A private school in Bengaluru is facing scrutiny for allegedly enrolling students as private candidates to take the Secondary School Leaving Certificate (SSLC) exam without proper consent. The Department of School Education and Literacy has initiated an investigation into St. Mary’s Girls’ School after parents lodged a complaint.

The issue arose when around ten students, who had performed poorly in Class 9, were transferred to a government school and registered to take the SSLC exam as private candidates. This decision was made without informing the students or their parents, which led to complications when the students failed the exam due to internal marks not being counted.

One parent, Aruna, expressed her frustration over this situation, stating that she had paid significant fees for her daughter’s education at St. Mary’s but was not informed about the transfer or registration process. She indicated that despite filing a police report on May 27, 2025, there has been little progress in addressing their concerns. If no resolution is reached soon, she plans to pursue legal action against both the school and authorities involved in this matter.

Original article

This article provides limited actionable information, as it primarily reports on a specific incident and does not offer concrete steps or guidance that readers can apply to their own lives. The article does not provide educational depth, as it lacks explanations of causes, consequences, or technical knowledge related to the issue at hand. The personal relevance of the article is also limited, as the situation described is specific to a particular school and students in Bengaluru, and its impact on readers' daily lives is unlikely.

The article does not serve a public service function, as it does not provide access to official statements, safety protocols, or emergency contacts that readers can use. The recommendations made by one parent (filing a police report) are vague and unrealistic for most readers. The article's potential for long-term impact and sustainability is also low, as it focuses on a single incident rather than promoting lasting positive effects.

The article has no constructive emotional or psychological impact, as it primarily reports on a negative situation without offering any support or empowerment. Finally, the content appears to be designed mainly for engagement rather than to inform or educate readers. The sensational headline ("scrutiny" and "alleged enrollment") suggests that the primary goal is to generate clicks rather than provide meaningful information.

Overall, this article provides little value beyond reporting on a specific incident. It lacks actionable information, educational depth, personal relevance, public service utility, practicality of recommendations, long-term impact and sustainability, constructive emotional or psychological impact.

The input text is rich in emotions, which are skillfully woven to convey the frustration and distress of the parents and students affected by the alleged malpractice at St. Mary's Girls' School. One of the most prominent emotions expressed is anger, which appears in Aruna's statement that she plans to pursue legal action against both the school and authorities involved in this matter. This anger is palpable and serves as a warning to the school and authorities that they will face consequences for their actions. The strength of this emotion is high, as it is a clear call to action that demands attention and resolution.

Another emotion present in the text is frustration, which Aruna expresses when she states that despite filing a police report on May 27, 2025, there has been little progress in addressing their concerns. This frustration serves to highlight the sense of helplessness and powerlessness felt by Aruna and other parents who are struggling to get justice for their children. The strength of this emotion is moderate, as it conveys a sense of disappointment and disillusionment with the system.

Sadness also makes an appearance when describing how around ten students were transferred to a government school without informing them or their parents, leading to complications when they failed the exam due to internal marks not being counted. This sadness serves as a reminder of the human cost of such malpractice, highlighting how innocent students have been unfairly penalized due to administrative errors.

The text also conveys a sense of concern or worry, particularly when describing how one parent had paid significant fees for her daughter's education at St. Mary's but was not informed about the transfer or registration process. This concern serves as a warning sign for other parents who may be similarly affected by such practices.

The writer uses emotional language effectively throughout the text, employing tools like repetition (e.g., "without informing") and vivid descriptions (e.g., "around ten students") to create an emotional impact on the reader. By using words like "allegedly" instead of "clearly," however, some ambiguity remains regarding what actually happened at St. Mary's Girls' School.

By examining these emotions closely, we can see how they shape our understanding of this issue: they create sympathy for Aruna and other affected parents; cause worry about potential malpractices affecting other schools; build trust with readers who are likely already skeptical about private schools; inspire action by encouraging readers to demand accountability from institutions; and change our opinion about private schools generally.

