It shouldn't be too difficult. Many of my colleagues did the same thing after having a child as it frees up a lot of their after school hours to be home with the kid.

Anyone got shortlisted for interview already? How long does it normally take to process?

Compulsory MOE HQ Posting
 

Good day people. I’m posting here to hopefully seek some clarity on my situation.

First, would like to provide some context. I’m currently a GEO4 holding SH position. I joined in June 2014 and just completed my 4 year bond. I was appointed SH back in Jan 2017. I was promoted to GEO4 just this year in April. I was from the NTU-NIE program and graduated with second upper class. I am not a scholar.

So my P just informed me that HQ informed him that I will be notified of a compulsory posting to HQ this November which will actualize in January 2020. The only other detail that he received is that my posting is a 5-year stint (he mentioned that he has never seen a stint that long, usually it’s for 2-3 years). There is no mention of which division I will be posted to.

Would like to find out a few things from the more experienced people here:

1. Have you come across a situation like this? If so, under what circumstances?
2. Can I technically reject the posting since I’m not a scholar?
3. Any idea why the stint is for 5 years? Any correlation to the possible division I’ll be posted to?
4. Is this because of CEP? (Previous grades were C+, B, B)

Thanks in advance. Always thought this kind of arrangement is only for the scholars so I am currently quite stumped as I did not see this coming at all. Still not too sure if this is a good thing as I’m very happy at my school and I enjoy working with my kids.

1) High-performing non-scholars do get offered such opportunities - usually this follows some type of tea session, though. And a 5-year posting is definitely atypical. Compulsory HQ posting is usually a shorter 2-year stint, in fact!

2) I've heard of people rejecting such postings before (though quite some time ago) - such an opportunity may not pop up again, and (unverified) rumour has it that it might affect your future progression.

3) You might want to find out more by contacting HR - even ask why it's a 5-year posting, and possibly negotiate to at least the standard 3-year posting that people get when applying in via open posting.

4) Quite likely.

Think only you can decide whether it's a good move for you - but having made the move I must say that it was a good learning experience to see the system at work in a different perspective. Five years is a scary commitment, though! Would love to hear more details (if not confidential) about this posting, haha.

Hey HQ worker,

Appreciate the detailed response! It did provide some clarity to my rather peculiar situation.

Come to think of it, I did attend a tea session back when I was a BT at cluster level. Hmm, my then VP did inform me that it was indeed a session meant to assess the BTs.

Yes indeed. I do think that a stint at HQ will widen my perspectives on the educational landscape and provide insights to the system that I would not be able to learn in the school system. However, like you mentioned, 5 years is very long and if I may say, an "all-in" sort of commitment given my age has a lot of implications on my future.

Would be glad to share the outcome of my situation but it will be quite a wait! haha.

Is it standard procedure for officers to be posted back to schools after their HQ stint? I am concerned that a 5 year stint may cause my ability to teach degenerate :/ Not to mention that I will certainly miss teaching and working with my kids!

For the folks with a 2/3-year posting, the default path is indeed to be posted back to school after the stint.

Exceptions I've noticed:
1) Switching to specialist track (pretty much committing to stay on in HQ forever; need to pass an interview)
2) Extending on year-by-year basis (max stint I've seen is 5 years, though - in your case I doubt it's an option)
3) Changing of appointment (e.g. taking up role as a Assistant Director)

Yeah... losing touch with the classroom is definitely a concern. I didn't think it'd be a problem at the start; but nearly 3 years on I'm somewhat concerned about adjusting back to life in school. I'm sure it's doable, but can imagine it taking some getting used to again...

Care to share what are the pros and cons in terms of difference between life in HQ and in schools?

Just found out that a friend of mine from the same batch received the same piece of news but his is for a four year stint 🤔

Anyone applying for open posting in June?
Is it difficult to pass the interview if I apply to teach in a different school?

Find it hard to meaningfully respond to this because the work can really differ in different divisions within HQ.

Some quick thoughts:

1) Pace of work is generally more consistent and moderate - this is probably untrue of certain divisions (esp. those that work closer to the minister), but generally I think that it's less hectic than in school (where life is often crazy during term time), but we also don't get as much of a lull period during the longer school breaks. There's still plenty of work to be done, but I personally enjoy having more time to properly plan and work towards deadlines.

2) Rewards may feel less immediate - a lot of what we do can make a big impact, but it can take very long to see the fruit of your labour; as opposed to school where you might feel good at the end of a good lesson, counsel a student who needs help, or even just see how they've improved at the end of the academic year.

3) Organisational structure is pretty flat - HOD, SH and BT-level officers all work together on projects. Sometimes the BT could be the team IC (admittedly such officers are usually scholars). Even the Deputy Directors (typically VP level officers) are pretty close to the ground.

There are elements of school work I definitely miss (mainly interaction with students in class, and the feeling of making a difference more immediately), but I'm glad to have experienced the other side.

(Also, frankly I think it's good to have at least some work experience outside of teaching to have a more holistic idea of the skills our students will need in the future, for those of us who joined immediately upon graduation.)

For the interview, I imagine that you'll essentially need to convince the hirer that you're a surer bet than a random NIE trainee they'll request should they not take existing teachers to fill the vacancy, which I'd say is a pretty low bar to beat.

However, you'll also be competing against other applicants - no real way to predict how tough that'll be. Guess it'll be harder if it's a popular school (for whatever reason).

All the best!