INTERVIEW FOR CSE 2019
All ForumIAS members selected for CSE 2019 Personality Test must submit their details and DAF and register below to receive further instructions and guidance from ForumIAS. Click here to register now
INTERVIEW 2020 CHANNEL
ForumIAS Channel for Interview Preparation is now Active! Please join the channel by clicking here
We are hiring!

[Draft Uploaded] Collective Efforts to Demand Extra Age / Attempts for 2015 and 2011-2014 scenarios

1108109111113114207

Comments

  • draft ka size chhota rakho ..govt bill nahi hai ye ....apni baat simple words me 1 page me rakho..

    ek line ka Hi to argument hai ki just 3 months pehle 50% of d total marks ko hata diya gaya which is unjust

    ab ise kuchh argument deke justify karna hai

    ye 6 page ki koi zarurat Hi nahi..koi nahi padhega itna bada aur boring
  • again 1 page letter

    intro - demand
    main argument - unfair decision, previous precedents of giving attempts when changes are made, SC/CAT rulings, etc ... focus on what has been promised, what has been done, judgements given etc
    conclusion - emotional plea

    i understand you have put in a lot of effort ... i'm not disparaging it ... but this will NOT work ...
    demand for large reforms ---> result committee
  • One more point ->
    MAKING THE DRAFT SHORTER would prove fatal

    because 90% of the times we won't have the scope to meet and explain to leaders / MPs / TV Channels etc, so proper explanation is required in the draft itself.
    Fully agree.. the draft shuld be an elaborate account of the plight f lacs f candidates who hv suffered this ignominy.. n a well justified plea will require as many examples n elucidation s that can fully place our views in picture. .this wl also form the basis f ny further representation in CAT or judiciary if required.
    Bhagwan ke liye yeh Na karo ... all effort will go waste ... please understand despite what they say - the officers/the ministers/tv channels do NOT want to understand your problem ... the only thing that is in our favour is - election years and numbers (if we can get them) ... anyone who wants to approach the CAT/judiciary - the lawyers will draft a suitable petition then ... we are trying to work at the political level .. keep it short and simple
  • Please ... limit the demand to an extra attempt for 2015. This has at least a good enough reason of sudden change in marking scheme. Understand that the system has a lot of inertia.
  • @gks


    I have just one important point:

    Since the Baswan committee will take about 6 months to submit its report to the UPSC/DoPT, it will again be March/April 2016 and aspirants would again get only 3 months to prepare for the 2016 attempt. So shouldn't we petition the committee to either complete its work by December end so that aspirants have at least 7-8 months to adjust for the new pattern. Or the UPSC announce that any recommendation made by the Baswan committee will be applicable w.e.f. 2017 only.
  • @all,

    Please find below the link for the INITIAL DRAFT for 2015_ATTEMPT

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-K6FLDUkfhlZWtFQUctZEZqOWs/view?usp=sharing

    The link will be active for next 4 days.

    WORK IS STILL IN PROGRESS


    We are still adding DATA to it,

    CRITICISM IS NOT WELCOMED, as it is not a debate but a DEMAND.


    Please suggest ONLY THOSE ARGUMENTS WHICH ARE NOT INCLUDED in the Draft.
    Please Don't suggest already added arguments - By changing tense / sentences.
    @gks
    I have read the draft and i am commenting upon it. My comment is on your central argument and not on a particular point. Before this, I would like to add that I have been following this thread from beginning being a victim myself of prelims 2015.
    I am making my suggestion with the same sincerety as I would have kept at mains 2015, had i cleared prelims. Also I have reached age 31 recently,though cse2015 was only my 2nd attempt, and with the bottom of my heart I want you to succeed in your initiative. All of this I have said because this is my 1st comment in the thread and whether you keep my suggestion or throw it in dust bin, I will be with your cause.
    As I gather from the draft, in point 2 subpoint five, you have mentioned two categories of people who were disadvantaged due to this only 3 months prior change and one category afterwards in point 4 subpoint three, that has benefitted from this change. The disadvantaged categories are 1) who possessed professional education and work exp and had a strong aptitude portion according to themselves, and left a high paying job or like to attempt cse2015 which was their first or second attempt. 2) who had their weakness in CSAT portion and paid 5-6 months of their preparation to CSAT portion.
    In point 3 subsection one and two both you criticize the change in pattern on the grounds (and on only one ground, you repeated the same point in subsection 1 & 2) that 3 months is a very short period to adapt for such people who had given "5-6 months prep" to CSAT . My point- you did not clarify how the first category A) people got disadvantaged by this change when CSAT is their strength as you mentioned it.
    However, In point 4 subpoint one, 3rd para you put forth that it was unfair to category A) people as they deserved "to be informed well in advance" about this change as CSAT was their strong area on which they hoped to clear prelims 2015. My point- include the underlined part in point 3 subpoint one for cat A) people.
    However this is not my exact suggestion. You have not included those people in these disadvantaged categories which I think makes >90% people of this thread who were preparing from more than 1 year and as the trend of prelims gs paper 1 evolved since 2011, were focussed on conceptual understanding and on clearing mains. Why focussed on clearing mains only and not on prelims because they had their strength in CSAT portion and were confident (not hoped) to clear prelims 2015 with this relative strength. I myself belong to cat A) people but a separate category of those people you need to make who were disadvantaged with these changes, who were not bad in gs1 but good at gs 2 and this combined strength made them clear earlier prelims and many of those who reached interview and mains stages earlier could not clear this time because of this abrupt change. With this you will also need to mention that gs 1 paper was of such nature that many questions were simple fact based and if those aspirants who were otherwise earlier successful in prelims or mains did not cover those facts because they relied on their strength of CSAT and focussed on conceptual understanding and not mere cramming of facts and hence were disadvantaged due to this SUDDEN change before 3 months which jeopardised their earlier preparation. UPSC has all right to ask fact based que as much as it want, but atleast inform us 8- 10 months before the exam considering vast syllabus of CSE.

