Articles 315-323 of the Indian Constitution envisage a free and fair Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) to conduct examinations for appointments to the services of the Union and as a bulwark of merit in the government. In this matter, UPSC is independent to decide upon the process of these exams and their conduct. And to the credit of UPSC unlike many state Public Service Commissions, UPSC, with all the real and perceived imperfections in its exams, has done its job with fair degree of impartiality and professionalism.
UPSC introduced Civil Services Aptitude Test (CSAT) in its Civil Services Preliminary (CSP) Exam in 2011 and is further introduced changes in Civil Services Main (CSM) Exam in 2013. A certain section of aspirants are infuriated and feel discriminated against these changes, these include aspirants from Hindi (my mother tongue) and regional language medium and students from humanities background. UPSC is perceived to be culpable to the current mess as it does not have a grievance redressal mechanism and at the same time UPSC scores low on transparency and certainty. It is considered unresponsive as it has not engaged with agitating aspirants to know their genuine fears and tried to address them. As a result, aspirants have resorted to extra constitutional means like hunger strike and dharna. This has resulted in a government intervention.
The current debate is around CSAT, which is perceived to be anti-Hindi, anti-humanities, anti-rural and anti-poor. Some of these points were mentioned in UPSC's own Nigvekar Committee report. In this article, I would try to debunk some of these myths associated with CSAT, bring out realities and see where reforms are required to eliminate all the real and perceived injustices in it.
What is CSAT paper? This is one of the two papers, the other being General Studies (GS), in CSP. CSAT
has 80 questions on Reading Comprehension, Logical and Analytical Reasoning, Basic Mathematics, Data Interpretation, General English and Decision Making. The Question Paper is in English as well as Hindi except the 8-9 questions on General English which are in English only.
Let us now analyze the arguments (mythical or real) against CSAT.
Argument #1: CSAT is anti-Hindi. Hindi translation of questions is extremely tough. The translation is more of mechanical nature, verbatim without taking into considerations the nuances of Hindi language.
Response: It is a real issue albeit not completely. Hindi translation is indeed mechanical, which can put aspirants attempting it in a fix. The 8-9 questions of General English were in simple language of tenth standard level, which most of us do study in our schools and use in everyday life today. Moreover,all the candidates who qualify CSP are required to take a mandatory paper of English in CSM. So ultimately there is no escape from English. But to say that questions of reasoning, maths and decision making are anti-Hindi is a travesty in itself.
Solution: UPSC should make Hindi translation simpler. It should be based on the nuances of Hindi language and not a verbatim translation from English to Hindi.
Argument #2. Reasoning and Mathematics make the exam disproportionately favorable to students from engineering background.
Response: The mathematics asked in CSAT is basic and simple. The questions based on reasoning are logic based. To say that humanities students find these questions difficult to do, is to consider them weak in reasoning and logical abilities which is far from truth. Being reasonable and logical are qualities of mind, not degrees. As far as questions on Reading Comprehension and Decision Making are concerned they are degree neutral. I have foundReading Comprehension questions more favorable to Humanities students than engineers and doctors who seldom read such long passages in their course !!
Furthermore, far higher number of candidates from all backgrounds appear for Bank PO and SSC exams. The level of aptitude questions asked in these exams is higher than those asked in CSAT. Aptitude has now also been introduced in many state public service exams. So how are we going to justify our disdain for CSAT only?
Solution: It lies in our adaptability. All aspirants have to show this quality. For e.g. If engineers and doctors are changing their mindset and study all humanities subjects required for CSP and CSM why can't those not exposed to math for a few years revise basic maths and practice basic reasoning questions. After all, in Civil Services we will have to adapt on each and every day.
Arguments #3: This is an elitist paper favoring only public school educated urban aspirants and unfavorable to poor and rural students. Cutoff for CSAT is as high as 70/200 while that for GS is as low as 30/200. Plus, GS is very tough (for all) while CSAT is very easy (for Elite-English-Engineering-Urban (E3U) category of students) which make selection through this exam very lopsided and imbalanced.
Response: Easy CSAT is in the interest of non-E3U category of aspirants. These days GS cannot be prepared solely on the basis of some books or coaching. It has to be prepared by making use of Internet, several books, TV , radio programmes, etc. Hence, GS could also be perceived as discriminatory against many. But we cannot do away with GS.
Further in my opinion CSAT and the new CSM have reduced the importance of coaching which is otherwise a costly affair, both in terms of money and time. Thus it is rather pro-poor.
Solution: UPSC should analyze this issue of cutoff, weightage, number of questions, etc. based on past data and feedback of experts. If changes are required they should be incorporated.
Next, I would like to list some of the arguments in the favour of CSAT:
1. CSAT tests logical and analytical abilities of a candidate which are necessary qualities to become a good
bureacrat in 21st century. At the same time, it discourages the mugging-and-passing phenomenon. In fact, CSAT has helped aspirants by taking pressure off them by eliminating the necessity of unnecessary hardwork. It helps mentally agile candidates over 'rutta' experts. And mental agility is not a monopoly of E3U category of aspirants. To sum up, it favours common sense. Let's not mix language and logic.
2. It may come as a surprise to many but CSAT has provided a level playing field. With it UPSC has tried to eliminate the differences between first-timers and many-timers, between working aspirants and full time aspirants and between engineers-doctors-CAs and humanities students.
3. CSAT has attracted talented aspirants from diverse educational and professional backgrounds towards Civil Services. This will create a better bureaucracy and a better workplace which would benefit the country in long term.
Let us now analyze where the real problem may lie and their probable solutions.
Problem #1. In CSM, the mandatory English language paper was quite difficult even for English medium students.
Solution: It should be made simpler. Language could be picked up in due course of career. We should not loose potentially good administrators just because their language is not good enough.
Problem #2. The type of questions asked in GS papers of CSM require a preparation strategy that involves extensive usage of internet and a studying from a diverse range of books, magazines and newspapers. The unfortunate fact is that there is a genuine paucity of quality material in Hindi. Newspapers are sine qua non in preparation for this exam. The Hindu is the favorite of UPSC and aspirants equally from this perspective. But it is in English. And so are Indian Express, Frontline, Economic & Political Weekly and others. Moreover, quality material on foreign policy, environment, internal security and such topics is also largely available in English. My friends from Hindi medium always complain about this fact.
Solution: As far as type of questions are concerned, UPSC should stick to its strategy of asking basic and simple but analytical questions. Regarding the availability of material, solution again lies in our adaptability and efforts.
Problem #3. Many of my friends from Hindi and other regional language medium complain that in UPSC Interviews there is a perceptible bias against them vis-a-vis English medium candidates.
Solution: Here again, UPSC should undertake a comprehensive data analysis exercise and make it public suo moto. If such partiality is observed then it should be corrected.
In my humble opinion, the above three problems are more responsible for thwarting the final selection of students from Hindi medium than CSAT. It should also be remembered that UPSC increased the number of attempts and the age limit only because the same set of people wanted, and quite justifiably, some time
to adjust. Are we now going back on our stand?
Knocking down and arm twisting autonomous and reputed organizations like UPSC through extra-constitutional means doesn't augur well for a liberal constitutional democracy like India. To scrap CSAT is tantamount to throwing baby out with the bathwater. Let's not do that.
