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!

[Debate] Nigvekar Committee Report on CSE - Radical or Reformist?

245

Comments

  • edited March 2014
    Is the entire report available? Curious to read what Dr Kalam had written to UPSC.[see Annexure in the Mrunal web link].

  • i don't know if it is a good idea to grant 2-year exemption to those who have already cracked prelims.Will this not create an uneven playing field?
    Yup! Another problem. If a person cracks Prelims under the current system by virtue of CSAT, they'll be trying for Mains more often. CSAT would become even more of a barrier for others. That's unfair as well as counterintuitive when they alreay say that " Thus, graduates from non-science/engg. background are hurt in the competition."
    You will have to consider the report holistically. Every point in the report is made on the assumption that all the other reco's are also implemented. Nigvekar specifically mentioned he had issues with csat paper - 2 being more partial to urban junta, which is quite true. I totally think once people pass prelims he should be given a license to write mains for 2 years in total.

  • Report is not only impractical, it will never get accepted by UPSC or by Personnel Ministry. Nigvekar is living in a fantasy world.
  • edited March 2014
    25 year age limit is also a drawback for financially not-so-well off people who have to prepare while on job, and also to rural students who are mostly late blossomers. Although, apart from this, his report looks logical to me. Those saying prelims score to be valid for 2 years is a bad option, should note that he advised reforms for pre as well. I have seen people reaching till the interview stage in one attempt and not being able to clear pre in the next. Prelims has a very small margin of error. And many good students miss out and are being replaced by non serious prelims-champions.

    * You reaching till the interview stage shows that you have got atleast something, providing these people with lower level jobs will (again good for poorer lads) atleast give some amount of stability and govt gets good human resource. Reaching the interview stage and not clearing doesnt have any value at all, for next attempt you start with 0. This right now increases the chaos. Right now its a waste of human resource when people giving 3rd-4 th attempts remain completely jobless, specially when most of them are extremely talented
  • 3 day interview though radical is/was a good recommendation. It would allow more thorough examination of candidate's abilities. Some deserving candidates were left out because the duration of the interview was too short to prove their worth.
  • There is no second opinion about the fact that a heavy dose of English in Paper II of prelims goes in favour of urban, techies and medicos (I am one of them!). UPSC should consider introducing minimum mandatory cut off for each paper based on percentile system as both papers are equally important.
  • edited March 2014
    Only 42% speak Hindi and yet the the case of rural candidates in non-Hindi speaking areas is not discussed. This is gross injustice.
  • @rahulv

    bhai totally agree with your opinion about English - I am also one of the people who are taking advantage of this. And, then there is another English language qualifying paper in Mains. What is the point of testing English at two stages and that too both elimination.
  • some points good and some rubbish
  • Through these recommendations this exam is going to become more competitive,

    Imagine that IAS and IPS and IRS are selected in one exam and assume that they are going to have about 600 seats here and 600 Seats in the other Exam.It makes people getting to the interview stage become just 1400(compare ~3000 now).Meaning we will have only 7000 people qualify for mains.(compare ~13000 now).

    Now imagine the foolishness of it, you already have 5500 people from last year who would have failed to go to the interview. Assuming some were from last prelims and some were from year before last years prelims (lets say 50% each) we have about 2700 people from previous years mains who will sit for mains this year. This means from Prelims we will just have 4300 candidates chosen for mains each year instead of 13000 currently. Damn! me.


    This is a half thought out report. Frankly this is a crazy and complicated and messy process. Besides I think its funny that UPSC should have syllabus books for those papers. Its crazy because the exam is currently testing current affairs which are not published anywhere.

    Also the personality test need not be done by 10 groups....the guy has no Idea of random sampling. If three boards give you low marks you don't have to go to 7 other boards...same with high marks. One needs to know the covariance of marks between groups to find the # of groups that can eliminate the bias. This is obviously outside his scope of understanding I suppose.

    I personally don't know if we need to reduce the age limit....we need to definitely reduce the attempts though. Make it three or two attempts with a more robust evaluation system.
Sign In or Join to comment.

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