Career as Teacher

[Tinkermaster]

Heard that HR has explored such systems but they know it will invite a lot of backlash. Because such a system if implemented, will need to be pushed across all the leadership positions e.g including VPs (if you don't make it to be P in 2 terms, then you revert but to what?) I think the fairer system will be look at the past grades, if cannot maintain reasonable good grades, then ask to switch track of step down. But any policy the HR implement will send out a signal and it may cause teaching to be less attractive too in the long run, so they need to balance this. So the question is why was there over-recruitment of teachers when mergers of schools should have been projected way in advance?

Originally Posted by Tinkermaster

Heard that HR has explored such systems but they know it will invite a lot of backlash. Because such a system if implemented, will need to be pushed across all the leadership positions e.g including VPs (if you don't make it to be P in 2 terms, then you revert but to what?) I think the fairer system will be look at the past grades, if cannot maintain reasonable good grades, then ask to switch track of step down. But any policy the HR implement will send out a signal and it may cause teaching to be less attractive too in the long run, so they need to balance this. So the question is why was there over-recruitment of teachers when mergers of schools should have been projected way in advance?

Yes say u seo1 then cannot move to vp after six years, the u drop down to geo 5
Or u go master teacher track

We cannot have too many jiak Liao bee as our his

I mean VP can so three terms.

U still cannot move up then revert back to get
Now the structure not collegial
VP think they god like

We must create a dynamic teaching force
Succession planning
Not because u old, u occupy the position till u 65

Guys my suggestion to moe

Hod shld adopt the tenure system of university.
Meaning maximum two 3 years term = 6 years
In university, u asst professor x 2 terms max.
If still cannot promote to assoc prof or get tenure, they sack u or ur contract not renewed

Our issues is too many fogies are occupying the hod positions in schools.
This severely hinder the upward mobility of the junior education officers

Under the revamp system. I termed it moe connect 2020

All new officers start off GEO 1
Every 3 years promote one grade.
Max GEO 5.

Sh Hod vp and p are appointments. With appointments allowance.
They still receive their basic GEO salaries

SH max 1 term
Hod max 2 term
Vp max 3 term
P max 4 term

If they fail to move up to hod, vp, cluster sup respectively . They will resume their teaching appt at GEO 5.

Only cluster sup and above, their grades are substantive and permanent.

This way we can have a dynamic workforce.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Guys my suggestion to moe

Hod shld adopt the tenure system of university.
Meaning maximum two 3 years term = 6 years
In university, u asst professor x 2 terms max.
If still cannot promote to assoc prof or get tenure, they sack u or ur contract not renewed

Our issues is too many fogies are occupying the hod positions in schools.
This severely hinder the upward mobility of the junior education officers

Under the revamp system. I termed it moe connect 2020

All new officers start off GEO 1
Every 3 years promote one grade.
Max GEO 5.

Sh Hod vp and p are appointments. With appointments allowance.
They still receive their basic GEO salaries

SH max 1 term
Hod max 2 term
Vp max 3 term
P max 4 term

If they fail to move up to hod, vp, cluster sup respectively . They will resume their teaching appt at GEO 5.

Only cluster sup and above, their grades are substantive and permanent.

This way we can have a dynamic workforce.

This sounds sad. Young and energetic officer cannot earn a HOD position on their own merit? Blame the old HODs for squatting on their positions? Why not stop complaining and start initiating and leading some positive change in the school?

It's not hard to outshine an underperforming SH as a normal teacher in the department, just saying. If you really think you are more deserving. No need to impose a 1 term limit on SH.

Originally Posted by Tinkermaster

There is a quota to every subgrade.
Usually up to 35% for As or Bs.
Up to 55% for As+Bs+C+
The rest will be Cs.
If the number of teachers of a job grade exceed a certain quota, then there will be a C-. appearing. Performance is now rated on a relative scale.

So it is not the panel of KPs in the ranking panel who determined the percentage.They can just collectively come up with a decision whether an officer meets the KRA for the job grade and put them in a ranked order. And there must be differentiation when a C grader is compared to a C+, or a C+ with the B grader. So if anyone gets a C-, it means there are some areas the person is not doing well in. Usually one can also tell, if one is already not getting a A/B/C+ when you are in your lower sub grades, the chance of you excelling when you are at a higher sub grade is usually slim.

We are aware that the % of performance grades is fixed by the larger system in general, not decided by the ranking panel.

What I'm asking about is - how has the % of grades dictated by the system changed for

(a) Pre-covid:

% of A ?
% of B ?
% of C+ ?
% of C ?

(b) Post-covid:

% of A ?
% of B ?
% of C+ ?
% of C ?

Feels like asking this in an exam question style makes my question clearer hahaha

Originally Posted by Unregistered

We are aware that the % of performance grades is fixed by the larger system in general, not decided by the ranking panel.

What I'm asking about is - how has the % of grades dictated by the system changed for

(a) Pre-covid:

% of A ?
% of B ?
% of C+ ?
% of C ?

(b) Post-covid:

% of A ?
% of B ?
% of C+ ?
% of C ?

Feels like asking this in an exam question style makes my question clearer hahaha

I'm not on the ranking panel so I don't have the answers you seek, but I'm always scratching my head wondering why people make themselves so miserable trying to dig for information from a system that is specifically engineered to be opaque, i.e. specifically hides this information from officers. Comparison is truly the thief of joy. The education service is really not a place for go-getters to min-max their progression and strategise to fly as high as possible and base their entire self-worth on how quickly they hit GEO4, SEO1 or Superscale grades (and consequently feel like crap because PSC scholars climb faster).

It's not that you shouldn't desire to do better and desire progression, but come on.. why fight a losing battle?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I'm not on the ranking panel so I don't have the answers you seek, but I'm always scratching my head wondering why people make themselves so miserable trying to dig for information from a system that is specifically engineered to be opaque, i.e. specifically hides this information from officers. Comparison is truly the thief of joy. The education service is really not a place for go-getters to min-max their progression and strategise to fly as high as possible and base their entire self-worth on how quickly they hit GEO4, SEO1 or Superscale grades (and consequently feel like crap because PSC scholars climb faster).

It's not that you shouldn't desire to do better and desire progression, but come on.. why fight a losing battle?

I fully agree. Comparison creates envy.

Slower progression happens in any organisation. Everyone cannot be leaders. Before we enter the ministry/civil service, we should accept that there is such a thing as an accelerated scheme for scholars. It means that within the system, there will be people with slower progression. It’s by design. You don’t have to like it, but you cannot choose to enter the system willingly and THEN complain that it exists.

Performance bonuses are to me an extra. I’ve planned my lifestyle based on my salary and not my uncertain bonus (that varies). If i do well, good. If i don't do well, also good. My family, friends, hobbies matter more to me than the endless pursuit of this elusive progression that I have no ultimate control over.

If you want fast progression, fat bonuses, a system where retrenchments are common (thats how young and new people replace the old and experienced and well paid folks), there are plenty of such companies out there. Question is: if you take a deep look at yourself, your qualifications, your abilities, your attitude, do you REALLY think you have it to survive/thrive in such a cut-throat environment? Be real. No free lunch in the world.

For those straddling two departments, is it unlikely that we’ll ever be considered for KP positions in one of those departments? (Eg someone who only teaches one subject in each department)

What a joke, some chaps here are. Asking for tenure for HOD. Do you ever think MOE will ever agree to that? In the first place, do you think they have a presence in this forum?

Why would they implement such a policy which shoots themselves in the foot?

Don’t ‘own self say, own self happy’ and keep talking along that line. No one ever said anything about changing the system. Learn to live with it. Tuition, shares, etc.