The controversies surrounding the Civil Service Aptitude Test (CSAT) are refusing to die down as multi-track factors that have been simmering for long, have come to the fore. The format of the examination is now being challenged, the alleged advantage to those who have had the benefit of pursuing a 'professional' course is being made and the strong bias against those from the Hindi heartland is also being fiercely advanced.
Sadly, in the whole process, the rationale of the UPSC examinations to evaluate the candidature of prospective civil servants is totally lost sight of. No where in the dust and din of the debate is there any space for highlighting the 'output' that is expected. We seem to be more keen on 'accommodating' the interests of the 'input' rather than deliberating on the calibre and capacity we expect among those entering our 'elite' civil services.
It is interesting to note that Mr Arvind Verma, who headed the Committee appointed by the present government to look into the demands of the agitators, was himself a member of the Hota Committee which made the original recommendation to revamp the pattern of the Civil Service preliminary examination. Thus to expect the Verma committee to concede the need for any dramatic changes in the reforms introduced would be unrealistic. The Verma committee's labeling the examination pattern as 'scientific' is in consonance with the need for consistency!
It would be useful to highlight why the changes in the pattern of the Preliminary Examinations was introduced. The revised pattern for the preliminary examination was introduced keeping in mind the skill set that was being sought in an aspiring 'civil servant'.
CSAT was seen as a logical step forward in that direction. The allegation of those from the Humanities and Social Sciences background that the nature of the CSAT test places them at a distinct disadvantage as compared to those who have pursued professional courses is clearly a valid argument but does not in any way therefore, justify its being withdrawn.
The nature of training that a Social Science graduate receives today in India, make him/her quite ill equipped to excel in the domains that CSAT evaluates - mental ability, logical reasoning, simple mathematical skills and the like. On the other hand those who pursue professional courses, are exposed to many of these skills right from the moment they seek entry into such programmes.
The scope of CSAT would clearly be an important component of any evaluation system that aims at testing the capacities of those who will play a crucial role in running the administrative system.
However, the way social science and humanities education in India is structured, clearly places the students who study the same at a distinct disadvantage in what CSAT assesses.
A tangential point would be relevant here. Over the past three decades, students who have excelled in the hardcore Social Science papers in the Mains Examinations of the Civil Services - History, Political Science, Sociology and Public Administration, have often be those from the Medical, Engineering and Management streams.
These students prefer not to choose their Medicine, Engineering and Management subjects, but opt for the social science papers to clear the Mains civil service examinations. Those who have formally studied the social sciences, often rank lower in the competition as compared to those from these 'professional' streams in hard core social science papers.
The opposition that is today being voiced by students of the social sciences and humanities needs to be seen in the light of the fact that their formal education does not equip them in the skill set that CSAT requires.
The challenge thus lies with how the higher education system especially with regard to the social sciences is structured. This controversy reared its head during the debate on the now withdrawn 4 year degree programme of Delhi University when many students of the Social Sciences protested on the need to study foundation courses that were not strictly linked to their social science domain.
An example that can be cited in this regard, is the aversion to Mathematics among a lot of Social Science students (as it is believed that if you have chosen the Social Sciences, you could happily bid goodbye to Mathematics) that places them at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to research and at times even Masters education in prestigious institutions both in India and abroad.
The controversy about CSAT linked to language is from a totally different logic. The Verma committee has also conceded the point that the translation into Hindi must be done with greater care and caution.
The gaffes a 'Google 'based translation makes are only too evident.
There is also a larger question that begs attention. Given the large number of students (especially in the social sciences and humanities) for whom the language of communication in their higher education is the language in which they pursued their school education, have we developed 'high' quality reading material for them in these languages?
Are they trained during their higher education to take examinations like the CSAT? The absence of such grounding places them at a clear and visible disadvantage. This explains the strong and intense agitation by many civil service aspirants against the CSAT.
While many would argue that the CSAT format is ideally suited for testing the potential of those aspiring to be in the civil service, the specific context of higher education in India cannot be lost sight of.
It, of course must be conceded that the aim of higher education is not merely to prepare one for a career like the civil services. However, it is also important that the yawning gap between the 'world of study' and the 'world of work' that appears so clearly especially in the social sciences and humanities needs to be addressed.
While CSAT may be an ideal framework, the Indian higher education context clearly ill prepares most social science and humanities graduates to effectively compete and do well in CSAT. The challenge is thus a much wider one. How does one match the current input to what is perceived to be the 'ideal' output is the real question.
(Sandeep Shastri is the Pro Vice Chancellor, Jain University)
Comments
0 comment