14/11/2025
The new CIP policy in Punjab is fundamentally unjust. Although it claims to prioritize postgraduate merit, in reality it gives disproportionate weightage to metric that varies widely across institutions and examination systems and disturbs fairness of the process.
Why this is unfair:
1) Assessment systems are not standardized. Private medical colleges often award higher marks in vivas and practicals.
2) UHS consistently gives higher internal and professional exam scores compared to KEMU, NMU, FMU, and FJMU.
3) Foreign medical graduates (FMGs) are assessed through entirely different examination structures.
Despite these clear discrepancies, the same criteria are being applied to all, which creates an imbalanced and non-level playing field. A policy can only be fair if its foundation is fair. Using MBBS marks as the decisive component of postgraduate merit — when those marks are not comparable across institutions — is unjust. This policy must be reviewed and reverted in favor of a system that measures all candidates by a uniform, transparent, and standardized method.
The new CIP policy in Punjab is fundamentally unjust. Although it claims to prioritize postgraduate merit, in reality it gives disproportionate weightage to metric that varies widely across institutions and examination systems and disturbs fairness of the process.
Why this is unfair:
1) Assessment systems are not standardized. Private medical colleges have different criteria of evaluating students.
2) UHS consistently gives higher internal and professional exam scores compared to KEMU, NMU, FMU, and FJMU.
3) Foreign medical graduates (FMGs) are assessed through entirely different examination structures.
Despite these clear discrepancies, the same criteria are being applied to all, which creates an imbalanced and non-level playing field. A policy can only be fair if its foundation is fair. Using MBBS marks as the decisive component of postgraduate merit — when those marks are not comparable across institutions — is unjust. This policy must be reviewed and reverted in favor of a system that measures all candidates by a uniform, transparent, and standardized method.