Originally Posted by prosetheus

I see a lot of people on these forums repeatedly using the phrase that CSS is a 'game of chance' but what baffles me is that it is described this way because English is not our native tongue and we do not use words properly or either are unaware of the concept of 'chance' and probability.

A lottery is a 'game of chance', gambling is also a mixture of chance, probability and some varying levels of skill.

The CSS examinations are used to select people to be inducted into bureaucracy to manage the affairs of the state. No, they DO NOT require the 'best of the best', they only require people that fulfill the minimum criteria for satisfactory performance and for the sake of maintaining transparency, the process is conducted through examinations.

I think that there are problems on both ends.

There is far too much of an interest in these papers that leads to a humongous amount of candidates appearing in these exams, in a system that was simply not designed for this purpose. The exams purpose is to eliminate unsuitable candidates, NOT to choose the best of the best (there is a subtle yet very crucial difference in these two approaches, such as CSS vs. GRE/GMAT)

We all know that the capabilities of the students vary greatly, and this is obviously reflected in their examination as well. However, due to the fact that the FPSC must minimize the number of examiners to maintain a fixed 'standard' as well as to control costs, each examiner is burdened with greater number of papers this way.

What happens next is simple. Any examiner that checks all papers thoroughly is either an honest man or a fool, hence rare. The practical solution is that the examiner simply selects the 'best looking' (aesthetically speaking) papers aside and once he has passed just enough students to meet an arbitrary criteria that would save him from scrutiny, can haphazardly fail students as he pleases.

The simple truth is that there is no way to get papers rechecked or any sort of external checks on the process, and also that the commission get their required number of candidates easily means that there is no reason why this process will be changed or improved, because, it is still doing what it was supposed to do.

Long story short, if any one wishes for their to be a 'fairer' (subjectively speaking) approach to avoiding extremely unpleasant outcomes at the end of years of hard work, struggle and sacrifice; petition/protest/lobby to get the commission to hold a GMAT/GRE style analytical reasoning and english MCQ test PRIOR to these lengthy written examinations. They can set a minimum acceptable criteria for marks from the objective exams for candidates to be eligible to sit for further examinations.


Ideally, they can simply hold interviews of top candidates right after the MCQ exams (which will obviously be checked by computers, eliminating human error)

This will decrease those soldiers of fortune that waste considerable amounts of theirs and others time by throwing off the grading curve.

Originally Posted by Kamran

I know many people who can't even write proper english yet they have managed to get 50+,

Originally Posted by Farrah Zafar

What do you mean by this ? Examiner can deduct marks blindly but can't give..acha !!

Originally Posted by Kamran

It only means that there was no consistency in marking English (P&C) paper.

Originally Posted by Farrah Zafar

If they are being suspected that they deduct marks themselves then I'm also doubtful for my marks in CA & PA.I did well in both papers.I mean I can't expect to fail them.I failed C.E 2012 by 14 marks even when I got 50+ both in essay and Composition.

Do you think 'they' can be responsible for it?