Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1

    Examiners Report::Town Planning & Urban Management::CSS-2016

    Examiners Report::Town Planning & Urban Management::CSS-2016


    >Writing standard of the candidates for attempting questions is not remarkable.


    > Conceptually they are very weak. Majority (95%) have developed their own meaning to various concepts of town planning asked in the question paper


    > Majority (80-85%) have not even understood the questions correctly, being asked in the paper. Particularly in case of question No. 3, 4 and 5.


    > The attempted questions are more inclined towards output rather than outcome. The candidates were neither precise nor to the point.


    > Majority of the candidates were very weak in grammar and sentence structure.


    > Structure of the paragraph and flow of writing donít exist in most of the paper. I am even not fully satisfied of the passing candidates, except very few (almost 2 or 3).


    > Finally I have not found any competition among the candidates. No one got outstanding position. However, only two candidates can be rated very good only

  2. #2
    Complete Report of the Examiner

    I appreciate the commission’s decision to incorporate the subject of “Town planning urban management” in the list of papers for CSS examination. It is really a wise decision as majority of the successful candidates select DMG as their career and work as a policy makers for the physical development of the country. Therefore, they must have an idea for spatial planning and development. The country is in intense need of such a policy makers who can foresee the appropriateness of various programs. The introduction of this subject will surely increase understanding of snail process of development in Pakistan. A good syllabus need to be formed for it, so that candidates may not only understand the concepts but could better analyze and synthesize the development prospects of Pakistan.

    Here is a brief review of the present (2016) papers attempted by the candidates

     Writing standard of the candidates for attempting questions is not remarkable.

     Conceptually they are very weak. Majority (95%) have developed their own meaning to various concepts of town planning asked in the question paper.

     Majority (80-85%) have not even understood the questions correctly, being asked in the paper. Particularly in case of question No. 3, 4 and 5.

     The attempted questions are more inclined towards output rather than outcome. The candidates were neither precise nor to the point.

     Majority of the candidates were very weak in grammar and sentence structure.

     Structure of the paragraph and flow of writing don’t exist in most of the paper. I am even not fully satisfied of the passing candidates, except very few (almost 2 or 3).

     Finally I have not found any competition among the candidates. No one got outstanding position. However, only two candidates can be rated very good only
    Imagination is more important than knowledge

 

 

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •