Quote:
Originally Posted by rubraiz
If you look at the other papers especially the optionals, you will be able to chalk out the visible change in trend of exams. MCQs are not the usual 20 juicy questions which you can bag by cramming last 10 years' past papers. The subjective questions were as analytical as they could be made and we are calling them the shocker. Yes indeed these are shockers we have received in each exam but this might be the beginning of a new epoch in css where cramming won't serve anyone and the sound knowledge base will matter. We should be rejoicing if FPSC has decided to offer a level playing field to all candidates rather than calling these shockers.
|
have you seen the paper? or have you prepared for the paper and appeared in it? though this is not directed at me but i would like to clear one thing brother...analytical approach works in papers like sociology and journalism or say the compulsory papers. in a paper like geography there is no analytical reasoning involved. if you see the paper-II , you will know that some of the questions were out of the blue. no matter which exam in the world you sit there is always a pattern ...and all these guys are saying here is that this pattern is not according to the pattern and there is no rocket science if FPSC starts giving those questions that the students cannot solve ...let me be the maker and i too can set a paper that everyone will find hard to solve ...and then i can get all the applauds that i made a tough paper?