Quote:
Originally Posted by mani1
Actually it does. Tests/Exams are specifically formulated to test the ability/aptitude/preparation of a candidate
|
I agree with you on this point. But what I was talking about that bad result does not necessarily mean lack of preparation/skills etc. There may be many other factors involved. Do you think candidates scoring 700+ score in CSS and unfortunately failing a particular subject will have no aptitude? not prepared? and incompetent? Our examination and marking system has many shortcomings and CSS is no exemption to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mani1
Do you have any proof of biasness of FPSC? If yes, please move the court of law so that your grievances may be addressed. If not, lets not debate on presumptions as I can put forward 100s of them too. If anyone scored less, its simply because he did not knew or was over-confident and made some mistake. There is no way examiner would unduly cut marks, especially in a mathematical paper like Accounting where you are either correct or wrong. Had it been a paper like History, I would have inclined towards your point of view but not in case of Accounting. Lets not base our debate on assumptions.
|
I don't have any grievances in this regard as I am not a party to this Accounting Paper. However, what I have said about targeting a particular subject is not an individual opinion rather an opinion shared by many aspirants and qualifiers. Well, you are talking about Accouting being a mathematical subject which if done correctly gives good score. Let me remind you some other fact. History is not a mathematical subject in which you can score nearly full marks. But if you have seen the result of Islamic and Indopak histories in CSS 2009, you would notice that candidates scored as high as 188. Not a single candidate might have scored as high in Accounting paper that year. The candidate who scored 170 in Indopak history in 2009 managed to score only 89 in 2010. So this is not only about competency/attitude/prepardness, it is about the trend in a particular year, examiner marking the paper, complexity of the paper etc. it also depends upon luck also.
In 2010, Accounting also proved to be disastrous. A candidate whose both papers went great scored 87. After exams, he solved both paper and get it checked from an experienced accounting teacher of Punjab University who has been a paper setter in different exams. The teacher gave him overall score 170 but his actual was 87. He was very skilled, had great aptitude, and was well prepared but even then scored low despite of having easy accounting paper.
I respect difference of opinions. Every one may have his/her own opinion. I have just tried to emphasize what I have found to be factual and logical.