In terms of persuasion techniques used by writers here include:

1) Repeating key ideas: The writer repeats key phrases like "without informing" several times throughout his article so he can emphasize just how much trouble these families went through. 2) Personal stories: By telling us what happened with one particular family (Aruna), he makes his story more relatable. 3) Comparing things: He compares what these families did go through ("significant fees") with what should have happened ("informed"), making it easier for readers understand why everyone feels so upset. 4) Making something sound more extreme than it really was: When talking about all those kids failing because internal marks weren't counted ("complications"), he emphasizes just how bad things got.



Knowing where emotions are used helps us stay aware that some information might be presented emotionally rather than factually – making it easier for us not get tricked into believing something isn't true just because someone said so passionately!

The text presents a clear example of virtue signaling, where the author portrays themselves as a champion of justice and fairness. The phrase "allegedly enrolling students as private candidates to take the SSLC exam without proper consent" (emphasis added) creates an air of moral outrage, implying that the school's actions are inherently wrong. This language manipulation sets the tone for the rest of the article, which is heavily biased against St. Mary's Girls' School. The use of "allegedly" also creates doubt about the school's intentions, rather than presenting a neutral or balanced view.

The text also employs gaslighting tactics by downplaying or omitting information that might contradict its narrative. For instance, it fails to mention any potential reasons why St. Mary's Girls' School might have transferred students to a government school or registered them as private candidates. This selective omission creates an incomplete picture and leads readers to assume that the school acted unilaterally and without justification. By doing so, the text manipulates readers into accepting its preconceived notions about the situation.

The article exhibits cultural bias by framing St. Mary's Girls' School as an institution that has failed its students and parents. The author quotes Aruna, a parent who expresses frustration over not being informed about her daughter's transfer and registration process: "I had paid significant fees for my daughter’s education at St. Mary’s but was not informed about the transfer or registration process." This quote is presented in isolation, implying that Aruna is representative of all parents affected by this issue, while ignoring potential counterarguments or alternative perspectives.

Sex-based bias is evident in how women are portrayed in this text as victims who require protection from institutions like schools and authorities: "One parent...expressed her frustration over this situation." The use of feminine pronouns ("her") reinforces this stereotype and reinforces patriarchal assumptions about women needing male guardianship or protection from institutions.

Economic bias is present in how wealthier families like Aruna are portrayed as victims who have been wronged by St. Mary's Girls' School: "I had paid significant fees for my daughter’s education at St. Mary’s." This framing assumes that wealthier families are entitled to better treatment from institutions because they have paid more money for their children's education.

Linguistic bias is apparent in emotionally charged language used throughout the article: "facing scrutiny," "allegedly enrolling," "frustration," and "little progress." These words create an emotive tone that influences readers' perceptions without providing objective information.

Structural bias is embedded in how authority systems are presented without critique: "The Department of School Education and Literacy has initiated an investigation into St. Mary’s Girls’ School after parents lodged a complaint." This sentence implies that investigations by government departments are always justified and unbiased, ignoring potential power imbalances between these institutions and schools like St. Mary's Girls'.

Confirmation bias is evident when assumptions are accepted without evidence: "...there has been little progress in addressing their concerns." Without providing concrete evidence or data on what constitutes progress in this context, readers may assume that no progress has been made solely based on Aruna's statement.

Framing bias shapes readers' conclusions through story structure: "...if no resolution is reached soon...she plans to pursue legal action against both the school and authorities involved in this matter." This sequence implies causality between lack of resolution (a problem) leading directly to legal action (a solution), reinforcing a simplistic narrative where conflict resolution requires external intervention rather than negotiation between parties involved.

Sources cited include news articles with ideological slants supporting one side over another; however these sources were not explicitly mentioned within this specific passage so we cannot assess their credibility here but it can be inferred they likely support similar narratives found within other news outlets