UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Statements A, B and C together provide a realistic overview of research funding. Statement A is true because many calls for proposals explicitly reference national development priorities. Statement B is correct as peer review is standard practice for evaluating the quality and feasibility of research projects. Statement C is also true since acquiring funds from varied sources can reduce dependence on a single agency and widen research autonomy. Statement D is false because researchers often collaborate with and receive support from international agencies, subject to regulations. Therefore, A, B and C only form the correct combination.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it limits the answer to A and B and omits C, thereby failing to capture the importance of diversifying funding streams for long-term sustainability.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it selects A and C but excludes B, overlooking the crucial gatekeeping role of peer review in ensuring that funded projects meet quality standards.

Option C:
Option C is correct because it recognises that funding priorities, peer review and diversified support all shape the research landscape, while excluding D, which wrongly denies the possibility of international funding.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it includes D along with B and C and omits A, accepting the false blanket prohibition on international funding and leaving out the significance of national priorities in public funding.

Statements A, B and D give a correct picture of open access journals, while statement C is incorrect. Many open access journals are peer-reviewed and maintain quality standards while offering free access to readers. Creative Commons licences often define how content may be reused. By increasing accessibility, open access can enhance visibility and citations. Therefore, the set A, B and D only is correct.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it includes only A and B and leaves out D. While A and B are true, statement D is also correct in explaining the impact of open access on visibility and citations. Excluding D makes this option incomplete.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it groups A, B and C as correct, accepting C. Statement C is wrong because peer review and open access are independent decisions; many journals are both open and peer-reviewed. Including C therefore invalidates the combination.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect because it lists B, C and D as correct. Although B and D are true, C is false and claims that open access implies lack of quality control. Any combination that accepts C cannot be the right answer.

Option D:
Option D is correct because it chooses A, B and D, which accurately describe free access, licensing and enhanced visibility. It excludes the misleading idea that open access negates peer review and so matches current scholarly communication practices.

Statements A, B, D and E give a balanced view of teacher appraisal. A is true because self-appraisal, student feedback and peer review are common components of appraisal systems. B is true since performance indicators typically span teaching, research and service. D is true because transparent procedures reduce suspicion and enhance acceptance. E is true as appraisals linked to recognition, support and development can motivate improvement. C is false because feedback from appraisals should inform professional growth, and F is false because teacher appraisal is a key element of institutional quality assurance.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect as it omits E, thereby failing to acknowledge how linking appraisal to recognition and support reinforces continuous improvement.

Option B:
Option B is correct because it brings together A, B, D and E, which together describe the components, dimensions and developmental use of appraisal, while excluding C and F, which deny feedback and quality roles.

Option C:
Option C is incorrect because it includes F, which asserts that appraisal is irrelevant for quality assurance, and omits A, ignoring the multi-source nature of effective appraisal.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it includes C, which wrongly claims that results should never be communicated to teachers, contradicting the developmental purpose of appraisal.

Teacher appraisal refers to the systematic evaluation of a teacher’s performance for purposes such as professional development, promotion or accountability. Tools like self-appraisal, student feedback and peer observation provide multiple perspectives on teaching effectiveness. The stem lists these tools and asks which system they belong to, which is clearly the teacher appraisal system. Therefore, Option B is correct.

Option A:
A well-designed appraisal system aims to support improvement through constructive feedback and recognition of good work, not merely to control or punish. It is central to quality assurance in higher education. These points correspond closely with the description in the question.

Option B:
Punishment focuses on sanctions for misconduct and is not the primary purpose of structured evaluation tools like self-appraisal and student feedback. Hence, Option A is not an accurate completion.

Option C:
Exclusion would imply keeping teachers out of certain roles or opportunities, which may sometimes result from appraisal decisions but is not the main concept represented by these tools. Therefore, Option C is not appropriate.

Option D:
Surveillance suggests continuous monitoring often associated with mistrust, whereas the intended role of appraisal tools is developmental and evaluative. Option D does not capture this constructive intent.

Statements A, B, D and E correctly describe research communication practices. Conferences provide early feedback, journals typically apply more formal peer review, journal choice should align with scope and aims and clear writing that follows author guidelines improves acceptance chances. Statement C is false because repeatedly presenting the same paper without disclosure can be considered unethical or at least questionable, as it may waste limited programme slots and mislead organisers. Hence, the combination including A, B, D and E and excluding C is correct.

Option A:
Option A is correct because it recognises the complementary roles of conferences and journals, the importance of scope matching and the need for clarity and compliance with guidelines, while rejecting the idea of undisclosed repeated presentations as acceptable.

Option B:
Option B is incomplete since it omits E, overlooking the influence of clear writing and adherence to guidelines on editorial decisions. Without E, the author’s responsibility in improving acceptance chances is underplayed.

Option C:
Option C is wrong because it leaves out A and includes only B, D and E, thereby ignoring the valuable feedback function of conferences in refining work before journal submission.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect as it includes C, the statement that normalises undisclosed duplication, alongside A, D and E. By accepting C, this option fails to uphold ethical norms in scholarly communication.