    I have said all of this because you will finally need to explain in person or argue this with either politicians/UPSC/ Baswan comm/ CAT/ court/ advocates. Now category B) people do not exist with us, neither in this thread nor anywhere else as I believe therefore we will be left with Cat A) people only.If there is a strong category A) person who can lead you in this even then we must include a new category. When many of you have given 3, 4 or even 6 attempts why not include this category and fight on the basis of truth. The most important point why we consider the change unfair- "because it was brought only 3 months prior to exam" and if this change would have come 8-10 months earlier, neither category or any of us would have had any problem with this change irrespective of our success or failure in the exam.

    Also for the third category who were advantaged by this change , you have mentioned that only by stroke of luck and/or ignorance they cleared prelims. This may be true for some SSC and state PSC preparing people as all of us know it but this shows that we consider all those who cleared prelims were either lucky and/or ignorant and hence will show us as arrogant people who consider they only are fit to become ias and will put us in a very poor light. Remove the word "ignorance/ignorant" and clarify that there are some who luckily got through this exam. However even this is going to be no good as court or UPSC cant do anything with luck as in praveen sharma's case ruling.
    Again
    If you consider my suggestion worthwhile make according changes and if not you can throw my advice out of the window, it does not matter i will be with you and your cause which is also my cause. I am however unsure whether govt/UPSC will keep the age-attempt criteria next year as 32-6 or 30-4 and if you know anything upon this (my 2nd attempt in 2015, age now 31, eligible for 2016 if 32 years age people would be eligible for 2016), please inform me.
  • @Goddamn 6/32 Is there to stay.plz dont hv that doubt.thats a permanent change
  • The main reason for keeping the demand short and precise is - This time only marking scheme has changed and not the examination syllabus and pattern, like in 2011. So according to my view, the case is itself not as strong as it was in 2011. Just a thought to make sure that authorities get minimum space to manoeuvre.
  • One more point ->
    MAKING THE DRAFT SHORTER would prove fatal

    because 90% of the times we won't have the scope to meet and explain to leaders / MPs / TV Channels etc, so proper explanation is required in the draft itself.
    Fully agree.. the draft shuld be an elaborate account of the plight f lacs f candidates who hv suffered this ignominy.. n a well justified plea will require as many examples n elucidation s that can fully place our views in picture. .this wl also form the basis f ny further representation in CAT or judiciary if required.
    Bhagwan ke liye yeh Na karo ... all effort will go waste ... please understand despite what they say - the officers/the ministers/tv channels do NOT want to understand your problem ... the only thing that is in our favour is - election years and numbers (if we can get them) ... anyone who wants to approach the CAT/judiciary - the lawyers will draft a suitable petition then ... we are trying to work at the political level .. keep it short and simple
    I agree wid u on the fact that v cn achieve our goal through govt only.. judiciary z the last resort.. isiliye likha hai 'if reqd' .. n of course agar court mei koi jaega to proper legal drafting hi hogi.. wot I meant ws all this ws act as a basis 4 our arguments.. otherwise m fully convinced ki court mei sirf mess hoga..nth else
  • Yes you are 100% right - Demand should be short and the Draft should explain it clearly no matter how long or short it is.
This discussion has been closed.

Welcome!

We are a secret self-moderated community for Civil Services preparation. Feel free to join, start a discussion, answer a question or just to say Thank you.

Just dont spread the word ;)

Sign in or join with Facebook or Google