Group-1 Evaluation Under Fire: No Experts, Poor Translation & Broken Evaluation System

A wave of dissatisfaction is growing among candidates who appeared for the Group-1 recruitment exams in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, with mounting concerns over the quality and fairness of answer sheet evaluation. Despite years of preparation by lakhs of aspirants, several credible complaints have emerged that cast doubt on the transparency and competence of evaluators.

Evaluation Based Only on ‘Key Points’, Not Comprehensive Answers

Candidates allege that answer sheets are being marked strictly based on pre-defined key points, ignoring quality or alternative valid arguments made by candidates. Even when answers go beyond expectations, marks are withheld unless the response matches the key exactly.

Additionally, multi-subject papers are reportedly being evaluated by a single evaluator, raising questions on whether assessors truly the subject expertise have to fairly grade such content.

Lack of Subject Experts: A Result of Alarming Faculty Shortage

The root cause, say experts, is the massive vacancy in faculty positions across universities in both states:

• Andhra Pradesh: Out of 4,330 professor-level posts, only 1,048 are filled. Around 150 retired recently.
• Telangana: Out of 2,825 sanctioned positions, only 873 are currently occupied.
• Close to 40% of degree college lecturer posts are also lying vacant in both states.

This lack of experienced professors is impacting not just education standards, but also the credibility of recruitment exams.

Also Read: Supreme Court Sets 3-Month Deadline for President to Act on State Bills

Translation Woes: Telugu Medium Students Face the Brunt

Another pressing issue is the poor translation of question papers. Originally drafted in English, these papers are translated into Telugu by official translators who often lack subject understanding.

This leads to literal translations that confuse candidates. For instance, “Civil Disobedience Movement” was translated directly, causing misunderstandings. Experts recommend involving 7–8 subject-aware bilingual translators in the process to ensure clarity and fairness.

Time Constraints in Exams: Unreasonable Pressure on Candidates

Candidates also raise red flags over unrealistic exam durations. For example, in Group-1 Prelims, candidates must answer 150 questions in 150 minutes, a pace even question paper setters struggle with. This often forces students to guess 30–40 answers, risking accuracy.

In contrast, UPSC’s CSAT paper offers 120 minutes for just 80 questions, giving aspirants enough time to read and analyze.

Experts Propose UPSC-Like Evaluation for Group-1 Mains

Former UPSC member and APPSC Chairman Prof. Y. Venkatarami Reddy suggests that Group-1 evaluations should follow the UPSC pattern:

• Double evaluation by two independent experts.
• If scores differ by more than 5%, a third evaluator is brought in.
• Section-wise evaluation by subject-specific experts for interdisciplinary papers.
• Marks are awarded for relevant additional information, not just key points.

UPSC selects 13 candidates per post for Mains and ensures national-level faculty are involved in fair evaluation—something state commissions are yet to implement.

Growing Demand for Objective-Type Mains

Given the evaluation issues, some experts and candidates are advocating for a fully objective Mains paper, similar to the prelims. This would reduce subjective bias and ensure equal opportunity for all candidates, irrespective of medium or interpretation.

Final Word: Transparency, Fairness, and Reform Needed Urgently

As lakhs of hopeful students invest years preparing for government jobs, the credibility of recruitment processes must be upheld. Addressing these concerns through better evaluation policies, transparent procedures, proper translations, and experienced faculty is not just necessary—it’s overdue.