Arabic produced no allocations in CSS 2025, and the failure was total: of the 11 candidates who sat it, not a single one even cleared the written stage, let alone reached allocation. With a field this small and an outcome this absolute, the subject offered no realistic path to a seat for anyone who attempted it. A candidate considering Arabic should treat the 2025 record as the clearest possible warning.
On the surface Arabic's mean of 40% sits a few points below the CSS optional-subject average of 43.5%, which might suggest a roughly typical paper. That reading is misleading, because the figure comes from just 11 candidates and a wildly wide spread, and it ultimately translated into zero written passes and zero allocations. The average score here is a statistical artefact rather than a meaningful benchmark, and the only number that genuinely describes the subject's outcome is the complete absence of allocations.
The pipeline collapsed at the very first hurdle, since all 11 candidates who appeared failed the written paper and none progressed to allocation. This is a step beyond the usual pattern of attrition, because the subject did not merely filter candidates at the merit stage; it stopped every one of them at the written exam itself.
The mean of 40% actually clears the 33% passing threshold on paper, and with the median slightly higher at 43% the distribution carries a modest tail of stronger scripts. Yet the standard deviation of 23 points is enormous relative to the mean, which tells us the handful of scores were scattered very widely rather than settling into any dependable band. In a cohort of only 11, that volatility means the average is almost meaningless as a guide, and despite a mean above the line not one candidate's overall profile was enough to pass the written stage. The lesson is that a flattering mean drawn from a tiny, erratic sample says little about a candidate's real odds. The median sitting three points above the mean hints at a left skew, but with only eleven scripts scattered this widely the skew is little more than statistical noise, and neither figure is a reliable guide to a candidate's real prospects.
No provincial allocation data recorded
No province secured an allocation, simply because no candidate anywhere was allocated. With the entire field of 11 falling at the written stage, geography played no part in an outcome that was uniformly nil.
No gender breakdown available — no candidates were allocated in this subject.
There is no gender breakdown to report, because not one candidate was allocated. Arabic offered no route to a seat in CSS 2025 for any candidate, regardless of gender, province or preparation.
Arabic is viable only for a true specialist with native or near-native command of the language and its classical texts, and even then the 2025 figures counsel caution. Eleven candidates attempted it, none cleared the written stage, and none were allocated. A small applicant pool can look inviting, but here it conceals a subject that produced no successful outcomes at all.