Observations on Performance of Candidates in Written Part of CSS Examination 2010

Performance of Candidates in Compulsory Subjects

7.36. Study of candidates qualifying written examination of CSS showed that 67%
candidates in English (Precis &Composition), 23% in Islamiat, 20% in Every Day Science,
2% in English Essay and 1% in Pakistan Affairs got above 60% marks in the said subjects.
Analysis showed that performance of qualified candidates in written examination in the
subject of English (Precis &Composition), Islamiat and Everyday Science were much better
than other compulsory subjects (Appendix-XVI, Table-11).

Observations of Examiners on Performance of Candidates in Written Part of

CSS Examination 2010
7.37. Following general observations are made by the examiners on performance of
candidates in written part of the CSS Competitive Examination 2010:

A. Compulsory Subjects
7.38. English Essay: Most of candidates lacked in presenting the relevant material, even the
basics of essay writing, like paragraph and punctuation. Some candidates did not complete
the essential requirements of topics and produced text without arriving at any conclusion.
The candidates should try to improve their skill of writing a good essay.
7.39. Current Affairs: Majority of the candidates seemed to depend on the guide books
which showed their lack of in-depth study of National and International Affairs whereas,
some of the candidates performed well in MCQ part of the paper and secured more than
70% marks. However, their knowledge and awareness on the relevant issues was not good.
Time management for answering each question was not given due consideration.
7.40. Pakistan Affairs: Performance of majority of the candidates was of an average level.
They could not understand the spirit of the question and did not follow the instructions
related to the questions. Few candidates obtained above 60% marks while a large number
of candidates failed in the paper.
7.41. Islamiat: It appears that some candidates could not understand the key concepts
asked in the question paper. Their answers were inappropriate to the questions. The
substandard text produced by the candidates showed decline in our educational standard.
Some answer scripts were of such a low standard that the candidates did not deserve to be
CSS examination candidates.

B. Optional Subjects
7.42. Accountancy and Auditing: Majority of the candidates produced irrelevant material and
did not deliver according to requirements of the questions. Their output was not according
to the Accounting Laws. Some candidates made some basic spelling and grammatical
mistakes in theoretical questions.
7.43. Agriculture: Total 259 candidates appeared in the subject. Out of them, 219 (85%)
candidates passed and 78 candidates showed very good performance who obtained more
than 60% marks, while 76 candidates secured between 44-59% marks. 65 candidates

obtained just passing marks in the paper and their execution was not satisfactory.
7.44. Arabic: Performance of almost all the candidates who appeared in the subject was
good but their knowledge and information were based on secondary sources. They should
study the original sources of Arabic Knowledge with authentic reference to perform better in
CSS Examination.
7.45. Chemistry: The performance of majority of the candidates was below average. They
expressed very poor knowledge of the subject, which was not even upto Matriculation level.
Vocabulary, grammar and spellings of their writing were also very poor. The spellings of
technical terms were written as malecule for molecule, nuclophyl for nucleophile, west
for waste, Ph for pH, settle for Steel etc. The symbols of elements were written as Br for
Barium, Mg for Magnesium, B for Bromine etc. They could not copy some words correctly
even from the question paper.
7.46. Computer Science: General performance of the candidates was satisfactory.
Candidates achieved good marks in objective type questions as compared to subjective
part. 6% candidates got outstanding marks, while 61 % candidates secured between 33 %
to 64% marks, and 33 % candidates failed in the subject. Majority of the candidates did not
have enough technical knowledge required in the subject. Quality of education in Computer
Science must be improved in Colleges/Universities especially in Private Sector Universities.
7.47. Constitutional Law: Performance of the candidates was hampered due to poor
expression in English. They just crammed the material available from guides and test
papers by producing irrelevant material, instead of providing the answers according to the
theme of questions. Moreover, candidates have not attempted the questions analytically. It
was also felt that candidates failed to present their thoughts within the stipulated time. In
objective type questions, their performance was also not satisfactory due to poor knowledge
of the Laws.
7.48. Economics: Overall performance of candidates was good. A reasonable number of
candidates obtained more than 60% marks, while 62% candidates just passed in the
subject.
7.49. European History-I: 7 Percent candidates got between 60 79% marks. 40 percent
secured between 44-59% marks. 25 percent candidates obtained between 33-43% marks
while 28 percent failed in the subject by getting less than 33 marks.
7.50. European History-II: 8 percent candidates got between 60 79% marks. 57 percent
secured between 44-59% marks. 28 percent obtained between 33-43% marks while 7
percent candidates failed in the subject. The performance of the candidates was better as
compared to Paper-I.
7.51. Geography-I: Brief descriptions of the responses are assimilated as based on their
visual, auditory and tactile approaches. The ability of candidates to present relevant maps,
diagram, charts, evolution of physiographic configuration and relief features lacked in many
aspects and lacked conceptual designs. Majority of the candidates with casual interest and
time constraints were placed in less than 50% marks slabs.
7.52. Geography-II: The candidates had critical and in-depth understanding of each of
human geography domains such as agriculture, economics, communication, religion, family
life, government and history. Candidates applied and appreciated various approaches with
unique impact of one civilization on other cultures. Knowledge of candidates, ability to

resource base activities with stimulating icon in the world over was fully traced positively.
Majority of the candidates secured less than 70% marks.
7.53. International Law: Over all standards of the answer scripts was satisfactory. Very few
candidates showed excellent performance and acquired marks in A+ grade. Almost, all the
candidates attempted direct questions wherever the question required assertive analysis
were either not attempted or required criticism was not made properly. Evaluation of papers
indicates that theoretical aspects of law have been understood by the candidates but its
application which requires legal and technical details had been overlooked by majority of the
candidates.
7.54. International Relations: Overall standard of the answers were not satisfactory.
Majority of the candidate had poor comprehension of the subject. For example a question on
Balance of Terror which is a general question in the present nuclear-age could not be
answered by 95 % of the candidates. They simply discussed balance of power with bookish
knowledge.
7.55. Islamic History & Culture: Overall, result of the subject was not satisfactory. Out of
1281 candidates, only two candidates have secured 60% marks. 6 percent candidates got
between 44-59% marks and 28 percent candidates have obtained between 33-43% marks.
While 66 percent candidates failed in the subject, which is an alarming situation and reflects
unawareness of young generation from Islamic History and Culture. Majority of candidates
suffered due to poor expression in English.
7.56. Journalism: Majority of the candidate had no idea of attempting a particular question
and they only reproduced the bookish knowledge available in guide books without
understanding of requirement of the question. Some candidates had given answers about
Pakistani media whereas they were supposed to answer about the general trends of media.
It was observed, that those candidates who have earned good marks in MCQs failed to get
good marks in subjective part of the paper.
7.57. Muslim Law & Jurisprudence: Knowledge of candidates generally reflects bookish and
superficial study with lack of applicability to present times. Majority of the candidates failed
to comprehend the call of questions. In some cases, their approach and interpretation in
Muslim Law & Jurisprudence was rigid which showed that candidates lacked vast study of
the subject.
7.58. Persian: Performance of the candidate was satisfactory. Majority of the candidates
were ignorant about the current affairs of Iran or new trends in Persian language and
literature. Some candidates appeared in the examination without any background in Persian
subject. Very few candidates had good Persian knowledge but they were perhaps in hurry
and they mixed some questions like AVICENA with AVESTA.
7.59. Physics: Almost 85% to 90% of the candidates had attempted same questions and
not touched the other questions in the paper. Majority of the candidates lacked in concepts
and initiative. Candidates had avoided solving the numerical problems. Preparation of
candidates for the examination was very selective and very unusual. Conceptual preparation
with the help of latest books on prescribed syllabus is essential for better performance in
the subject.
7.60. Political Science-I: Performance of the candidates was good as 66 percent candidates
got between 40-55% marks. However, majority of the candidates depended on guide books
instead of consulting original books. In MCQ part of the paper, most of the candidates got

about 50% marks. Their performance was deplorable due to poor expression in English.
Knowledge of the CSS candidates should be extra ordinary while answering the questions
properly.
7.61. Political Science-II: Overall Performance of candidates was anaverage. It is desired
that approach of the candidates in the subject should be analytical and comparative but
majority of the candidates did not follow this pattern. They attempted mostly theoretical
questions. Only few candidates attempted the questions related to the present condition of
the Country.
7.62. Psychology: Majority of candidates had poor comprehension/preparation, spelling,
writing and presentation of answers in the subject. The role of colleges/Universities needs to
be enhanced by improving curriculum, teaching techniques and introducing refresher
courses for college teachers. The candidates should develop good communication skills,
presentation skills and English language to improve their performance in such competitive
examinations.
7.63. Public Administration: Performance of the candidates was not satisfactory, only 2
percent candidates got between 60-79% marks. 24 percent secured between 44-59%
marks. 46 percent candidates obtained between 33- 43% marks while 28 percent failed in
the subject. They depended largely on guide books. Majority of the candidates did not know
much about the subject as Public Administration was not taught at graduation level.
7.64. Punjabi: Generally, the performance of the candidates was not upto the mark. It
appeared that majority of the candidates had prepared from the guides or helping books
available rather than the authentic text books. Theyndepended upon the notes and lectures
given by the academies and coaching centres.
7.65. Pushto: Majority of the candidates were well aware of the facts and truth as they had
expressed their ideas in a very impressive manner which showed their command in the
subject and language. However, performance of those candidates who attempted questions
which required assertive analysis, was just average, while performance of candidates who
attempted rest of the questions was excellent.
7.66. Statistics: Overall performance of candidates was average. Some of the candidates
had shown results without showing computation. They also avoided comments and
interpretation of the output/results. 20 percent candidates got 69% and above marks in the
subject. 16 percent secured between 50-64% marks. 10 percent obtained between 44-49%
marks. 19 percent attained between 33-43% marks whereas 35 percent candidates failed in
the subject.
7.67. Zoology: Performance of candidates was poor as more than 60 percent candidates got
below 44% marks. 7 to 9 percent candidates obtained between 60-79% marks while 30
percent candidates secured between 44-59% marks. The synthetic potentials of the
candidates were generally poor and one had to struggle hard to search for the correct logic
in such attempts. They have a tendency of developing some long irrelevant introduction and
produced answers with unnecessary text. Their grasp on the subject was poor and the
candidates lacked basic concept of the subject. Performance of majority of the candidates
was spoiled by poor expression.

