Ahead of the issue of job notification for Groups exams by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission (APPSC), educationists and Group aspirants called on Tuesday for reforms in the Group-I exam pattern on the lines of UPSC Civil Service examinations. “Luck is playing a dominant role rather than merit, “is the main objection being raised by Gro-up-1 aspirants for a long time, and now they seek intervention of the who’s who of the government.
The APPSC has been adopting the 1:50 ratio (50 times the number of vacancies) for selecting candidates for Mains (descriptive) examination of Gro-up-I from those who have appeared for the Preliminary (objective). But educationists want the government to trim down the number to 1:15 on the lines of UPSC to promote the cream of the crop to the next level. Some serious aspirants have also been asked to set a word limit for descriptive questions as it enables evaluators assess the presentation skills, relevance of the subject and analytical skills of an applicant in a coherent manner.
TD legislator from LB Nagar and BC Welfare Association national president R. Krishnaiah, who recently gave a representations to APPSC secretary and special chief secretary of the AP government regarding reforms in Group-1, said, “In order to enhance the spirit of the serious Group-1 aspirants, the APPSC should create a mechanism like resorting to a 1:15 ratio for the Mains examination, and setting a word limit for questions. This facilitates proper evaluation of descriptive answer papers of the candidates.
If questions on different subject matters are asked in one common paper, the authorities should also ensure evaluating the paper by different subject experts against the current practice of evaluation of the paper by one evaluator. The commission should also opt for evaluators having a minimum experience of 10 years to improve the assessment system.” There are those who felt that evaluation of group-1 descriptive papers has been giving jitters to the aspirants as the papers are often being evaluated for the third time if variation of marks is more than 15 per cent in the first two evaluations.
“Given the vagueness, ambiguity and subjectivity in the evaluation process, the descriptive exam can be of qualifying nature and the merit list can be drawn from the marks obtained in the pa-pers of objective pattern,” Mr Krishnaiah added. Thota Venkata Ramana, a Group aspirant from Visakhapatnam, who app-eared for Group-1 Mains exam in 2012, said: “The very purpose of the preli-minary examination sho-uld be weeding out non-serious candidates. But the 1:50 ratio adopted by the state government is giving the much-needed room for them, which cou-ld reverse the fortunes of meritorious candidates.”