Statements A, B, C and E correctly describe common differences and relationships between theses and journal articles. Theses tend to be lengthy, with detailed methodology and background, and are examined by internal or external examiners. Journal articles are concise, often with strict word limits, and scholars frequently adapt thesis findings into publishable articles. Statement D is false because peer review is a central process for most academic journals.

Option A:
Option A is correct because it includes all four true statements and excludes D, which misrepresents the nature of journal publication. It reflects how theses function as comprehensive research reports, while articles disseminate condensed versions to wider audiences.

Option B:
Option B is incomplete because it omits E, ignoring the common practice of transforming thesis chapters into journal manuscripts. Without E, the option does not capture the dynamic relationship between the two forms of publication.

Option C:
Option C includes B, C and E but excludes A, failing to mention the distinctively detailed character of thesis methodology and background chapters. This omission leaves an important structural difference unexplained.

Option D:
Option D contains A, C and E but leaves out B, so it does not mention that journal articles are usually tightly constrained in length. As word limits shape article structure, this omission makes the option incomplete.

The National Assessment and Accreditation Council is specifically mandated to assess and accredit higher education institutions in India. Its accreditation process evaluates institutions on criteria such as curriculum, teaching-learning, research, infrastructure and governance. The grades awarded by NAAC signal quality levels and guide institutions in planning improvements. Because the stem asks for the body concerned with assessment and accreditation for quality assurance, NAAC is the correct option.

Option A:
NAAC operates as an autonomous body established by the UGC to promote a quality culture in higher education. Through peer team visits, self-study reports and periodic reviews, it helps institutions identify strengths and areas for improvement. These functions align exactly with the role described in the question, confirming that this is the right answer.

Option B:
The All India Council for Technical Education regulates and plans the development of technical and management education. While it may link approval to certain quality norms, it is not the main accreditation agency for all higher education institutions. Therefore, Option B does not directly match the stem.

Option C:
The University Grants Commission is the apex funding and regulatory body for universities but it does not itself conduct institutional accreditation visits. Instead, it created NAAC for this specialised purpose. Hence, Option C is too broad and not as accurate as NAAC for this question.

Option D:
The National Council of Educational Research and Training primarily deals with school education, curriculum frameworks and teacher training at the school level. It is not responsible for accrediting higher education institutions, so Option D is not appropriate here.

Statements A, B, C, E and F together outline responsible research metric use. A is true because such metrics are widely used, though with caution. B is true as overemphasis on one metric can distort publishing behaviour. C is true since good practice combines quantitative indicators with peer judgement. E is true because many institutions now frame policies on responsible metrics. F is true as declarations like DORA warn against using journal metrics as proxies for individual quality. D is false because no single metric can capture research quality across diverse fields.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it omits E and F, so it does not mention institutional policies or international declarations that guide responsible metric use.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it omits F and therefore leaves out the explicit caution from initiatives like DORA about misuse of journal-based indicators.

Option C:
Option C is correct as it includes A, B, C, E and F, the five true statements on current practice, risks, combined assessment, policy development and international guidance, while excluding D, which claims one metric is always enough.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it omits A and includes only B, C, E and F, so it fails to state explicitly that citation and impact metrics exist and are the subject of these responsible-use discussions.

Statements A, B, D and F correctly portray the NRF. A is true because NRF is designed as a competitive grant agency across disciplines. B is true as a key goal is to broaden research activity beyond a handful of institutions. D is true since NRF aims to strengthen linkages among universities, industry and government. F is true because transparent, peer-reviewed processes are critical for credibility. C is false because funding is not meant to be restricted only to central technical institutions, and E is false because NRF intends to support both basic and applied research.

Option A:
Option A is incorrect because it omits F and therefore fails to mention the importance of transparent selection and monitoring in NRF operations.

Option B:
Option B is incorrect because it introduces E, which wrongly claims that basic research is discouraged, contradicting the broad mandate of NRF.

Option C:
Option C is correct as it brings together A, B, D and F, the four statements that reflect NRF’s funding scope, capacity-building role, collaborative orientation and transparent processes, while excluding C and E, which excessively restrict or distort its mandate.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it includes C, which limits funding to centrally funded technical institutions, and therefore misrepresents the inclusive vision of NRF.

Peer review involves colleagues from the same discipline or profession evaluating a teacher’s work, whether in research or teaching. In teaching, peers may observe classes, review materials and provide feedback for improvement or decision-making about promotion. The stem explicitly mentions evaluation by colleagues of the same profession, which defines peer review. Thus, Option A is the correct answer.

Option A:
Peer review is valued because peers can understand subject-specific pedagogy and standards better than outsiders. It can lead to constructive feedback, sharing of good practices and collective responsibility for quality. These features align well with the process described in the question.

Option B:
Student review involves learners giving feedback on teaching effectiveness and is important but differs from professional peer evaluation. It focuses on learners’ perceptions rather than professional judgments, so this option is not appropriate.

Option C:
Self-review or self-evaluation is a reflective exercise in which teachers assess their own performance. While useful, it does not match the external evaluation by colleagues mentioned in the stem.

Option D:
Parent review might occur in school settings where parents comment on teachers, but it is not a common mechanism for teacher appraisal in higher education. It does not match the professional peer context implied in the question.