Observations on Performance of Candidates in Written Part of CSS Examination 2009

Performance of Candidates in Compulsory Subjects

7.24. Study of candidates, qualifying written examination of CSS showed that 69%
candidates in Islamiat, 33% in Every Day Science, 7% in Current Affairs, 5% in English
Essay and 3% in English (Precis&Composition) got above 60% marks in the said subjects.
Analysis showed that performance of qualified candidates in written examination in the
subjects of Islamiat and Every-Day Science was much better than other compulsory
subjects. (Appendix- XVI, Table- 8).

Observations of Examiners on Performance of Candidates in Written Part of

CSS Examination 2009
7.25. Following are observations of the examiners on performance of candidates in
compulsory and optional subjects offered in written part of the Competitive Examination
2009.

Compulsory Subjects
7.26. Essay: Majority of the candidates had produced crammed knowledge obtained from
available stereo-type sources. They had invalid and expired pieces of information/knowledge
without any sense to update it. However, 5 percent candidates showed commendable
originality of approach, precision of comprehension and clarity of expression. More
importantly, one third of the total candidates who appeared in the subject had no logic of
the basic English grammar, punctuation and sentence formation.
7.27. General Knowledge-I (Every Day Science): Although 60 percent candidates
passed in the subject but they still seemed depending upon traditional help/guide books.
They should not be confined within the boundaries of classrooms. The candidates were
lacking conceptual background of the subject. 8 percent candidates secured marks in the
range of 70-79%, which reflects better tendency, competency and aptitude of the
candidates towards the CSS Examination. Majority of the candidates reflected a casual
approach and ill preparation.
7.28. General Knowledge-II (Current Affairs): General level of awareness of the
candidates seemed improved to certain extent, but their level of understanding, depth of
knowledge and analysis of issues was weak. It reflects that the standard and quality of
higher education had not made any significant improvement in-spite of heavy investment
during the last five years. The preparation level of the candidates for the examination was
also found to be sub-standard. The overall impression of erosion in the public delivery could
be a reason for the lack of interest in the examination.
7.29. General Knowledge-III (Pakistan Affairs): Overall standard of the answer scripts
was poor. Answers were not according to the requirement of the questions. Creative and
thought provoking answers were very rare.
7.30. Islamiat: Performance of the candidates was not bad in general. However, their
knowledge was superficial and shallow. The general deficiency seems to be because of lack

of extensive reading. Knowledge of Quran & Hadith was quite unsatisfactory due to
insufficient practice in the youngsters life. For better performance, grammar based
translation activity of Quran & Hadith should be introduced at graduation level. Overall 26
percent candidates obtained 60% and above marks. 35 percent secured between 50-59%
marks while 39 percent obtained between 40-49%. In all, no candidate failed in the subject.

B. Optional Subjects
7.31. Accountancy & Auditing: Candidates had a poor knowledge of the basic concepts of
Accounting. Their primary focus was on practical work, though practical accounting was not
possible without proper knowledge of basic concepts, rules/regulations, techniques and
standards of accounting. In Paper-II, performance of majority of the candidates was good in
Cost Accounting (Section-A) and Business Organization & Finance (Section-D), but very
weak in sections B&C i.e. Auditing & Income Tax. It was also observed that candidates
showing poor results in MCQ were also weak in other sections.
7.32. Agriculture: Overall performance of the candidates was satisfactory. Depth of
knowledge of some candidates was excellent but majority were lacking it. Comprehension of
the subject needed improvement. Some candidates made grammatical mistakes in their
writing.
7.33. Applied Math: More than 62 percent candidates had failed in the paper. 6 percent
candidates secured 60% and above marks. Ability of candidates to analyse the questions
and provide relevant information was very poor. Attitude of majority of the candidates
appeared as non-serious. Performance of candidates in Paper-II of the subject was
comparatively better than Paper-I. About 34 percent candidates failed in the paper while 12
percent candidates got 60% and above marks.
7.34. Arabic: Performance of candidates in objective part was very poor as they had no
knowledge in the applied grammar of the subject. However, their performance in subjective
part was comparatively satisfactory as 43 percent candidates got 60% and above marks.
7.35. Balochi: Performance of all candidates was very good and 50% of them expressed
their thoughts in proper language and showed command in Balochi literature while
remaining 50 percent candidates used other languages i.e. Urdu, Sindhi and English to
express their views in answers. The candidates opting for this subject should learn proper
terms, idioms, proverbs, phrases and quotations of Balochi language and literature. 98
percent candidates secured between 60-64% marks while only 2 percent obtained less than
60% marks.
7.36. British History: Performance of the candidates was satisfactory. Some answer
scripts were impressive while others were moderate. Percentage of passed candidates
manifested that the questions in the subject were understandable, comprehensive and the
topics were explorable as well.
7.37. Business Administrations: Performance of the candidates was not satisfactory. It
showed lack of knowledge about the questions asked.
7.38. Chemistry: Performance of majority of the candidates was poor. Only 5 percent got
60% and above marks. 22 percent secured between 44-59% marks, while 38 percent
candidate attained between 33-43% marks whereas 36 percent candidates failed in the
subject. Syllabus of the subject needs to be reviewed and improved.

7.39. Computer Science: Overall performance was not satisfactory. A majority of the
candidates were not even able to attempt all questions and were not able to express their
views adequately. Only 6 percent candidates got 60% and above marks. 23 percent
obtained between 44-59% marks, while 31 percent secured between 33-43% marks and 4
percent candidates failed in the subject.
7.40. Economics: Performance of the candidates on the average was good. 34 percent
candidates obtained 60% and above marks, 29 percent secured between 55-59% while 36
percent attained 33-54% marks. Only 1 percent failed in the subject.
7.41. English Literature: Answers of the candidates reflected that they lacked in-depth
study of the subject. They had made preparations from the guide books and exhibited lack
of originality and analysis. Improvement in teaching is required at the graduation and under
graduation levels to inculcate accuracy and fluency in English language and grammar.
Mistakes committed generally by the candidates included use of articles, direct/indirect
speech, active/passive voice, use of prepositions, sequence of tenses and syntax. Only 1
percent candidates got above 60% marks, 27 percent obtained between 44-59% marks, 42
percent secured between 33-43% marks, while 30 percent candidates failed in the subject.
7.42. European History: Candidates performed satisfactorily but they had very limited
knowledge of geographical locations of various countries.
7.43. Geography: Overall performance of the candidates was satisfactory. In certain cases
their answers were not to the point and gave irrelevant and unnecessarily lengthy answers.
They failed to draw required diagrams which could help attain good marks.
7.44. Geology: Geology is not a common subject. The candidates opting it for CSS
Examination must have background of the subject at graduate and post graduate level, so
that concept of subject is cleared in their minds for better performance in the examination.
7.45. History of Pak & India: Performance of the candidates was average. Some of them
produced totally irrelevant material in their answer books. Majority of the candidates
suffered due to lack of expression in English language inspite of mushroom growth of
English Medium Schools in the Country.
7.46. History of USA: The performance of the candidates was satisfactory. The proficiency
in English language was the most worrying aspect. Government should pay more attention
towards qualification and training of the school and college teachers instead of
concentrating only at university level teachers. 23 percent candidates got 60% and above
marks. 39 percent obtained between 44-59% marks. 21 percent secured between 33-43%
marks while 17 percent candidates failed in the subject.
7.47. International Law: Overall standard of answer scripts was satisfactory. The
knowledge and expression of the candidates in the subject was quite clear. However,
majority of the candidates had poor expression in English as well as in their hand writing.
7.48. International Relations: Majority of the candidates were not well versed with the
subject. The general performance was below average. They should improve their analytical
ability and refer to standard books and newspapers.
7.49. Islamic History & Culture: Performance of the candidates was good. Majority of the
candidates produced very good answers. Only few candidates failed in the subject. They

should improve English language and writing skill for better performance in the subject.
7.50. Journalism: Majority of the candidates had attempted papers in this subject in a
stereotyped way and were below average in their performance. They had tried either to
reproduce material from the books or provided irrelevant material.
7.51. Law: It reflects that majority of the candidates who opted for this subject have no
background/familiarity with law subjects whereas it was clear that it was a specialized field
and needed specialized knowledge. Moreover, the candidates were not able to write even a
single paragraph in correct English. Majority of the candidates produced lengthy answers
and gave unnecessary details/irrelevant material.
7.52. Mercantile Law: The answer scripts reflected that some candidates had neither
attempted the paper seriously nor did they have even basic level of knowledge of this
subject. 41 percent candidates got 60% and above marks, 30 percent obtained between 4459% marks, 21 percent candidates secured between 33-43% marks while 9 percent
candidates failed in the subject.
7.53. Persian: Overall performance of the candidates was satisfactory. 51 percent
candidates got 60% and above marks, 37 percent obtained between 44-59% marks, 10
percent secured between 33-43% marks while 2 percent failed in the subject. However,
some candidates had written too much irrelevant/unwanted material and thus wasted their
time. They should follow logical and analytical order in writing. Majority of the candidates
were weak in Persian writing, translation and grammar. They were also weak in text
comprehension, particularly in poetry.
7.54. Philosophy: Performance of candidates was satisfactory to some extent. The
candidates were required to emphasize on logic and present the facts/material with
analytical approach. 20 percent candidates got 60% and above marks, 30 percent obtained
between 44-59% marks, 20 percent secured between 33-43% marks and 30 percent
candidates failed in the subject.
7.55. Physics: Performance of the candidates was satisfactory. The general response of
concepts in Physics and Mathematical background of the candidates was not very good.
There was a real need to improve Physics and Mathematics of the students from the grass
roots level. 14 percent candidates got 60% and above marks, 35 percent candidates
secured between 44-59% marks, 25 percent obtained between 33-43% marks while 26
percent candidates failed in the subject.
7.56. Psychology: Performance of the candidates in Paper-I was better than Paper-II.
Their writing ability as well as power of expression was good. 69 percent candidates got
60% and above marks, 20 percent secured between 44-59% marks, 10 percent obtained
between 33-43% marks, while only 1 percent failed in the subject.
7.57. Public Administration: Overall standard of the candidates was not satisfactory as
majority of them seemed to have made preparation from guide books and had not actually
studied the recommended books. 15 percent candidates got 60% and above marks, 51
percent obtained between 44-59% marks, 27 percent secured between 33-43% marks
while 7 percent candidates failed in the paper.
7.58. Punjabi: About 50 percent candidates did not seem to have studied the
recommended books. 25 percent candidates produced irrelevant material. Remaining 25
percent candidates performed comparatively better with good knowledge of the subject.

Majority of the candidates got less marks due to lack

of comprehension of Punjabi Language and Literature.
7.59. Pure Math: Overall performance of the candidates was poor. The main reason for
such performance was that at college/university level, students were not encouraged to do
simplification themselves which may improve their confidence. The teaching staff should lay
emphasis on introducing new concepts with full clarification.
7.60. Pushto: Overall performance of the candidates was good. However, the candidates
were unable to write correct Pushto script due to unfamiliarity with the subject. Particularly,
they could not differentiate between soft and hard dialect of Pushto. 37 percent candidates
got 60% and above marks, 54 percent secured between 44-59% marks, 8 percent obtained
between 33-43% marks and 1 percent candidates failed in the subject.
7.61. Sindhi: Performance of the candidates was good. The candidates are advised to use
relevant reference books for the preparation of the examination. 52 percent candidates
secured 60% and above marks, 30 percent got between 44-59% marks, 13 percent
obtained between 33-43% marks, while 5 percent candidates failed in the subject.
7.62. Sociology: Overall performance of the candidates was good. 60 percent got 60% and
above marks showing clear concept of the subject, 18 percent secured between 44-59%
marks while 22 percent obtained between 33-43% marks which clearly indicates their poor
concept and expression of the subject.
7.63. Statistics: Performance of the candidates was not satisfactory. Majority of the
candidates lacked in communication skill. They should learn to apply theoretical concepts
objectively. 13 percent candidates obtained 60% and above marks, 22 percent got between
44-59% marks, 18 percent secured between 33-43% marks and 47 percent candidates
failed in the subject which is a higher rate of failure.
7.64. Urdu: Paper contained questions which could only be attempted by those candidates
who had prepared according to the entire suggested course and recommended books. But
their answers showed single book study and lacked in-depth ideas. 5 percent candidates got
60% and above marks, 40 percent secured between 44-59% marks, 40 percent obtained
between 33-43% marks, while 15 percent candidates failed in the subject. In Paper-II, the
performance of candidates was better than in Paper-I. Grammar and spelling mistakes were
also common and there was no flow in their answer. 12 percent candidates got 60% and
above marks. 61 percent obtained between 44-59% marks, 19 percent secured between
33-43% marks while 8 percent candidates failed in the subject.
7.65. Zoology: Majority of the candidates produced poor answers with lack of
understanding. Technical terms were not used correctly by several candidates. They could
not produce correct diagrams for cell-membrane, endoplasmic reticulum etc. 29 percent
candidates got 60% and above marks, 38 percent secured between 44-59% marks, 15
percent obtained between 33-43% marks, while 18 percent candidates failed in the subject.
Observations on Performance of Candidates in Written Part of CSS Examination 2008

Performance in Compulsory Subjects

7.29. Study of candidates who qualified in CSS written examination showed that 84%

candidates in Every-Day Science, 45% each in Islamiat and Pakistan Affairs got above 60%
marks. In Current Affairs and Essay 1% and 7%, candidates secured above 60%marks
respectively. Analysis showed that performance of qualified candidates in written
examination in subject of Every- Day Science, Islamiat and Pakistan Affairs was much better
than other compulsory Subjects. (Appendix- XVI, Table-11, Page- 159).

Observations of Examiners on Performance of Candidates in Written Part of CSS

Examination 2008
7.30. Following are observations of the examiners on performance of candidates in
compulsory as well as optional subjects offered in written part of the Competitive
Examination 2008.

Compulsory Subjects
7.31. Essay: The Essay Paper brings out the expression, current knowledge and the mental
caliber of the candidates. Majority of the candidates lacked the natural flare of writing an
English Essay. The basic structure was unknown to them i-e Introduction, Body of essay and
the Final Conclusion. There was no continuity of thoughts, at times faulty language, forms
and idioms were used, These flaws of expression marred the over all impact of the essay.
7.32. English (Prcis & Composition): The grasp of the subject even the most
fundamentals of language was deplorable. Majority of the candidates did not understand the
simple mechanics of paragraph and prcis-writing. The choice of style and lexical items did
not match the contents. The range of their lexical competence also seemed highly
restricted. On the whole, the level of competence in the English language must be
improved.
7.33. GK-I (Everyday Science): General performance about 40 to 45% candidates was
well, giving conceptual answers to some extent covering all microscopic details of the
questions. While 20 to 25% candidates gave same traditional answers taken from
help/guide books. Whereas remaining candidates did not show any interest even they could
not qualify in the subject. Majority of the candidates did not bother to consult well reputed
general material which may be helpful in broadening their views/enhancing capabilities to
learn knowledge and, provide a strong grip over the current issues of Everyday Science.
7.34. G.K-II (Current Affairs): Majority of candidates failed to understand the contents of
question and consequently detracted. Most of the candidates lacked analytical ability and
followed descriptive method in their narrations. Very small number of candidates secured
more than 50% marks in objective type question (MCQs) which manifested their poor
general knowledge.
7.35. GK-III(Pakistan Affairs): The standard of the candidates was satisfactory. Some of
the candidates were outstanding and performed well. Majority of the candidates got average
marks. They appeared in the examination for the sake of CSS Examination and did not give
due importance to the paper.
7.36. Islamiat: The performance of about 50 percent candidates was generally
satisfactory. Majority of candidates required improvement in their knowledge. They should
consult newspapers, magazines and foreign journals etc.

Optional Subjects

7.37. Accountancy & Auditing-I: The overall pass percentage was 79. Apart from
compulsory questions, the most favourite question was of accounting ratios, but the
candidates faced difficulty in calculating Debt/Equity ratio. Some candidates had no clear
idea that Revenues were shown on the Credit side of an account and Expenses on the Debit
side of it. Generally the quality of the short answers was not upto the mark. It is imperative
that candidates should take keen interest in the subject and produce quality answers.
7.38. Accountancy & Auditing-II: The general performance of the candidates was
satisfactory. The strength of the candidates includes their physical and mental abilities,
educational qualification, experience and standard books relevant to the syllabus. The
weakness of majority of the candidates was that they did not take care of recent changes in
prescribed law (income tax) relating to this paper. The candidates who had command over
the subject did well, whereas the others miserably failed in the subject.
7.39. Agriculture: Overall performance of the candidates was satisfactory.
7.40. Applied Mathematics I-II: Performance of the candidates was poor in paper-II as
compared to paper-I. Majority of the candidates had more practice in manual and numerical
calculations rather than the knowledge related to it and the concepts of the subject. They
must have knowledge of Modern techniques for better performance in the subject.
7.41. Arabic-I: The overall performance of the candidates was satisfactory. However,
general knowledge regarding Arabic literature must be improved as well as Essay writing
skill and grammatical rules be followed.
7.42. Arabic-II: The overall performance of the candidates was good. In general, the
candidate had knowledge about Arabic literature but not Arabic itself. The candidates
generally did not have the capability of creativity in the answers which showed lack of
their knowledge about direct access to Arabic language. The performance of the candidates
can be improved by adopting direct method of teaching Arabic in Colleges and Universities
level.
7.43. Balochi: The overall general performance of the candidates was satisfactory.
7.44. Botany I-II: The performance of the candidates was just satisfactory. However,
majority of the candidates did not attempt the paper according to demand of questions. The
answers should be focused on the main points being asked in the questions.
7.45. British History I-II: The performance of the candidates was poor. The main reasons
were non-availability of good text /reference books, subject offered in very few
Colleges/Universities at BA/MA level and lack of qualified teachers.
7.46. Business Administration: The overall performance of the candidates was
unsatisfactory. Majority of the candidates had given general answers, based on their general
knowledge. The candidates must concentrate more on practical application of concepts at
this level.
7.47. Constitutional Law: The answers offered by majority of the candidates were not
relevant which showed that they were not strong in terms of conceptual comprehension. In
MCQs, the candidates had done well and such questions, thus enabled them to get through
the paper. Overall performance of the candidate was lower than the required standard of
the FPSC. Majority of the candidates were weak in English grammar and Writing skill.

7.48. Chemistry-I: The performance of the candidate was satisfactory.

7.49. Computer Science: The candidates did not make in-depth study and appeared in
examination without thorough knowledge of the subject especially in Database, Networking,
Programming and Computer Architecture.
7.50. Economics-I: The performance of candidates was deplorable. Out of total 261
candidates appeared in the subject, 222 (85%) got below 32% marks, 36 (14%) obtained
33-59% marks, while only 3 (1%) candidates secured between 60-79% marks. Majority of
the candidates appeared to have
crammed the topics.
7.51. Economics-II: The performance of candidates was quite disappointing. Poor English,
lack of general knowledge and ignorance towards the basic concepts of the subject were
indeed lamentable. Most of the answers were irrelevant and the candidates were found in
the habit of writing stories instead of addressing the question to the point. In addition,
majority of the candidates did not even understand the questions. Hardly 4 to 6%
candidates performance was found satisfactory to some extent. Performance in objective
part of question paper, was quite poor which showed traditional ratta system prevailing in
our educational institutions.
7.52. English Literature-I: Overall performance of the candidates was average. Majority
of candidates could not produce answers as per requirement of questions, and their
thoughts were fuzzy/confused and lacked ability to analyse the situation. The pathetic/below
average answers were replete with errors of syntax, wrong spelling and incorrect
statements.
7.53. English Literature-II: The candidates lacked originality and in-depth study of the
subject. Their answers to questions reflected rote learning and reliance on notes/guide
books. The candidates, securing 50-60% marks had good command over the language.
Majority of the candidates had poor spellings, faulty structures and weak knowledge of
grammar of the language. The candidates should be motivated to attend the libraries and
be encouraged for originality and conceptual learning.
7.54. European History & Culture I&II: Majority of the candidates had indepth study of
some of the aspects asked in the question paper. Moreover the significance of diplomacy in
World affairs was discussed in an intelligent way by a number of candidates. Some of the
candidates had the ability to appreciate the analytical nature of the various aspects covered
in the questions.
7.55. Forestry: Majority of the candidates had average understanding of the subject. They
are advised to be concise and to the point while answering the question instead of writing
irrelevant material.
7.56. Geography-I: The performance of candidates revealed that precise knowledge of the
subject was not strong. The candidates, who supported their answers with Maps, Diagrams
and Tables, secured good marks. However, the improvement in the quality of English
language, grammar, spellings and comprehension was much needed.
7.57. Geography-II: The performance of candidates was better as compared to paper-I.
The candidates should have wider knowledge of regional Geography and not limited only to
Asia and Pakistan. The candidates mostly suffered due to deficiency in English language.

