Education Policy Analyst?

Mon, 16 Feb 2009
2 min read
2 Comments

I received this in my mail last week:

From: MOE PED EAS RECRUITMENT
Date: February 13, 2009 7:51:25 PM GMT+08:00
Subject: Make an Educated Choice: MOE Education Policy Analyst Recruitment

Dear NUS Alumni,

This is an exclusive preview to MOE’s recruitment of Education Policy Analysts to selected NUS Alumni.

For more information and application of this position, please visit the Ministry of Education website at http://www.moe.gov.sg/careers/eas/.

The closing date for applications is on 28 Feb 2009.

Truth be told, I’m actually quite interested in this offer, especially being where I am at this point in my life. I’m going to e-mail them to ask how it’s gonna work out for someone in my position.

One of the turn-offs so far is that the entry requirement don’t require you to possess a professional qualification in the area of education, or to have taught before in an educational institution. I find this rather strange, as I am basing this on the assumption that one needs to have some knowledge of educational pedagogy and educational reality in order to “shape the education landscape of tomorrow”, but it seems I might be wrong.

The other is seeing this line on the website:

As processing will be based on the application form, it will not be necessary for you to attach a separate resume. We regret that incomplete application forms will not be considered and only shortlisted applicants will be notified.

I’m shure this is a standard civil service policy, to reduce duplication of effort, red-tape, etc. But doesn’t it immediately disqualify people who aren’t able to fit their experiences into the requirements of the template provided in the application form? Or is that the point itself: that there is already a mould in which applicants must fit into?

If this is the case, the civil service is always going to end up with cookie-cutter versions of policy makers – something which I don’t know if it wants to achieve, given that diversity management is an important consideration in organisations today.

One of the favourite parts of my weekend:

Mon, 16 Feb 2009
1 min read
2 Comments

(Or the Lit Field Trip rather.)

Hanging out at the Fullerton Hotel, and letting the koi fish gently nibble at my fingers, then discovering that they were good-natured enough to let me pet them. The best part was when I decided to (gently) box them, and they let me do so AND then came back for more.

I think it was then that I realised that fish could make good pets, so long as they were interactive. Or perhaps humans are instantly engaged with anything that is interactive.

I was so happy with my discovery that I would’ve head-butted the fish. I don’t think they would’ve minded, seeing how good-natured they were

But I hadn’t planned on getting my head wet, so I decided against the idea, and settled for trying to get the fish to jump out of the water and nibble my fingers. I figured that since they had been rather dog-like so far, anything was worth a shot.

But head-butting would’ve been fun, wouldn’t it?

Should information be free?

Tue, 10 Feb 2009
3 min read
Add Comment

One of the arguments that Walter Isaacson makes with regard to charging for online content is this:

… those who believe that all content should be free should reflect on who will open bureaus in Baghdad or be able to fly off as freelancers to report in Rwanda under such a system.

I say this not because I am “evil,” which is the description my daughter slings at those who want to charge for their Web content, music or apps. Instead, I say this because my daughter is very creative, and when she gets older, I want her to get paid for producing really neat stuff rather than come to me for money or decide that it makes more sense to be an investment banker.

As a producer of creative work myself, I’m inclined to agree: I don’t want to be a struggling artist, or worse, not producing art at all. At the same, I’m quite perturbed by Isaacson’s stand, for if he had had his way a long time ago, I wouldn’t have reached this stage of my life.

This is because I wouldn’t have had a chance to read widely, and the main reason for my reading widely is because of the Internet, and not having to pay for information on the Internet. So what happens when one starts charging for content then? The laws of demand and supply dictate that some consumers will end up foregoing this content, for whatever reasons might occur. That’s not a pleasant thought in my humble opinion – although I can afford to pay for content now, what about people who will benefit from free information but are unable to pay at this point in time?

I think there’s a middle ground, and the current Straits Times model might be it – let consumers who value the timeliness of news pay a premium for it. Personally, I’m fine with news coming in late; it isn’t important for the news I’m interested in to arrive fresh off the press, and besides, reading blogs does help ameliorate this possible drawback.

I’m not kidding, by the way. Previously, I used to listen to The Mr Brown Show (TMBS) to get my news. My rationale was that the jokes I didn’t get were the gaps in my knowledge which I needed to fill, since satire and parody have to reference real-life events in order for them to work. Now I have Google Reader to aggregate information for me. That’s why I love technology, or tek-no-lo-ghee, as a character on TMBS might call it.

At the same time, Cherian George has written a very thoughtful piece entitled The Future of Journalism in a Post-Newspaper World. It throws up very interesting ideas about the way to go for journalism, including government intervention, if you consider the educational aspect of information as a public good.

For now, I’m just going to read voraciously, as a form of me shaking my fist defiantly at impending doom. Or maybe it’s just the Singaporean in me taking advantage of the freebies. Whatever lah. Anyway, I have miles to go before I sleep, so I’ll do my work first before reading the news.

P.S. On that note, this is duh news I think everyone should read. Okaybye.