Dawn: Letter to Editor
Dated: 28-Oct-2010

THE revised CSS 2009 results and the recent results of CSS 2010 written part have shocked all future aspirants. Subjects like Journalism, Sociology, Indo-Pakistan and Islamic History were considered the top scores but the results show an unexpected view of the situation.

Most people have scored 20 to 40 marks. Journalism being the easiest and relatively shorter in terms of course was the most favourite due to its scoring potential.

What we see in the 2010 results is a deliberate move on the part of the Federal Public Service Commission to discourage students from the option of the same subjects every year. So this time FPSC had probably planned to change the subject selection tread by assigning a low score.

If some subjects are scoring, let them be like that. It should not be the concern of the FPSC to bring confusion among students about subject selection.

The FPSC needs to re-hire the top lot. They have no right to refrain candidates from selection of easy subjects. If they have a problem checking the scores, they can reduce the number of optional subjects but they have no right to play with the future of aspiring students.

Some of the candidates who had earlier qualified the 2009 examinations were declared failed this time in subjects in which they earlier scored very high.

Suppose if a person passes the essay paper, it should then mean he knows how to write an essay.

But if he fails in the next attempt, then there is a problem with the testing system. The FPSC, therefore, should improve its testing criterion instead of creating problems for students.

The aspirants are already disappointed with the cumbersome recruitment system which usually takes up to two years for a person to be allocated. Now they will have to face another issue of subject selection.

The FPSC should recheck all the papers of 2010 and re-announce the result to address the grievances of the affected candidates.

RANA ZEESHAN PERVAIZ

Multan

This is not an official policy of the FPSC, instead its more like an allegation on them. Therefore what we can expect from this is that the FPSC will try to prove these claims wrong or that they will not react at all. In either case we should not worry about this.

We should have to improve our prep. techniques.........

__________________
BORN TO LEAD..................

This is why its called competetive exam !!

__________________
*****************************
A good child is seen but not heard.
*****************************

FPSC policy is really contadicting its own standards... A candidate who is already serving in income tax group scored 93 in composition and 17 in essay... what does it mean??? After serving five year in civil service, his english has so much worsoned that he even could not pass essay paper... while he has scored exceptionally in all other papers...
The pople who opted hisotories last year were so competent that they got 180 plus scores in histories and candidates who opted histories this year have scored less than 100.... Were competent people only present in year 2009????

Same is the case with Journalism, Audititing and Accounting etc. It shows that there is definitely some flaws in the testing criterion of FPSC...

__________________
Best end of life is not knowledge but action.
Don't limit yourself to what you think people are expecting!

There should be equality in marks of all subjects. For example one of my friends got 178 marks in ISLAMIC HISTORY in css-2009, same person got 88 marks in css 2010, another friend of mine got 130 marks in "Islamic" 2009 css, and 60 marks in css 2010, both marks of css 2009 and css 2010 are unjust. There should be uniform system of marks in all subjects. In this regard fpsc should set a few rules, like any best paper attempted by candidates should not be given more than 80% marks except maths and few subjects. And a good paper is given 65% or 70% of marks. In this way all the 12 papers should be equally treated by fpsc.
It will pay a long way in helping the candidates in choice of their subjects, as normally candidates just go for high scoring subjects irrespective of their minds inclination and will ensure a fair system of group allocation, because if a candidate has got 175 marks in ISLAMIIC HISTORY definitely he would be allocated in good group. Therefore only one subject should not be the criterion for a good group allocation.