7.58. Geology I-II: Majority of the candidates lacked conceptual clarity. They produced
totally irrelevant material in replying even basic questions, which clearly showed their lack
of interest in preparing the subject. 6 candidates (55%) failed in the subject while only one
candidate got between 60-64% marks.
7.59. History of Pakistan & India-I&II: There was a steady decline in performance of
the candidates due to poor quality of education. This can be attributed to; poor teacher
training, out-dated curriculum and non-availability of good quality text books and reading
material.
7.60. History of USA: The performance of the candidates was satisfactory. 25 percent
candidates got 60% and above marks, 47 percent obtained between 44-59 marks, 20
percent candidates secured 33-43% marks, while 8 percent failed in the subject. Majority of
the candidates seemed not prefamiliar with the subject. They relied on guide books and
other second rated material available in the market. Most of them had faulty English
language/structure of sentences and poor syntax which hampered their expression.
7.61. International Law: The performance of candidates was not fair. 30 percent got 3343% marks. 32 percent candidates obtained 44-59% marks. 18 percent secured 60% and
above marks in the subject.
7.62. International Relations: Majority of the candidates opted this subject without
proper preparation and in-depth understanding of it. They could not develop common sense
of the dynamics and factors of International Relations. Majority of candidates lacked
techniques of expression, exactitude, methods of argumentation and even they faced
difficulties of expression in English Language. In objective part of paper, several candidates
marked the options without having confidence and accuracy.
7.63. Islamic History & Culture-I: Actually question paper was belonged to easy
approach to the candidates but the standard of answers was not up to mark. It was
observed that candidates did not study the subject properly and they were also handicapped
due to poor English grammar and writing skill. The candidates are advised to have up to
date knowledge of the subject.
7.64. Islamic History & Culture-II: The general performance of more than 80 percent
candidates was not up to the mark. Lack of analytical and critical approach was the main
and common concern of the candidates. They had no command in the language because
majority of them studied in Urdu Medium Colleges. Out of 514,139 candidates failed in the
subject while 17 candidates attained 60-64% marks; and only 2 candidates got 65-79%
marks.
7.65. Journalism: Majority of the candidates relied on guide books/notes to achieve their
goal which was a stigma on the part of education. They lacked ability to understand the
actual theme of question and produced answers as memorized by them. The up-dated list of
recommended readings should be provided to candidates to enhance exposure of subject
knowledge and to get rid of stereotype method of attempting the question.
7.66. Law I-II: The candidates showed average performance in the subject. Majority of
them had lack of expression and basic proficiency in English language. The candidates,
securing below 60% marks in the subject, were not worthy of consideration for this
examination.

7.67. Muslim Law & Jurisprudence: Majority of the candidates lacked power of
expression in English. Instead of quoting Articles/ Sections of an Ordinance, their answers
were found superficial and hypothetical. In objective part majority of candidates did not
have overall knowledge of the subject. 12% candidates got 60% and above marks. 60
percent secured in the range of 44- 59% marks. 21 percent obtained 33-43% marks, while
7 percent failed in the subject.
7.68. Philosophy-I&II: Majority of the candidates lacked comprehension of the subject.
Generally they had opted to answer straight forward questions rather than based on applied
nature. They were mostly depended on notes, guides and selective study of the syllabus.
Their answers were devoid of logical cohesion and technical terms were often misused.
7.69. Political Science-I: In MCQs, the candidates did well and better performance in
these questions enabled many of them get through the paper. Overall, performance
standard had still to match the corresponding calibre of the Commission. The conceptual
question was not attempted well. Majority of the candidates were weak in English grammar
and lacked writing skills. Answers of majority of candidates were not appropriate / relevant
to the questions.
7.70. Political Science-II: General performance of the candidates was not up to the mark
of CSS Examination. In majority cases the standard was even below BA/BSc level. 2 percent
candidates were rated as very good. 10 percent were good, while remaining were
satisfactory or not really satisfactory. The deteriorating standard of knowledge was alarming
and thought provoking. Lack of original thinking and analytical approach was also observed
which reflected the non serious and casual attitude of the youth towards life.
7.71. Physics-I&II: Majority of the candidates were poor in solving the numerical
problems in Mechanics. Overall, performance of the candidates was very poor. 50
candidates out of 116 failed in the subject. They did not have basic concept of Physics. In
objective part, they just tried to fill the square because they knew that there was no
negative marking. The candidates are advised to go through general Physics books.
7.72. Psychology-I: Overall, the candidates performance was quite satisfactory with the
impression that they had the knowledge of concepts but were not able to relate it with real
life situation. Besides this, the candidates were not capable to express their knowledge in
English properly.
7.73. Psychology-II: On the whole, performance of the candidates was satisfactory. It
reflected that majority of candidates had never studied the subject in their entire academic
career and neither prepared seriously for the examination. They had very poor knowledge
and wrote irrelevant material in their answers. However, 32 percent candidates got 60%
and above marks. 51 percent secured 33-59% marks and 17 percent candidates failed in
the
subject.
7.74. Public Administration: The overall performance of the candidates was not much
impressive. No candidate was able to get more than 14 marks in MCQs which clearly
showed shallowness of their overall knowledge, selective study of the syllabi and
dependency on get-through guides. The candidates were unable to manipulate their ideas.
There was usually a big gap between discussion and the conclusions drawn by the
candidates in their answers.
7.75. Punjabi: Majority of the candidates had studied guide books/ready made notes

prepared for the purpose instead of thorough and detailed study of standard books/
materials and therefore could not produce answer as per requirement of the questions. They
filled pages with unwanted information which had no link with the question. The grammar
and spelling were very poor.
7.76. Pure Mathematics-I: The performance of the candidate was poor due to selective
study of the subject. 73 percent candidates failed in the subject. 8 percent obtained 3343% marks, 15 percent secured 44-59% marks, while 4 percent got 60-64% marks.
7.77. Pure Mathematics-II: The performance of the candidates was very weak as
compared to paper-I. The knowledge of the subject was poor and no serious efforts were
made. 81 percent candidates failed in the subject. 15 percent got 33-43% marks and 4
percent obtained 44-59% marks.
7.78. Pushto: The performance of the candidates was very good. Out of 532, 3 candidates
got above 79% marks. 409 candidates obtained 65-79% marks. 108 secured 60-64 marks.
50 candidates got 44-59 marks while only one candidate secured between 33-43 marks,
only one candidate failed in the subject. Majority of candidates had good knowledge.
7.79. Statistics: The result was not satisfactory as the candidates did not possess
conceptual knowledge of the subject although question paper was exactly according to
syllabus and emphasized more on application of Statistics in real life. The performance of
the candidates would have been better if they had studied / prepared applied aspect of the
subject.
7.80. Urdu-I: Candidates did not know the technical aspects and new trends of Urdu
literature. However, overall pass percentage in Urdu (paper-I) was 94, 35 percent
Candidates got 65 to 79% marks, 11 percent Candidates secured 60 to 64% marks, 57
percent Candidates attained 44 to 59% and 22 percent obtained 33to 43% marks, while 6
percent candidates did not qualify the paper.
7.81. Urdu-II: The performance of candidates was worse as compared to paper-I, only 74
percent candidates passed the paper. Overall literary and poetry interest is being declined.
Positive steps should be taken for improvement. Only one percent candidates got between
65 to 79% marks and 3 percent secured 60 to 64% marks, 34 percent attained 44 to 59%
marks, 36 percent secured 33 to 43% marks, while 26 percent candidates could not even
pass the paper.
7.82. Zoology-I&II:The performance of the Candidate was generally satisfactory.
Performance of Candidates in Written Part of CE 2007

Performance in Compulsory Subjects

7.29. Study of candidates who qualified in CSS written examination showed that in EveryDay Science and Islamiat 87.6% & 74.7% candidates got 60 and above marks. In Current
Affairs and Essay 6.1% and 5.1%, candidates secured 60% and above marks respectively.
Analysis showed that performance of qualified candidates in written examination in subject
of Current Affairs and Essay was much better than other compulsory Subjects.
Observations of Examiners on Performance of Candidates in Written Part of CSS
Examination 2007

7.30. Following are observations of the examiners on performance of candidates in

compulsory as well as optional subjects offered in written part of the Competitive
Examination 2007.
Compulsory Subjects
7.31. English (Prcis & Composition): Standard and performance level of candidates was
extremely weak. Out of 3482, 92 percent candidate failed. 7 percent secured 40-49 marks,
while 1 percent obtained 50-59 marks and one candidate got 60-69 marks. Candidates did
no know how to write prcis and also lacked comprehension of subject.
7.32. Essay: Out of 3505 appeared candidates, only 1 percent got above 60 marks, 9
percent candidates obtained 50-59 marks while 46 percent secured 40-49 marks. 44
percent failed in the paper. Overall result was indicative of a widespread lack of objective
judgment. Instructions categorically required building this aspect through given forms of
discourse. Around 80% candidates either ignored it or misunderstood the guideline due to
lack of organizational attributes. Another factor contributing negatively was a grossly
misplaced reliance on preparatory help books with meaningless stocks phrases and
irrelevant references, taking away originality from candidates. Two distinct categories of
candidates, one with good expression but muddled thought process and the other with clear
thought lines but defective language ability, clearly indicated diametrically opposed
education system in our country.
7.33. General Knowledge-I: Basic ideas and concept of majority candidates were not
clear. Language of 40 percent candidates was very poor with a standard below intermediate
level.
7.34. General Knowledge-II: There was a steady decline in standards and quality of
response in subject. Despite information explosion which has provided greater access of
knowledge to candidates, they were unable to utilize these ideas/knowledge in their
answers due to poor expression and writing skill in English language.
7.35. General Knowledge-III: Performance of candidates was very poor. Most of them
were unable to understand sense of questions. About two or three candidates secured 60 or
above marks. Majority of candidates got 40-45 marks.
7.36. Islamiat: Candidates lacked thorough knowledge of subject as they depended on
memorization of guide books/helping notes and had not consulted recommended books.
Majority of candidates did not give any quotation or references. Even their answers were
not supported with verses of the Holy Quran, Hadiths, and saying of jurists and scholars.
However, some candidates had good knowledge, appreciable expression and justified their
answers with a lot of verses of the Holy Quran, Hadiths, quotations, TV programmes,
Internet/other latest material and stable bibliography.
Optional Subjects
7.37. Accountancy & Auditing-I: Preparation of candidates in general was restricted to
selected topics rather than whole course of subject. Candidates lacked sound knowledge of
accounting concepts and principles governing preparation of accounting record /financial
reports. Sufficient practice in topics involving practical work was also missing.
7.38. Accountancy & Auditing-II: Performance was largely satisfactory. Some candidates

presented well structured answers on topics of importance of finance. However, deep

knowledge on this critical area of business was missing. Most candidates who attempted
question on cost sheet and tax calculation got excellent marks but their attempt on Income
tax section was poor. Generally, quality of answers was not upto mark. Candidates must
produce quality in their answers.
7.39. Agriculture: In general, candidates showed poor knowledge of topics with little indepth /awareness of subject. They apparently lacked ability to develop a logical approach
and particularly inability to present/interpret the reference material. Their analytical skills
were handicapped by their weak understanding and poor expression. 27 percent candidate
got 60 and above marks. 24 percent secured 44-59 marks, while 49 percent candidates
obtained less than 43 marks.
7.40. Arabic-I & II: Generally, candidates have information about Arabic not of Arabic
language. Therefore, they could not attempt compulsory questions in Arabic Language.
Candidates should be well versed in Arabic as well as in English for better performance.
7.41. Balochi: Majority of candidates did not know about basic principles of Balochi
language with exception of few candidates. Language was of poor quality. No candidate got
above 80 marks. While majority of candidates secured about 50 marks.
7.42. Botany-I & II: In general, knowledge of candidates regarding basics of subject was
found weak. Majority of candidates write unnecessary details which were either not required
or not appropriate with reference to question. Majority of candidates lacked knowledge of
classical fragments and theories of subject e.g. evolution and genetics. They should have
knowledge of subject right from evolution to latest DNA techniques.
7.43. British History-I: Overall performance of candidates was good. 9 percent candidates
got 65-79 marks. 20 percent secured 60-64 marks. 43 percent obtained 44-59 marks and
19 percent attained 33-43 marks whereas 9 percent candidates failed in subject. However,
way of presentation/answer to questions was not much satisfactory in relation to some
candidates.
7.44. British History-II: Performance of candidates was good as compared to paper-I. 7
percent candidates got 65-79 marks. 24 percent secured 60-64 marks. 54 percent obtained
44-59 marks. 7 percent attained 33-43 marks, while 7 percent candidates failed in paper.
Perhaps, performance of candidates belonging to backward area was not satisfactory due to
non -availability of standard books and proper guidance.
7.45. Business Administration: Overall performance of candidates was good while some
candidates remained outstanding. 38 percent candidates got 65 and above marks. 27
percent obtained 60-64 marks. 38 percent secured 44-59 marks. While 2 percent got 33-43
marks and only 2 percent failed in the subject. Majority of candidates was better in
Management and Marketing Section while less number of candidates seemed to be strong in
Financial Management Section.
7.46. Chemistry-I: Performance of candidates was good. 25 percent candidates got above
65 marks including one exceptional case. 10 percent candidates secured 60-64 marks. 31
percent obtained 44-59 marks, 18 percent got 33-43 marks and 16 percent candidates
failed in subject.
7.47. Chemistry-II: Performance of candidates was just satisfactory. Paper comprised
some topics of Physical Chemistry and Organic Chemistry. 10 percent candidates were good

both in subject as well as in presentation of answers. While 33 percent performed

satisfactorily. Performance of remaining candidates was not satisfactory. By and large their
power of expression was not good. Candidates (with some exception) find difficulty if
question is twisted.
7.48. Constitutional Law: Candidates failed to produce pertinent answers due to lack of
theoretical and practical foundation of subject. Majority of candidates could not comprehend
questions owing to poor understanding of basic knowledge of Constitutional Law. They even
failed to distinguish between Constitution and Constitutional Law. They were unable to
attempt their answers with cases references as well as judicial decision. Due to meager
knowledge, majority of candidates got below 50 marks. Only 10-15 percent candidates
attained more than 50 marks.
7.49. Computer Science: Performance of candidates was satisfactory. 16 percent
candidates got 65 and above marks. 12 percent secured 60-64 marks. 28 percent obtained
44-59 marks. 20 percent attained 33-43 marks. While 25 percent candidates failed in the
subject.
7.50. Economics I & II: Overall performance of candidates was satisfactory. 60 percent
candidates, who presented economic facts and figure in concise, pertinent and organized
form, got 44-79% marks. 26 percent secured 33-43% marks and 14 percent failed.
Improvement in prevalent educational system was essential to discourage verbose and
time/space wasting lengthy answer by assigning more weight to introduce objective
questions in exam. Case study method must be introduced in Colleges/Universities to
develop skill of analysis and problem solving.
7.51. English Literature-I: Candidates did not demonstrate desired level of competency
at this level. Most candidates seemed to have taken this examination for granted.
7.52. English Literature-II: Majority of candidates seem to pick up answers in a hurried
manner from sub-standard notes prepared by unknown authors/publishers which were full
of incorrect analysis and having many mistakes of syntax etc. They were required to
accomplish intense/focused and vast reading of subject. However, some candidates did very
well, their use of literary and critical remarks reveals a good/sound background.
7.53. European History-I: Performance of candidates was satisfactory and better than
paper-II. Candidates were required to give clear concept of subject/build their arguments to
support it. This would have led to an analytical conclusion. 10 percent candidates got 60
and above marks. 41 percent secured 44-59 marks and 36 percent obtained 33-43 while 13
percent candidates failed in subject.
7.54. European History-II: Performance of candidates was not satisfactory. Candidates
should be able to visualize, express, analyse and connect the known facts of history in a
logical and rational way with a critical view on topics of subject. 13 percent candidates
secured 60 and above marks. 25 percent got 44-59 marks. 24 percent obtained 33-43
marks. While 38 percent failed in subject.
7.55. Forestry: 85 percent candidates did not have grasp over subject and avoided
attempting technical forestry question. 99 percent of candidates attempted question on
Range Development in Cholistan but none of them mentioned Technical or English name of
any major grass species growing in deserts. Almost all candidates attempting similar
question had presented same type of answers clearly indicated material taken from guide
books instead of recommended forestry books.

7.56. Geography-I: Overall performance was good. Candidates who studied subject
thoroughly have performed very well and got good marks in objective question. However,
candidates who had not studied subject waste their time in writing irrelevant material. They
should give answers to the point with well illustrated diagrams for better performance. 26
percent candidates got 65 and above marks. 16 percent obtained 60-64 marks while 38
percent secured 44-59 marks. 12 percent attained just 33-43 marks. While 9 percent
candidates failed in paper.
7.57. Geography-II: Overall performance of candidates was very low. Barring a few
candidates, almost all candidates failed to understand demand of questions, particularly
Q.No.1, 2, 6 and 7(b). As a result, their answers were way-ward and mostly gibberish.
Some of them seemed to possess a fair amount of information but their knowledge
appeared to be sketchy and answers fragmentary. Candidates showed poor expression and
inarticulate language in their answers. 6 percent got 60-79 marks. 37 percent obtained 4459 marks and 25 percent secured 33-43 marks. While 32 percent failed in subject.
7.58. Geology-I & II: Out of five, three candidates passed in paper-I and two in paper-II.
While only one candidate got 60-64% marks in both papers. On the whole, performance of
candidates was not satisfactory.
7.59. History of Pakistan & India-I: Out of 1586 candidates 1423 (90%) candidates
passed. 25 percent each obtained 60 and above and 44-59 marks respectively while 39
percent secured 33-43 marks. 10 percent candidates failed. However, answers were substandard with full of irrelevant material. Candidates were poor in punctuation,
spelling/tenses with illegible writing.
7.60. History of Pakistan & India-II: Performance of candidate was generally not upto
the expectation. 31 percent candidates got 60-79 marks. 56 percent obtained 44-59 marks
and 9 percent secured 33-43 marks while 4 percent candidates failed. Candidates generally
lacked in style and expression. Some candidates took it very easy/lightly. They did not
study adequately and thus subjectively not clear.
7.61. History of USA: Performance of candidates was good as 91 percent were passed in
subject. 30 percent candidates got 60 and above marks. 41 percent candidates obtained 4459 marks. 20 percent attained 33-43 marks. While 9 percent failed in subject. Candidates
should avoid using sub-standard guide books/notes/text as they were expected to show
their achievement and knowledge of higher standard to the Commission. Standard of
English (syntax) structure and grammar even in papers where candidates secured high
marks left much to be desired.
7.62. International Law: Performance of candidates was not so good. Majority of
candidates took exam lightly. Handwriting of many candidates was poor and illegible. Their
performance seems to be hampered further due to non-availability of suitable books in
market.
7.63. International Relations: Majority of candidates have attempted papers without
proper and in-depth study of prescribed syllabus, as they could not score better in question
8. Several candidates could not present their view points accurately with reference to
dynamics of International Relations, Balance of Power, Diplomatic Mechanism, Human
Rights, Democracy and Terrorism. Majority of candidates lacked techniques of expression
and argumentation in English. Even their vocabulary was too limited and lacked accuracy in
grammatical expression with worst hand writing. In objective question, several candidates

marked options without having confidence and accuracy.

7.64. Islamic History and Culture-I: Performance of candidates was highly unsatisfactory. More than 90 percent candidates could not utilize their knowledge accordingly.
Many of them even could not understand true concept of questions. Candidates must
improve their knowledge and writing power by reading standard books on Islamic history
and culture.
7.65. Islamic History and Culture-II: Majority of candidates answered below required
standard. Candidates have some valid ideas but due to poor expression they could not
produce it in a suitable manner. 90 percent candidates had not basic knowledge and
information about Islamic History and Culture. Most of candidates were unable to clearly
define culture and civilization. However, some candidates were of outstanding standard.
They may be compared with any international standard and can compete with any one.
7.66. Journalism: On the whole candidates have done well. A vast majority of them
displayed knowledge of subject and have passed. However, most candidates give lengthy
answers by including irrelevant material and answers without paragraph sub -headings and
proper order. Expression in English of almost 25 percent candidates was poor with various
grammatical errors/spelling mistakes.
7.67. Law-I: Majority of candidates lacked in-depth knowledge of subject and sufficient
command over the language. Keeping in view level of knowledge and its expression,
performance of candidates in general was not satisfactory.
7.68. Law-II: Majority of candidates have done well in compulsory question. 50 percent
had attempted traditionally. Overall, 10 percent candidates showed good performance.
7.69. Mercantile Law: Largely performance of candidates was hopeless which showed that
candidates did not realize importance and worth of exam as none of candidates could get
above 80 marks. Only 11 percent candidates got between 60-79 marks, 54 percent secured
33-59 marks and 35 percent candidates failed.
7.70. Muslim Law & Jurisprudence: Very few candidates have quoted case law or
reference to original text. They were lacking in analytical approach to subject. Some
candidates had not understood even the call of question. 30 percent candidates got 60 &
above marks. 54 percent obtained 44-59 marks and 8 percent attained 33-43 marks, while
8 percent candidates failed.
7.71. Persian-I: Performance of candidates was satisfactory as 38 percent candidates got
60 to 79 marks. 23 percent secured 44-59 marks and 27 percent obtained 33-43 marks.
While 12 percent candidates failed in subject. Candidates must understand nature of
question. Some candidates had poor knowledge and awareness of subject.
7.72. Persian-II: Performance of candidates was good as 69 percent candidates got 60
and above marks. 12 percent obtained 44-59 marks and 19 percent secured 33-43 marks.
While no candidate failed. However, they need to understand the nature of question and
improvement in Persian writing, translation and grammar.
7.73. Philosophy-I & II: Performance of candidates was above average as 50 to 60
percent candidates secured 60 and above marks. However, candidates having poor
expression in English suffered badly.

7.74. Physics-I & II: Among total of 207, only 8 percent candidates showed good
responses whereas 22 percent were just satisfactory and rest 70 percent remained below
average. Majority of candidates have subject understanding of below level of Matric. Such
candidates did not prepare examination seriously.
7.75. Political Science-I: Overall performance of candidates was average. Expression in
English was main reason for getting average and below average marks. Answers were
relevant but originality of expression and analysis was seen only in a limited number of
answer scripts. Candidates seemed familiar with concept and topics of paper generally.
7.76. Political Science-II: Performance of candidates was fairly good, yet majority falls in
second class category. In objective question candidates averagely got 10 marks out of 20
which bring the average score of candidates more downward. They mostly suffered due to
intellectual poverty/general intelligence.
7.77. Psychology-I & II: Performance of candidates was good. Majority of candidates
seemed had studied subject at Graduation or Masters Level.
7.78. Public Administration: Majority of candidates who had only general knowledge of
subject could not secure good marks. However, performance of some candidates was no
doubt exemplary. Non availability of proper books, material and ample guidance of the
teacher hampers their performance. Candidates must have proficiency in oral and written
English to express their ideas properly. Quality of education must be improved in
educational institutions.
7.79. Punjabi: Spellings of candidates in Punjabi were very poor. Some candidates indulge
in gossips and produce irrelevant material. They were expected to give exact and to the
point answers.
7.80. Pure Mathematics-I: Majority of candidates showed some dexterity and answering
questions which require routine or formula answers. They were wholly or partially failed
when a problem needs a good understanding of ideas & concepts.
7.81. Pushto: Almost all candidates attempted objective question well. In theory part, it
was observed that candidates study subject thoroughly but they failed to write pushto
language and made various spelling mistakes. Majority candidates did not write correct
poetry which blocks their performance. Candidates could get maximum marks if they were
able to write pushto correctly.
7.82. Sindhi: Performance of majority of candidates was good. 27 percent candidates got
60 and above marks, while 37 percent secured 44-59 marks. 22 percent obtained 33-43
marks whereas 14 percent candidates failed in subject. However, most of candidates having
low academic standard. Particularly who opt for subject as their mother tongue was not
sufficiently familiar with importance of course. They relied on short guide books/five years
solved papers, which hampers their performance.
7.83. Sociology: Generally performance of candidates was satisfactory. However, a few
took exam as a joke and failed miserably. Perhaps due to subjective type of questions
(more prevalent) at College level, candidates getting lesser marks in objective portion
generally performed well in subjective part. Most candidates had hardly any idea about
theoretical framework assumed behind question asked.
7.84. Statistics: Result was quite encouraging as 80 percent candidates passed in subject.

10 percent obtained more than 80% marks, while 14 percent got 70-80 marks. This
performance showed dedication of candidates and their right choice of subject.
7.85. Urdu-I: Standard of answers simply deplorable. Majority of candidates have
dependent upon ready made notes/guides and tried to memorize available material for
qualifying examination. Candidates could not produce answers as per requirement of
questions. They filled pages with unwanted information and irrelevant material which had no
link with questions. For discouraging the bulk use of guides/ready made notes, new
questions should be formulated instead of repeating old wording/voice of question year by
year.
7.86. Urdu-II: Despite better performance of candidates, it was generally observed that
stock answers were available in market in form of guide books or short notes. Taste of
appreciating poetry was on the decay.
7.87. Zoology-I & II: Overall performance of candidates was just above average.
Knowledge of majority candidates was superficial and of Intermediate level. Very few papers
reflected knowledge at degree level. There was not a single paper which could be
considered extra ordinary. It appears that there was something wrong for Zoology.
Teaching of subject at graduate level must be improved for better result.
Observations on Performance of Candidates in Written Part of CSS Examination 2006

Observations of Examiners on Performance of

Candidates in Written Part of CSS Examination
2006
Performance in Compulsory Subjects
7.26. Study of CSS written examination showed that in Every-Day Science 10% candidates
got 60% and above marks. In Pakistan Affairs, English(Precis & Composition), Islamiat and
Current Affairs 5% , 3%, 5% and 2% candidates secured 60% and above marks
respectively. Analysis showed that on average 5.5% candidates got above 60% marks in all
compulsory subjects.
7.27. Following are observations of the examiners on performance of candidates in
compulsory as well as optional subjects offered in written part of the Competitive
Examination, 2006.

Compulsory Subjects
7.28. Essay: Majority of candidates suffered due to poor expression in English. They
produced sub-standard stuff, irrelevant material and obscurantist approach in the Essay.
Religiosity, bigotry and anti-American outbursts appeared as identical synonymous spread
over page after page with impunity. More and more answer books were found radiating with
opinions rather than mentioning facts, figures or relevant data.
7.29. English Precis and Composition: General quality of papers was poor. Majority of
candidates did not make any concrete effort whereas some even lacked basic proficiency
and skill. Standard of English is deteriorating with the passage of time. The new craze for

functional English which rejects all recourse to literature has further intensified the tragedy.
7.30. G.K-I (Every Day Science): Overall performance of candidates was poor. Only 10
percent secured above 50% marks, 29 percent were in the range of 40-49% marks, while
61 percent got below 39% marks.
7.31. GK-II (Current Affairs): A reasonable number of candidates appeared to have a
grasp of the subject as well as originality of thoughts and ideas but they suffered due to
poor expression in English. Many candidates had very poor knowledge regarding geography
of Pakistan. Nevertheless, many candidates have expressed their views quite orderly,
effectively and to the point.
7.32. GK-III- (Pakistan Affairs): Performance of candidates was satisfactory.Their
answers showed single book study and lacked in-depth ideas.Knowledge of Pakistans
geographic locations, its importance and current global scenario presenting through simple
castro-graphic techniques was also limited. However, expertise of candidates regarding
culture & heritage of country was sound.
7.33. Islamiat: General performance of candidates was not satisfactory. Some candidates
were good in English, but were not able to write correct Quranic verses and other Arabic
quotations. While some candidates were efficient in Arabic writing but were weak in
English/Urdu expression. Most candidates were able to perceive the idea of the question but
very few were successful in presenting required material relating to the question.

Optional Subjects
7.34. Accountancy and Auditing: On the whole, performance of candidates was average.
There is a need to comprehend concepts of subject and to understand application through
quantitative approach. Comprehension relating to accounting principles and its practical
aspects was also weak.
7.35. Agriculture: Performance of candidates was good. Out of 197 candidates who
appeared in this paper, 37 percent got marks in the range of 44-59, 41 percent candidates
showed excellent performance in the range of 60-84 marks. 22 percent failed in the subject.
7.36. Applied Mathematics: Performance of candidates was poor.Candidates used
formulas and made calculations, without logic and reasons which were required in the
paper. System of examination at college level needs to be designed in such a way which
should compel students for comprehensive study of the syllabus instead of selective study.
7.37. Balochi: Performance of candidates was satisfactory.
7.38. Botany I & II: Performance of candidates was below satisfactory level and needs
serious attention. Most deficient areas were plant physiology,biochemistry and genetics.
Performance was better in paper-II as compared to paper-I.
7.39. British History: Overall pass percentage was just satisfactory. Out of 279
candidates, only 91 passed. Majority of candidates had poor expression in English. They
could not elaborate their view points critically and logically.
7.40. Business Administration: Theoretical part of the question paper was attempted by
almost all candidates in generalities and un-professionally. Most did well in the applied part

of the subject.
7.41. Chemistry-I: 70 percent candidates passed, but only 5 percent got 60 or above
marks. It was observed that majority of candidates preferred to attempt subjective
questions on Industrial and Environmental Chemistry, while a few attempted questions
based on Physical Chemistry which involve some Mathematics.
7.42. Chemistry-II: Pass percentage in the paper was nearly 75%.Generally, candidates
relied on rote learning which lacks reasoning and critical analysis. Questions should have
logical and critical analysis rather than descriptive at this level.
7.43. Computer Science: Performance of majority of candidates was very poor.
7.44. Constitutional Law: A large number of candidates were unable to understand the
requirement of questions. They merely reproduced unwanted information. A substantial
number of candidates lacked comprehensive knowledge of the Constitution of Pakistan.
7.45. Economics-I: Performance in the theory part was better. Candidates who consulted
quality references have performed far better than those who prepared from sub- standard
notes/guide books available in the market.
7.46. Economics-II: Performance of candidates was satisfactory. Evaluation follows
standard normal distribution curve i.e. some good scripts co-exist with a larger number of
medium and poor attempts. It was also observed that candidates normally put less effort in
this paper.
7.47. English Literature-I: Majority of candidates secured in the range of 44-50% marks
in the subject It appeared that they had taken help from locally prepared notes/guide books
and lacked exposure to original text of the syllabus. A few top scorers showed their keen
interest in study of English Literature as their analysis were well organized and had mature
expression.
7.48. English Literature-II: Standard of answers did not reveal in-depth study in English
Literature. Structure, syntax and vocabulary, in most cases, were above average as they
have better proficiency in English Language due to study of English Literature in their
graduation/post graduation studies.Teachers should motivate students to read original
criticism and to discourage them to depend solely on guides and helping material.
7.49. Forestry: Candidates generally produced answers without focus on points asked in
various questions. They tend to write a lot of irrelevant material. They were careless and
indulged in numerous errors which could be very easily avoided otherwise. Their answers
should properly be sequenced/organized.
7.50. Geography-I: Performance of candidates showed that in-depth study of various
hypotheses regarding cyle of erosions in different climates in many instances was avoided.
Maps and diagrams though produced selectively, created viability of the discipline. Keeping
the background of limited reading list/material, performance of candidates showed truly
achieving goals of an active learning package offered by the FPSC.
7.51. Geography-II: Candidates displayed manipulated and interpreted geographic
information satisfactorily. Their answers indicated understanding with basic concepts in
Human Geography. However, some difficulties were observed in diffusion, spatial
interaction, local and environmental change scenarios.

