Daily Times

The national media is moaning the disappointing results of this year’s competitive examination for civil services. In 2016, 9,643 candidates sat for the written test of the Central Superior Services (CSS). Sadly however, only 202 or 2.09 percent qualified, and the rest failed the test. This is the lowest percentage of successful students since 2011. In 2015, a total of 12,176 sat for the CSS written test, but only 439 passed, while only 377 qualified the interview. These successful candidates will undoubtedly play a crucial role in shaping the future of the country. Given the high stakes, the winners should form the crème de la crème of the country. But do they? And what about the 9,000 who failed, a good chunk of who have dedicated the most productive phase of their lives to this seemingly unachievable pursuit?

Similarly, 24,640 candidates applied for the written test in 2014 against 315 vacancies. Of them, only 233 managed to clear all tests. The despondency is understandable, yet it conceals just how deep the problem is in connection with candidates’ proficiency in basic writing skills. In its 2014 report, the Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC) depicted a sorrow picture of competence of candidates, which is now consistently being mentioned in every annual report. “The standard of performance reflected that the majority did not know the strategies of making précis and reproduced the original language of the passage.”

A number of myths surround the civil services and the CSS examination. Some believe that only those having an English medium background and high academic record can get into it, while some think that it is easy for students with professional qualifications such as engineering and medicine. In CSS examinations, understanding of concepts is tested. Therefore, instead of memorising, ca0didate’s ability to understand concepts and writing is the main emphasis. I have long been interested in the idea of giving more weight to teaching conceptual analysis in developing writing and creative skills to my students. While securing overall competence of candidates in general knowledge and basic writing skills remains the overarching priority of CSS, abilities in the broader cognitive domains of candidates continues to decline, both here and in many other countries. Maybe the FPSC, which conducts the CSS examination, should take the lead to initiate a training course and be amongst the leading thinkers on this issue.

One of the lessons I draw from thinking about conceptual analysis is that what matters to the public does not always fit into the curriculum structure of the CSS examination. On the basis of the structure of the civil services examination, it is difficult to maintain that successful candidates are temperamentally and motivationally suited to the service they would be allocated at the completion of the written and academy training.

If we want to address the basic cognitive abilities and the desired personality attributes in CSS candidates and complex issues in society, we need to collaborate more. The average civil servant enjoys a rotten reputation, and Pakistan’s bureaucracy is not entirely unknown for its red tape and a knack to stall even the most critical reforms. Yet given the lure of elite government services, which includes guaranteed job security, often-unbridled authority, relatively quick and assured promotions, diversity in work and non-financial perks, on average it is not a surprise that CSS examinations are expected to attract talent more from the rural than the urban middle class.

If there is so much at stake what then explains the absence of intelligent candidates from appearing and the presence of thousands of candidates who fail the CSS examination? Sure, a low-paid salary and perceived servility to the oft-inept politicians play a role in keeping some of the best brains away, but the FPSC is a comprehensive body that needs to review its reforms commission to suggest changes in organising a pre-CSS examination academy for aspiring students. It is not difficult to see how the examination keeps away suitable civil servants. The best and the brightest candidates are those working a fulltime job. Sadly, the inherent structure of this examination discourages full time job-holders from taking it. On the contrary, most other comparable competitive exams GMAT, GRE, CAT etc. encourage examinees to appear while working a job, which is why the best talent is lost to these examinations.

Besides pushing away the best brains, this examination lures too many could-have-been doctors, engineers and countless other professionals into its trap, laying waste to their potential during the many years of preparation, and, in most cases, renders the unsuccessful ones permanent underachievers, usually stuck in low-productivity jobs. Worse, a great many students from rural backgrounds rely solely on CSS examinations to make a career, entirely neglecting their education and alternative job prospects, only to find many years later that they are stranded with neither civil services nor worthy education. In many cases, they blithely bankrupt their families to spend on substandard coaching academies. But what makes the structure of examination so bad? It is this super-intensive, year-long examination cycle that makes it practically impossible for anyone working a full-time job to clear the ultra-competitive CSS examination, which admits less than one in 500 aspirants.

Also, the quick resumption of the next cycle means the aspirants are stuck in a quicksand for years. Educationalists would excoriate this inordinately long duration as a national loss. On top of that, the infamous, everything-under-the-sun, syllabus repels the best candidates.There is an urgent need for the FPSC to use all their political capital to implement the right mix of recommendations to strongly encourage full-time job-holders to take the examination. This would serve two purposes: it would ensure better civil servants; and it would provide relief to the millions of aspirants who, at the peak of their productive powers, are doing nothing except spending their days failing to get better results in the CSS examination.

(To be concluded)

The writer is a professor of psychiatry and consultant forensic psychiatrist in the UK. He can be contacted at fawad_shifa@yahoo.com