General Studies 2022 GS Paper IV 20 marks 250 words Compulsory Analyse

Q8

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 General Studies questions

Directive word: Analyse

This question asks you to analyse. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Analyse the ethical dimensions of the incomplete case study by identifying stakeholders, conflicting values, and underlying principles. Structure as: brief context identification → stakeholder analysis with ethical dilemmas → application of ethical theories/frameworks → balanced resolution with justification.

Key points expected

Identification of all relevant stakeholders and their legitimate interests in the case
Recognition of ethical dilemmas involving conflict between duty, consequences, and virtue ethics
Application of specific ethical frameworks (utilitarianism, deontology, Rawlsian justice, or Indian ethics)
Reference to relevant constitutional values, legal provisions, or administrative ethics codes
Balanced resolution that prioritizes public interest while respecting individual rights
Practical implementability of the suggested course of action

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	4	Correctly interprets 'analyse' as breaking down the case into constituent ethical elements, not merely describing or suggesting; identifies multiple layers of ethical tension	Partially understands analytical demand but mixes with description; identifies some ethical issues without systematic deconstruction	Misreads directive as 'describe' or 'suggest'; treats case superficially without analytical depth
Content depth & accuracy	20%	4	Demonstrates mastery of ethical theories, administrative ethics codes, and constitutional morality; accurately applies concepts to case specifics	Covers basic ethical concepts with some accuracy but limited theoretical grounding; minor conceptual errors	Significant factual errors in ethical concepts; confuses theories or misapplies principles; generic content
Structure & flow	20%	4	Logical progression from problem identification → analysis → evaluation → resolution; smooth transitions between ethical dimensions; 250 words optimally utilized	Adequate structure but some disjointed sections; either too brief or exceeds word limit without proportionate value	Disorganized or missing logical flow; abrupt jumps between points; severe under/over-length
Examples / case-law / data	20%	4	Cites relevant SC judgments (e.g., Vineet Narain, Common Cause), ARC recommendations, or real administrative precedents; uses Indian ethical examples (Gandhian trusteeship, Kautilya's arthashastra)	One relevant example or generic reference to ethics codes; examples not tightly integrated with case analysis	No examples, or irrelevant/invented references; misses opportunity to ground analysis in Indian administrative context
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	4	Synthesizes analysis into reasoned, defensible course of action; acknowledges trade-offs; offers innovative yet practical resolution with citizen-centric outcome	Safe, conventional conclusion without clear justification; misses opportunity for nuanced synthesis	Absurd or unethical conclusion; no conclusion; purely descriptive ending without analytical integration

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →