The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) on February 20 held the physics paper for Class 12. The paper was conducted for 70 marks, and students got three hours to complete the paper. The CBSE Class 12 physics examination conducted today, as per students and teachers, was easy to moderate in difficulty and well within the prescribed syllabus.
Section A comprised multiple-choice questions (MCQs) and assertion-reasoning questions of one mark each. Section B had two-mark each five questions with internal choice in a few questions. Section C comprised three-mark questions with an internal choice in one question. Section D had case study-based questions of 4 marks each. Section E had long answer questions of 5 marks each, with internal choice in a few questions. No overall choice was available, and only one choice had to be attempted in questions with internal options.
As per Thilak M, PGT Physics, JAIN International Residential School (JIRS), Bengaluru, the paper was balanced and gave students ample opportunity to score, while also testing conceptual understanding in selected areas. According to Priya Roy, PGT – Physics, Modern English School, Kahilipara, Guwahati, Assam: “The CBSE Class 12 Physics examination was well-balanced and largely moderate in difficulty, aligning with the expected application-based pattern.
CBSE Class 12 physics section-wise analysis
The MCQs, according to Thilak, were balanced. Some were direct and memory-based, while others tested conceptual clarity. Overall, this section was moderate and manageable.
As per Roy, the MCQs were moderate, with a few being direct and others based on application and analysis, aimed at testing students’ analytical understanding. The assertion and reason-based questions were moderate and based on conceptual clarity, which will help students score well.
The two-mark questions, Thilak said, came from Nuclei, Dual Nature, and Wave Optics and were easy and expected. “However, the question from Moving Charges involving torque might have been slightly tricky for below-average students,” he added.
Story continues below this ad
The two-mark questions included direct questions from semiconductor electronics and nuclei, while others consisted of numerical evaluating students’ conceptual understanding and problem-solving abilities, Roy added.
Section C had a mix of theory and numericals. Questions such as Gauss’s Law application for a plane sheet, Wheatstone network, dielectric insertion into a capacitor, p–n junction diode formation, and Ray diagram of optical instruments were easy and expected. “Students who practiced previous year questions could answer them confidently,” Thilak said, adding that numericals from electrostatic potential, semiconductor diode circuit, and total internal reflection (TIR) were multi-step and required good analytical and problem-solving skills. These questions effectively tested students’ application ability.
The three-mark questions, Roy said, were moderate and manageable, with 6–7 marks allotted to numerical, allowing students to apply concepts with clarity.
Case-based questions were moderately application-oriented and analytical, Roy added, saying that the five-mark questions also maintained a moderate level, focusing on analytical and application-based thinking, with around 6 marks dedicated to numerical.
Case-study questions from the galvanometer and photoelectric effect tested conceptual understanding rather than memorisation. Well-prepared students would have found these manageable. The questions required interpretation and application of theory, but they were not unexpected – JIRS Bengaluru teacher.
Story continues below this ad
Section E, the JIRS Bengaluru teacher said, was clearly a scoring section. Important and expected derivations were asked from electrostatics, ray optics, and EMI and AC, which came as a big relief to students.
Those who had practiced standard derivations from previous years would have found this section comfortable and high-scoring.
Overall, the paper reflected a fair distribution of questions, with approximately 25–30 marks comprising direct questions and the rest involving arithmetic and numerical components, comfortably within a moderate range, the Guwahati teacher added.
Pawan Choudhary, HOD Physics, Lancers Army Schools, while analysing the physics paper said that a significant portion of the paper focused on direct theory and standard derivations. It allowed students who prepared sincerely and worked consistently through the syllabus to secure stable marks.
The paper’s overall level was above moderate, requiring both conceptual understanding and composure under pressure. While most questions were manageable, a few needed careful reading, and small mistakes like missed requirements or sign errors might have impacted performance, especially for top scorers. Minor errors should not discourage students – the paper was syllabus-bound, and consistent preparation is key.
