the question is called proof by contradiction.

Option A:
Proof by induction is a different technique that involves a base step and an inductive step to show that a statement holds for all natural numbers. It does not rely on assuming the negation of the statement and reaching a contradiction. Therefore, induction does not match the description in the question.

Option B:
Proof by contradiction is correct because it fits exactly the process of assuming the negation and deriving an impossibility or inconsistency. For example, classic proofs of the irrationality of √2 use this method. Understanding this technique helps students tackle theoretical questions in mathematical reasoning.

Option C:
Proof by construction involves explicitly constructing an example or object that satisfies the required properties. It does not necessarily involve any assumption that the statement is false. Therefore, construction is conceptually different from the method described in the stem.

Option D:
Proof by example is typically used to demonstrate the existence of at least one object with a given property, but it cannot prove statements that are meant to hold universally. It also does not depend on assuming the negation and producing a contradiction. Thus, this option is not correct for the method mentioned.