Opinion Fixing the frame
Proposals for UPSC reform need to be bolder...
The demand for reform of the civil service entrance examination has always provided a subject for passionate debate,right from its inclusion in one of the first resolutions of the Indian National Congress in 1885. Changes in the recruitment pattern have represented hard-won struggles by the nationalists before Independence (the exam to the Covenanted Civil Service began to be held in India as late as 1922) and a consistent attempt in the direction of engaging the most capable minds in running the administration since 1947. It is a chequered record,to say the least.
With more than four lakh applicants for the preliminary stage of the Civil Services Examination this year,UPSC Chairman D.P. Agarwals announcement at the Inaugural UPSC Foundation Day Lecture regarding changes in the preliminary testing pattern has already added to the current buzz surrounding the exam. Change,it seems,is in the air. On the face of it,it sounds near revolutionary to provide a level playing field to aspirants by replacing the objective-type preliminary test (which includes one common general studies paper and an optional subject of ones choice) with a civil service aptitude test. It was the Alagh Committee Report in 2001 that had favoured testing candidates in a common rather than an optional subject and the Hota Committee in 2004 had favoured introducing aptitude and leadership tests for selection. The current two-stage examination structure,on the other hand,is a legacy of the Kothari Committee report in 1976 following which the preliminary exam was introduced in 1979 as a simple screening device to weed out non-serious aspirants and to bring them down to a manageable number.
Amidst all this talk of reform,the commission continues to be resolute in its refusal to address the questions regarding the secrecy surrounding the preliminary results. And even the best recruitment pattern in the world will not survive the inefficiency that comes with a refusal to make public the standards by which a candidate is judged. The commission has consistently stonewalled attempts to reveal the cut-off required to clear the examination as well as the model answers to the various question papers. Citing Section 8 of the RTI Act,the commission has bafflingly reasoned that not only will the disclosure of the said information not serve any public interest but that it will irreparably undermine the integrity,strength and efficacy of the competitive public examination system. (The Commissions appeal against the Delhi HC judgment directing it to reveal the above-mentioned information is pending with the Supreme Court). It goes on to argue that the unpredictability of the methodology of testing is an inherent feature of any system of testing in a competitive exam.
This unpredictability,which it cites primarily as a means of thwarting the attempts of various coaching institutes to reverse engineer from the model answers and the cut-off to load the exam against the serious candidate,comes at a huge price. While it cannot be argued that this pattern has completely blocked talent from seeping into the system,it has clearly not aided a barrage of talent in making the cut either. And isnt that the final touchstone for pronouncing upon the efficacy of this system?
In frantically trying to outwit the coaching institutes,the UPSC has gone on upping the level of unpredictability in the exam,for instance,it introduced negative marking in the preliminary exam in 2007. Anybody even remotely familiar with the examination will agree that the Civil Services Examination may be found wanting on many counts,but not being difficult or unpredictable enough is hardly one of them. The problem clearly lies elsewhere and the commission needs to figure out where.
Lack of transparency would be a reasonable guess. Moreover,should the institution responsible for recruiting the future administrators of the country hide behind a shadowy notion of public interest to evade accountability?
Its also a point worth pondering how there are cases of serious candidates making the cut right up till the interview stage and failing to even clear the preliminary in their next shot at the exam. One would be forgiven in mistaking the commissions zeal for unpredictability for a largely arbitrary,trial and error method of selection.
If well begun is half done,the UPSC needs to address the other basic issues that plague the exam.
pallavi.singh@expressindia.com
Share
