Targeting the wrong problem areas
What we need is motivation and passion among the youth
The writer is a 2016 CSS qualifier
When only 202 out of 9,643 candidates who sit a competitive exam qualify, the results ought to shock the country and the recruiting authority itself. The country witnessed the situation this year when over 97 per cent of the candidates who sat the competitive exam for civil services failed the written test – a test that evaluates them for their written, cognitive and inferential competence with an explanatory syllabus.
Critique on the ‘dismal state of education in Pakistan’, the ‘examination strategies’, the ‘flaws in the system’, among others, followed the indubitably disappointing results this year, but one criticism has been highlighted exclusively in both the electronic and print media without a counter by those directed: the targeting of candidates who qualified the exam this year, marring the achievement to the extent that created some self-doubts.
So let’s talk about it now.
Any rational mind who is familiar with the Federal Public Service Commission’s (FPSC) testing for the Central Superior Services (CSS) will not argue once about the prestige, authenticity, transparency and austerity of the selection process which the candidates go through. The unusual struggles, the time consumption and diversity of knowledge that is sought and achieved through the process, the mind-boggling questions in both the written exam and the interviews that test our written and spoken capabilities, our psychology and cognition and above all our personalities speak volumes of the credibility of the system and the understanding, knowledge, information and transition we go through before we even become officers.
Amid all this, what came as a shock was when learned people, who are well-aware of the system questioned it. Anjum Altaf, for instance, looked quite unhappy and disappointed with FPSC, or at least that is what his opinion for a newspaper reflected. He argues that his observation, evidence and investigation tell him that CSS is not looking for creative, perceptive and competent students. He comments over the Commission’s evaluating strategies quoting an example of one student who, otherwise an A-plus in English, scored 12 out of 100 in an essay, and consequently failed.
To me, his and many more such analyses that are motivated by “single/personal examples” are victim of generalisation. Before commenting on the system, we have to remind ourselves of the diverse educational backgrounds these candidates come from, around the country – a country where getting quality education is based not only on performance, will and potential of a student, but largely on financial and geographical factors as well. Yet, simultaneously, we cannot ignore that the fact the academic career alone does not reflect a student’s competence or the other way round. I have personally seen students with rich academic career failing CSS exam twice, not due to the “flaws” of the system or examination and evaluation strategies, but lack of their personal motivation towards self-regulated study. There is no justifiable argument that creates a strong nexus between academic career and competency. The Commission is most certainly testing for intelligence, creativity, cognitive inference, confidence and strong narratives and ideologies that serve the country and its highest institutions.
Going through the process, I realised the freedom I had to construct and express my opinion; and the process began right with the written test. I refute arguments that make us look like we only follow officially sanctioned narratives. There’s comprehensive study and knowledge seeking involved from myriad sources that teach us to establish our own opinions and responses.
I do not say that bureaucracy is free from problems that need to be rectified, but doubting the selection process and the capabilities of qualifiers and those selected will most certainly create scepticism about the Commission. What we need is motivation and passion among the youth, and that is the biggest attribute that takes us places. I am 22-year-old, among the 202 who made it through this year in my first attempt, a recent graduate from a local university like most of those who qualified. So generalisation and doubt wouldn’t do us or future CSS aspirants any better.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 27th, 2016.
Critique on the ‘dismal state of education in Pakistan’, the ‘examination strategies’, the ‘flaws in the system’, among others, followed the indubitably disappointing results this year, but one criticism has been highlighted exclusively in both the electronic and print media without a counter by those directed: the targeting of candidates who qualified the exam this year, marring the achievement to the extent that created some self-doubts.
So let’s talk about it now.
Any rational mind who is familiar with the Federal Public Service Commission’s (FPSC) testing for the Central Superior Services (CSS) will not argue once about the prestige, authenticity, transparency and austerity of the selection process which the candidates go through. The unusual struggles, the time consumption and diversity of knowledge that is sought and achieved through the process, the mind-boggling questions in both the written exam and the interviews that test our written and spoken capabilities, our psychology and cognition and above all our personalities speak volumes of the credibility of the system and the understanding, knowledge, information and transition we go through before we even become officers.
Amid all this, what came as a shock was when learned people, who are well-aware of the system questioned it. Anjum Altaf, for instance, looked quite unhappy and disappointed with FPSC, or at least that is what his opinion for a newspaper reflected. He argues that his observation, evidence and investigation tell him that CSS is not looking for creative, perceptive and competent students. He comments over the Commission’s evaluating strategies quoting an example of one student who, otherwise an A-plus in English, scored 12 out of 100 in an essay, and consequently failed.
To me, his and many more such analyses that are motivated by “single/personal examples” are victim of generalisation. Before commenting on the system, we have to remind ourselves of the diverse educational backgrounds these candidates come from, around the country – a country where getting quality education is based not only on performance, will and potential of a student, but largely on financial and geographical factors as well. Yet, simultaneously, we cannot ignore that the fact the academic career alone does not reflect a student’s competence or the other way round. I have personally seen students with rich academic career failing CSS exam twice, not due to the “flaws” of the system or examination and evaluation strategies, but lack of their personal motivation towards self-regulated study. There is no justifiable argument that creates a strong nexus between academic career and competency. The Commission is most certainly testing for intelligence, creativity, cognitive inference, confidence and strong narratives and ideologies that serve the country and its highest institutions.
Going through the process, I realised the freedom I had to construct and express my opinion; and the process began right with the written test. I refute arguments that make us look like we only follow officially sanctioned narratives. There’s comprehensive study and knowledge seeking involved from myriad sources that teach us to establish our own opinions and responses.
I do not say that bureaucracy is free from problems that need to be rectified, but doubting the selection process and the capabilities of qualifiers and those selected will most certainly create scepticism about the Commission. What we need is motivation and passion among the youth, and that is the biggest attribute that takes us places. I am 22-year-old, among the 202 who made it through this year in my first attempt, a recent graduate from a local university like most of those who qualified. So generalisation and doubt wouldn’t do us or future CSS aspirants any better.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 27th, 2016.