__________________
The most important single ingredient in the formula of success is knowing how to get along with people.

my dear how many candidate got 180 plus in history papers????????
if you dnt mind plz tell us.........

and one thing more that... CSP "official" language is local language my brother or may be urdu....they only use to deal with English occasionally......
and
i dnt understand the mentality of the people that why people compare the score of current year with previous year....It might be possible that last year someone's arguments clicked the mind of examiner and this year candidates failed to do this....
my dear,, these are the theoritically papers my dear not numerical that you got same marks as before....and as far as accounting paper is concern, paper pattern is changed from 2008 and there is 30 number's short questions in paper A and Paper B has also have two parts for Theoritical question.. so my dear, now it is not easy to get good marks in Accounting untill and unless your concepts are not clear....
and
It does not mean that a person once passed the CSS exam, he will must pass next year again.. this is only a illusion my dear....

o bhai sahb yeh theorictical paper hai, theoritical......

haaan,, if anybody want that there should be a uniform paper marking than only one option is there that all 12 papers should be comprises of "MCQs",,,

but...... if this happened than also there will be so many people who will say that.,."oh my God... main nay to saray MCQs theek kiay thay mgr meray marks itnay kam kiyon aey"......

just be patiant yara... or just left your 15, 20 question preparation mathod and than look that how many number you will get my dear....

another dilema is this,,,,,suppose if a person opt journalism in 2009 and he secured, suppose, 75 marks, and when anybody ask him about Journalism paper that either he opt this subject or not, than you know what will be the answer of that person,,, "o yar halwa paper hai yar bus last five year k paper kr lo +60% marks aa jaen gay yar and what happened next... the aspirant of 2010 opt the journalism and start craming that 15, 20 questioin....or jub paper hotay hain result ata hai to janab je marks aatay hain 20, 30 to phir rona start.... ye fpsc waloo nay bura kiya, last year itnay number diay, iss dfa ziyadti ke hai and what not and what not........ but they dont give any slight view to their prep. that how much they prepared for this exam.....?

My dear stop blamming FPSC and accept your weakness and try to cover it and get good marks and become a CSP...........

__________________
BORN TO LEAD..................

I know three people who got 180+ marks in islamic history last year... Average score in this paper was 140-150. Average score this year is 70-80. How would you compare these two extremes...

Now, if the difficulty level of the paper is same in consecutive years and one year a candidate scores 81 and next years he scores 42 despite the fact that his papers in both years went equally well... how would you justify this???

There are some candidates who are doing CA, they scored miserably low in this paper... If a candidate having B.Com degree scores 150+ in year 2008 and a Chartered Accountant scores only 84... how would you justify this???

I am not talking about some of the candidates... but for most of the candidates, the trend of this year was the same...

__________________
Best end of life is not knowledge but action.
Don't limit yourself to what you think people are expecting!

i dnt know the way that i tell you that the paper are same, no doubt. the person attemptin the paper is same. but, the material he right must be different from his previous paper my dear... Last time, his arguements may click the mind of examiner and this time not... o my dear this is theoritical paper my dear, not a MCQs paper.
two things are different in both papers
1 : Questions
2: Material of Answers.
if these are different in a theory paper than how you can get equal marks?????????????
first of all, tell me that who told you that a person doing CA is a able to top in Accounting paper in CSS... my dear the whole sylbi is just equal to the sylbe of B.com.. same topics of B.com sylbi are included in CSS paper.. and second thing... CA candidates are not the doctors of Accounting...
and the person you mention is doing CA not a qualified CA.....
and....
when i was appered in 2008, one of my friend also appeared, he was ACMA...We study in same academy.. you know what was his attitude towards accounting prep...just like fun... he said "shoro yar accounting ke kiya teyari krni hai, apnay right hand ka khail hai je" or you know after paper outside the examination hall what was his situation....? and you know how much marks he got????? 78 marks.......sir je 78.... and i got +120 my dear....
i did M.com.. but i didnt left the prep of Accounting my dear....and got good marks...
bhai sb, until and unless you leave the policy of selective study you will face these types of results every year.........
just tell me, suppose, if only 1 person succeeded to get 70 marks in journalism than tell me " wo examiner ka rishtaydar hai".... bhai sb jis kissee nay asha likha unkay number ashay aa gaey....

__________________
BORN TO LEAD..................

sir we need to understand one simple thing this is a job recruitment test not a certified examination, no matter how much we protest on the marking scheme it wont bear any fruits for us..