7.52. Geology-I: Candidates lacked in the basic concept of geology. Their response to
questions based on applied nature and basic concept of Geology was a matter of
disappointment.
7.53. Geology-II: Performance of candidates was not satisfactory as two out of six
candidates failed, 3 candidates secured between 33-59% marks and one
candidate got above 80% marks.
7.54. .History of Pak & India-I: Performance of majority of candidates was not good.
Their concepts regarding questions and subjects were not clear.Only 11 percent candidates
got above 60% marks in the paper, while 23 percent candidates obtained below 33% marks
and 66 percent candidates secured marks in the range of 33-69%.
7.55. History of Pak & India-II: Candidates were not well versed with factual knowledge
of the subject. However, their performance was largely vulnerable
due to poor expression in English. Overall performance of candidates was poor as compared
to paper-I.
7.56. International Law: Performance of candidates was comparatively good as 85
percent of them had passed and majority of them got above 60% marks. Few candidates
had written long irrelevant answers by using 20-25 pages for one question but got only 3 or
4 marks. Candidates should thoroughly understand the concepts asked in the questions and
provide answers accordingly.
7.57. International Relation: Performance of candidates was good.
7.58. Islamic History & Culture-I: Performance of candidates showed that their quality
of communication ability is declining. Their answers were stereotyped and objectivity was
lacking. They generally lacked aptitude for Islamic History. General awareness regarding
importance of the subject is needed.
7.59. Islamic History and Culture-II: Standard of candidates performance was not
satisfactory. 33 percent got marks in the range of 44-59, 30 percent secured in the range of
33-43 marks. 22 percent candidates obtained below 33 marks and only 15 percent got
above 60 marks.
7.60. Journalism: Candidates are not getting proper guidance or counselling for
preparation of this subject. Seminars/Workshops should be arranged in which Media Experts
may deliver useful talks to provide better understanding of the subject. Majority candidates
had no proper knowledge/information of the subject.
7.61. Law: Performance was fairly average. Out of 133, 80 secured below 50% marks,
while 42 got in the range of 50-70% marks. Only one candidate obtained above 70% marks
in the subject. 80 percent candidates had superficial knowledge of the subject.
7.62. Mercantile law: Overall performance was poor as only 45 percent candidates could
pass in this paper out of which a huge majority secured below 50 marks. Only a few
candidates got in the range of 60-79 marks.About 70 percent candidates apparently had no
legal educational background.Since the exam was problem based than essay type,
therefore, only those candidates could pass who had studied Law as a core subject during
their graduate studies. Majority of the candidates relied on unnecessary/irrelevant details.

7.63. Muslim Law and Jurisprudence: Candidates were not well prepared for the
examination. They selected the subject with the hope to get good marks, without much
study/hard work. They simply filled the answer book by repeating the same sentences again
and again or writing illegible words.
7.64. Persian-I: Performance was not so good as in paper-II. 56 percent obtained marks
in the range of 60-84. While 26 percent candidates go in the range of 44-59 marks. 11
percent secured in the range of 33-43 marks and 7 percent candidates failed in the subject.
They should give proper attention, particularly to Persian grammar.
7.65. Persian-II: Performance was better than paper-I as 78 percent candidates got
marks in the range of 65-79. Question paper was prepared from the prescribed text which is
the same since last many years.
7.66. Philosophy: General performance has been deteriorating year by year. They showed
poor knowledge, expression and mostly depended on low standard short books/crammed
and superficial material.
7.67. Physics: Performance was poor as 35 percent candidates failed in the paper. While
45 percent candidates failed in paper-II. Only 7-9 percent candidates got marks in the
range of 60-79%. Majority of the candidates have following weak areas in the subject:i)
Application of concepts. ii) Problem solving
7.68. Political Science-I: Overall performance was satisfactory. 49 percent got marks in
the range of 44-59, 24 percent secured above 60 marks, 14 percent between 33-43 marks
and 12 percent got below 33 marks. It was observed, that the majority had no
understanding of the subject. However, some candidates who had a good grasp of the
subject secured good marks.
7.69. Political Science-II: Performance was good. However, it was observed that
candidates having very good marks in the objective questions generally could not perform
very well in the subjective/explanatory part of the paper. It indicated that they mainly
depend on rote learning and had poor analytical capability.
7.70. Psychology I & II: Performance in general had been quite disappointing, both in
terms of acceptable degree of knowledge and expression. About 25 percent candidates did
not demonstrate the knowledge of the level of F.A.
7.71. Public Administration: Ability level of some promising candidates was good.
However, majority lacked either in substantive content or the ability to express their views.
They prepared for this exam, not from original sources but from guides/notes freely
available in the market.
7.72. Punjabi: Standard of the subject is deteriorating gradually. Answers scripts were
unsatisfactory and below standard. Candidates give references of guide books, rather than
the prescribed books. In optional part of paper, a few students could get 70-79.
7.73. Pure Mathematics: Performance was not satisfactory. Candidates had no clarity in
their concepts/ideas. The situation is alarming and demands serious considerations/review
of curriculum and teaching methods.
7.74. Pushto: General standard was satisfactory. However, majority had not read the
whole suggested course and only depended upon selective study. More interest and

thorough study of the subject will enable them to have good result in the competitive
examination.
7.75. Sindhi: General standard was not satisfactory. Majority know very little about the
classical form of Sindhi poetry. Only four candidates had written the alphabet of Sindhi
language, even they were unable to write the history of development of Sindhi writing
system. They only depended on notes/guide books as they did not refer to books published
recently.
7.76. Sociology: Overall performance was good. 64 percent candidates got marks in the
range of 44-59, 10 percent secured above 60 marks, while 21 percent obtained in the range
of 33-43 marks. Only 4 percent got below 33 marks.
7.77. Statistics: Overall performance was poor. Candidates had not properly prepared
themselves for the subject. A lot of irrelevant material was written in poor English.
Candidates should read standard books on Statistical Method,Probability Theory, Inference
and Sampling to prepare for this paper.
7.78. Urdu-I: Performance was good as out of 800, just 14 candidates failed. 53 percent
got marks in the range of 44-59, while 36 percent obtained above 60 marks. Their interest
in Urdu language/literature was appreciated. Majority of candidates showed power of
descriptive expression and comprehension.
7.79. Urdu-II: Performance showed that 70 percent candidates had studied the suggested
syllabus well and got good marks. 20 percent candidates who relied on bazari notes,
obtained less marks or failed as their answer were not according to requirements of
questions. 10 percent candidates failed badly as their answers were full of error of syntax,
wrong spellings and incorrect statement.
7.80. USA History: On the whole, 89 percent candidates passed in USA History which
clearly showed their interest in the subject. 36 percent got above 60 marks, while 34
percent secured 44-53 marks and 19 percent obtained 33-43 marks. Candidates got
average marks due to their shallow knowledge.
7.81. Zoology-I Performance was just satisfactory as 67 percent candidates got in the
range of 33-59 marks, 32 percent failed in the subject while only 1 percent got above 60
marks. Performance of candidates was not satisfactory on questions where candidates
talent and synthetic abilities were required. Many candidates lacked basic concepts of the
subject which can be partly attributed to declining educational standards under general
socio- political environment.
7.82. Zoology-II: Performance was better as compared to paper-I. Overall 70 percent
candidates got marks in the range of 33-59, 7 percent secured above 60, while 23 percent
failed in the subject. However, some candidates showed a trend of unnecessary long and
irrelevant introduction. Their answer scripts largely lacked comprehension and
understanding of the ques
Observations on performance of candidates in Written Part of CSS Examination 2005

Observations of Examiners on performance of candidates in

Written Part of CSS Examination
2005
7.25. Following are observations of the examiners on performance of candidates in optional
as well as compulsory subjects offered in written part of the Competitive Examination,
2005:
7.26. Accountancy & Auditing-I & II Overall performance of the candidates was good.
48 percent candidates secured 60% or above marks, which indicate their level of
preparation for the subject. The candidates should further improve their understanding, and
follow proper format in producing answers in the subject.
7.27. Agriculture. The performance of the candidates was satisfactory. However, they
could not perform well in the compulsory question based on objective type items.
7.28. Applied Math-I & II On the whole, the performance of the candidates was
satisfactory. But it appeared that the knowledge of learning Mathematics at college level is
deteriorating. It is suggested that competent and able teachers need to be deputed to teach
mathematic classes regularly to impart quality education in the subject.
7.29. Arabic-I & II The general performance of the candidates in the discipline of Arabic
literature was satisfactory. However, the candidates need depth of knowledge to
comprehend the exact literary spirit of the primary Arabic sources and references.
Expression in writing Arabic was comparatively weak due to lack of modern Arabic
vocabulary and acquaintance with morphology, syntax, eloquence and Rhetoric of the Arabic
language. Relentless efforts may be made to create reading habits and literary culture in the
students to think freely with creative mind.
7.30. Balochi It was observed that candidates were well versed in Balochi literature but
they could not express their knowledge in proper Balochi language. Some candidates
showed sufficient knowledge in Balochi language but they could not express Balochi
literature, particularly on the famous writers, poets and folk tales etc.
7.31. Botany I & II Majority of the candidates did not know about basic principle of
Taxonomy which is extremely important subject in Bio-sciences. They did not realise
diagrammatic explanation of answers of the questions at all and those who tried to draw the
diagram miserably failed.
7.32. British History. The statistics of the overall result showed that the performance of
the candidates was not appreciable. Out of total 315 candidates who appeared in the
subject, only 6 percent got above 65% marks, while 30 percent candidates got less than
43% marks which was not satisfactory performance. Majority of the candidates failed or got
low scores due to lack of expression in English language.
7.33. Business Administration. The overall performance of the candidates was
satisfactory. It was observed that knowledge of the subject was based on limited number of
books, which needed more references on Management,Marketing and Financial
Management. Linguistic skills of the candidates also need to be improved.
7.34. Chemistry-I The performance of the candidates was average. It was observed that

