A web portal that lets trainees learn, trainers manage content and track progress, and admins oversee users and courses for organizational training.
Ministry of Earth Sciences (MoES) · India Meteorological Department · Software
Signing in saves it for your whole team, so everyone on your invite link sees the same two entries. Anything you shortlisted while signed out comes with you.
Decomposed from what the description asks for. Nothing added.
Secure Authentication System
Provide secure signup and login functionality with three distinct user roles for trainees, trainers, and admins.
Trainee Dashboard
Allow trainees to build profiles, enroll in courses, access resources, take MCQ assessments, and provide feedback.
Trainer Portal
Enable trainers to manage profiles, create questionnaires with deadlines, track performance, and upload lectures and study materials.
Admin Management Module
Provide user approval, role management, system monitoring dashboards, and homepage announcements for admins.
Competency Mapping Tool
Support competency mapping to identify suitable trainers for various subjects.
Both columns are read off the brief's own wording. Nothing here is inferred from the ministry's name.
The evaluators will check for secure role-based access for trainees, trainers, and admins, along with working course enrollment, MCQ assessments, and competency mapping features.
A jury can still ask about these. Decide them deliberately rather than by accident.
Generated from the brief's own wording and the competition's published rules, never from a guess about what this ministry prefers.
Specific database schema requirements?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
Exact technology stack preferences?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
Has any part of this been shown at a previous event, hackathon or college project?
The guidelines are explicit: your solution must not have appeared in any previous event or programme, of any sort. A recycled project is what a team under time pressure reaches for.
The brief asks for secure authentication system. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26075 itself: Provide secure signup and login functionality with three distinct user roles for trainees, trainers, and admins. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for trainee dashboard. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26075 itself: Allow trainees to build profiles, enroll in courses, access resources, take MCQ assessments, and provide feedback. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for trainer portal. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26075 itself: Enable trainers to manage profiles, create questionnaires with deadlines, track performance, and upload lectures and study materials. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for admin management module. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26075 itself: Provide user approval, role management, system monitoring dashboards, and homepage announcements for admins. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for competency mapping tool. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26075 itself: Support competency mapping to identify suitable trainers for various subjects. The brief asks for it by name.
Where does your data come from: a published source, one you collect, or one you generate?
No dataset is attached to this problem statement, so sourcing it is part of the work and nobody told you that.
Why not use what already exists? Name the closest thing to this that is already running.
A team that has not named the alternative themselves is answering this for the first time in the room.
Which single thing will you demonstrate end to end, start to finish, with nothing skipped?
Ours, not a rule: a narrow thing that fully works survives questioning better than a broad thing that half works. If nobody on the team can name it, that is the finding.
Show me this working: the evaluators will check for secure role-based access for trainees, trainers, and admins, along with working course enrollment, MCQ assessments, and competency mapping features.
This is the evaluator read for your problem statement, decoded from the brief's own wording.
Each one is quoted from a gap in the brief, not a guess about your team.
No measurable target
The description asks for a scalable and user-friendly platform but gives no quantitative performance or user load targets.
What the organisers attached, and what the brief assumes you can get.
Same organisation, same year. Reading two of theirs tells you more about what they care about than reading one.