majority of the candidates had studied guide books/ready made notes prepared for the
purpose, instead of thorough and detailed study of the standard books/material. Grasp of
the subject is essential for securing good marks especially in objective type question.
7.35. Chemistry-II Almost all the candidates performed poorly. The result showed lack of
interest among young Pakistani Scientists and improper teaching (theoretical as well as
practical) in the Colleges and Universities. The candidates should select only those optional
subjects which they have studied at Graduation level at least in natural and physical
sciences.
7.36. Computer Science. The result showed a very poor performance of the candidates in
contrast with exigent requirements of the Competitive Examination. Only 16 percent of the
candidates secured 60% or above marks. Whereas 25 percent candidates could not even
qualify in the subject.
Computer Science has diversified areas of study and requires a thorough study of the
subject to appear in the exam with full justification. The weak areas of the candidates were
Algorithm, Design, Networking and Programming in the subject.
7.37. Constitutional Law. Almost every candidate attempted questions on American
Constitution but in an informative and pithy manner. They lacked even about basic
knowledge about Constitution of Pakistan. Some of the candidates appeared to have studied
only guidebooks.
7.38. Economic. The performance of the candidates was average. Majority of the
candidates have depended upon ready made notes, and tried to memorise the available
material for qualifying the examination. The candidates could not produce answers as per
requirement of the questions given in the paper. They filled pages with unwanted
information which had no link with the questions.
7.39. English (Prcis & Composition) The performance of the candidates was simply
deplorable as only 23 percent of the candidates could obtain qualifying marks i.e. 33%. The
ability of the candidates to express in English remained very poor inspite English being a
compulsory subject up to Graduation level. Majority of the candidates had little or no idea of
grammatical structures and sequence of tenses. The standard displayed by the candidates
in the subject indicated that the best graduates are no longer attracted by the Civil
Services.
7.40. English Literature-I The performance of the candidates was satisfactory.
7.41. English Literature-II The overall standard/quality of the scripts was poor. The
language was of the poor quality with the exception of few candidates. The English grammar
and spelling were very poor. There was no logical sequence and unity in their wording. This
drawback cannot be considered in isolation from the overall quality/standard of education
provided by Education System of Pakistan.
7.42. Essay. Overall performance of the candidates was quite unsatisfactory, which
indicate the deteriorating academic standard of Education in Pakistan. Candidates lacked
analytical ability and miserably failed to create organic unity. The ideas expressed in the
Essays were trite and backward. Mistakes of sentence structure and spellings marred the
beauty of Essays. The students should be imparted lessons in grammar and in the art of
composition in Educational Institutions.
7.43. European History-I & II The candidates had understanding of the philosophy of the

question paper and produced convincing answers. Their knowledge and expression of
answers was satisfactory.
7.44. Forestry. The performance of the candidates was below average. Majority of the
candidates generally depended on low standard short books and avoid struggle in learning.
Majority of the answers indicated memorised material showing a common trend to present
bulk rather than quality and writing answers without seriously understanding the questions
theme.
7.45. G.K-I(Every Day Science) The performance of the candidates has shown that the
candidates who have graduation in Social Sciences give more importance to English
language. They normally write lengthy answers to short questions. Sequence/order of the
question must be observed in writing the answers.
7.46. G.K-II(Current Affairs) Most of the candidates lack the ability of analysing the
issues and just narrate the event in quite descriptive manner. Out of total 3564, only 40 to
50 candidates secured 60 to 70% marks in compulsory question (MCQ) which clearly
showed that they had little knowledge of current issues and current affairs of Pakistan.
7.47. G.K-III (Pakistan Affairs) Majority of the candidates secured marks in the range of
40-49% in the subject. It was observed that awareness of the candidates regarding Muslim
Role in the Sub-Continent, its downfall and efforts for renaissance was rather bleak.
However, the concept of Muslim Nationalism and political development in Pakistan since
1947 reflected specific strategies discussed by the candidates in the subject.
7.48. Geography-I The performance of the candidates who studied in English Medium
Schools was far better as compared to those who have studied in Urdu Medium Schools, as
their knowledge of the subject, ability to understand the question and techniques of
answering the question was satisfactory.
7.49. Geography-II The performance of the candidates was not up to the mark as
majority of the candidates had no grasp of the subject even lacked in basic knowledge. They
had no foundation of the subject because they did not study Geography at secondary level.
7.50. Geology-I & II The performance of the candidates was satisfactory. They had
prepared well for the exam and had good knowledge of the subject. However, their answers
were rather long and included unnecessary details.
7.51. History of Pakistan & India-I The overall performance of the candidates was
satisfactory. 36 percent candidates secured above 60% marks in the subject, while 36
percent candidates got marks in the range of 44-59%. Only 20 percent candidates obtained
33-43 marks and remaining 8 percent failed in the subject.
7.52. History of Pakistan & India-II The performance of the candidates was almost substandard. They wrote irrelevant stuff in their answers. Only a few
candidates presented solid and relevant answers. Expression, punctuation and sentence
structure of most of the candidates were faulty. A detailed History of Pakistan Movement
especially Two- Nation Theory should be taught at Colleges and University levels.
7.53. International Law. The general standard of the candidates was average. A few of
the candidates attempted very well and were placed in good category. Majority of the
candidates secured marks in the range of 44-59%,while remaining were just at passing
stage. It was observed, that majority of the candidates had adequate knowledge of the

subject but they could not express their knowledge in English effectively. They must know
how to refer the appropriate case of International issues and how to attempt the paper as a
whole. Teaching as well as paper attempting in the examinations needs to be improved at
the University and College levels.
7.54. International Relation. Majority of the candidates had selected the subject I.R for
Competitive Examination without having in-depth study of this
subject. They lacked the techniques of expression and argumentation. They had not enough
vocabulary and accuracy in expression of their views in English.
7.55. Islamiat Majority of the candidates showed good performance in objective type
question. They appeared to had studied the Quranic portion as well as the whole syllabus
thoroughly. The majority of the candidates also tried their best to attempt the subjective
type questions seriously.
7.56. Islamic History & Culture-I The performance of the candidates was satisfactory.
However, in some cases the quality of answers was very low
which reflected an impression that the candidates neither had the ideas of the subject nor
the ability to express their idea in simple English. Moreover, the construction of sentences
and spellings of certain common words were horrible and alarming.
7.57. Law. The performance of candidates was quite satisfactory. 48 percent candidates
secured above 60 % marks, while 11 percent candidates got marks in the range of 33-40%
and remaining 21 percent candidates had failed in the subject.
7.58. Muslim Law & Jurisprudence. The performance of the candidates was satisfactory.
Some of the candidates expressed a good knowledge of the subject and they had supported
their answers with reference to the Quranic Versus.
7.59. Persian The performance of the candidates was not satisfactory as majority of them
secured marks in the range of 33-50% in the subject. The
answer scripts of the candidates showed that they had no interest and understanding of the
subject. The reason behind this dismal picture was general decline in the standard of
education, absence of curiosity for literature/knowledge and no longer use of Persian
language in our educational institutions as well as social life.
7.60. Philosophy. The general performance of the candidates had decreased as compared
to the previous years. Their minds aptitude was confined to notes, guides and specific
portions of the concerned syllabus. Thorough study of the books and in-depth knowledge of
the subject was not expressed in the answer scripts .It appeared that the candidates simply
relied on short cut methods to achieve their goals which was a stigma on the part of
education.
7.61. Physic-I & II The performance of the candidates was not satisfactory. Their
concepts and understanding of the subject were poor, which indicated
the deterioration of standard of higher education, especially in Natural Sciences, in Pakistan.
7.62. Political Science-I The candidates could not get good marks due to selective study
of the subject. Majority of the candidates obtained below 60% marks, which indicated lack
of interest and poor knowledge of the candidates. The candidates desirous to appear in the
Competitive Examination should study the subject thoroughly and prepare themselves fully
to achieve good marks and position for competition.

7.63. Political Science-II The performance of the candidates in paper-II was not so good
but it was satisfactory.
7.64. Public Administration. Majority of the candidates lacked conceptional knowledge
about the issues and areas of the subject. The candidates who
studied this subject in their academic career expressed solid/concrete arguments/facts and
performed better as compared to those who picked up this subject for CSS Competitive
Examination only.
7.65. Punjabi. Majority of the candidates seemed appeared in this paper with full
preparation. However, a good number of the candidates did not know the
writing and spelling of Punjabi words.
7.66. Pure Math-I & II The performance of the candidates was very poor. They did not
have clear concepts about the questions. Majority of the candidates did not know the logical
steps for solving the problems. It appeared that either the subject concerned was losing its
popularity among the candidates or teaching in the subject in Colleges and Universities is
not up to the mark. The candidates select the subject of Mathematics with the impression to
get better marks as compared to other subjects, but it is not possible unless concept are
clear in the subject.
7.67. Pushto. The performance of the candidates was good as 63 percent of the candidates
secured above 65% marks. 21 percent candidates got marks in the range of 60-64% and 13
percent candidates obtained 44-59% marks. 02 percent candidates got 33-43% marks while
only 0.35 percent candidates had failed in the subject.
7.68. Sindhi. The performance of the candidates was good. They had indepth knowledge
regarding history of literature, history of language and origin
of Sindhi Language.
7.69. Sociology. Only few candidates attempted their papers according to the standard of
Competitive Examination. Majority of the candidates relied on
guides/test papers and did not have proper understanding of the subject as they were well
acquainted with the names of the founders of Sociology but did not know about their
contribution in the subject/discipline.
7.70. Statistics The performance of the candidates was just satisfactory. 50 percent of
them secured less then 60% marks. While 16 percent candidates
could not even qualify in the subject. The candidates appearing in Competitive Examination
are advised to take an active tutorship in the subject which could enable them to solve the
numerical questions, considered to be an integral part for the subject applications.
7.71. Urdu-I Majority of the candidates lacked the ability to understand the actual theme
asked in the questions. They produced answers as memorised
by them without understanding the concept of the questions. On the whole, the standard of
scripts was not satisfactory.
7.72. Urdu-II The performance of the candidates was satisfactory in paper-II as compared
to paper-I.
7.73. Zoology-I & II The performance of the candidates was satisfactory.Paper-II was
attempted by the candidates better as compared to paper-I. A gradual shift from the basic
Zoology to general Zoology was observed. Only 7 percent candidates got above 60% marks

in the subject. While 32 percent candidates obtained marks in the range 44-59% marks and
36 percent in the range 33-43% marks. Whereas, 25 percent candidates failed in the
subject.
Majority of the candidates had tried to fill pages with long/undesired introduction and
irrelevant material and repeating the same stuff time and again. Their answers scripts
largely lacked comprehension and understanding of the subject.
Performance in Compulsory Subjects
7.24. The study showed that in the subject of Every-Day Science, 13 percent of the
candidates got 60% and above marks in the written exam. While candidates who secured
60 and above marks in Pakistan Affairs were10 percent, English (Prcis & Composition) 05
percent, Islamiat 04 percent and Current Affairs 04 percent respectively. The analysis
showed that on the average 6.1% candidates got above 60% marks in all compulsory
subjects.