Lousy Scholar vs Excellent Farmer

[Alechi]

It seems, in the civil service, a lousy scholar who so long he don't screw up big time, will end up in a higher position than an excellent farmer (non-scholar), even if the farmer is better and more productive than the scholar.

 

How meritocratic is this?

 

Scholars can easily get back-to-back promotions and continually top level performance grading, while a farmer will never be considered for back-to-back promotion (no matter how good) and worse, performance grading after every promotion is a default 'C'.

 

Again, how meritocratic is this?

 

If these scholars are put on an even footing with the farmers, same starting point, same running equipments ..., I dare say the results at the finishing line will be astonishing.

 

Comments?

[Lethalstrike]

And that is the reason why many excellent farmers choose to leave the civil service and its charade of meritocracy. Where's the meritocracy to speak of when the government is just paying lip service to it? I will say the priorities of this country has already gone wrong quite sometime ago.

 

Put a tortoise and a hare on the same starting line and you can be sure the hare will finish first no matter how much it rests along the way. That's uniquely Singapore for you. The story of the hardworking tortoise winning the race eventually doesn't apply here.

 

If i'm the tortoise in the race, i will leave the hare to run its own race and venture off the track to chart another path of my own.

Edited March 19, 2012 by Lethalstrike

[2009k]

There is this thing about justifying their judgement. Earlier on the scholar was ok by the management. Later on, the same scholar must perform or at least do better than farmers. Else, how to justify that the management made the right decision to award the scholarship earlier on?

 

Scholar failing a task means the task is too difficult and it's not his fault. Farmer in the same situation will be seen as the farmer was incompetent. Scholar doing well in a task will mean he has potential for greater things. Farmer doing well in his task will mean the job was simple or he was just lucky and more tests required to ascertain his capabilities.

 

Frankly, it's not just a scholar farmer thingy, it works for blue eye boy or girl also.

 

Cheers and welcome to Singapore and reality.

[Happily1986]

And that is the reason why many excellent farmers choose to leave the civil service and its charade of meritocracy. Where's the meritocracy to speak of when the government is just paying lip service to it? I will say the priorities of this country has already gone wrong quite sometime ago.

 

Put a tortoise and a hare on the same starting line and you can be sure the hare will finish first no matter how much it rests along the way. That's uniquely Singapore for you. The story of the hardworking tortoise winning the race eventually doesn't apply here.

 

If i'm the tortoise in the race, i will leave the hare to run its own race and venture off the track to chart another path of my own.

 

it all began when someone brought eugenics and elitism to the table.

[Windwaver]

At the rate we're heading, maybe elites must be recognized when they're babies in future

[Lethalstrike]

it all began when someone brought eugenics and elitism to the table.

 

Personally, i will not want to comment too much on this as most of us here knew these too well.

 

But, speaking of civil service in the highest echelon of this country, even meritocracy is not being actively practiced despite what has been repeatedly said and drilled into our minds throughout the mass media.

 

So, my question to threadstarter is how possible is it for meritocracy to exist within the lower realms of our civil service if the top doesn't take it too seriously?

[Silver_blade]

It seems, in the civil service, a lousy scholar who so long he don't screw up big time, will end up in a higher position than an excellent farmer (non-scholar), even if the farmer is better and more productive than the scholar.

 

How meritocratic is this?

 

Scholars can easily get back-to-back promotions and continually top level performance grading, while a farmer will never be considered for back-to-back promotion (no matter how good) and worse, performance grading after every promotion is a default 'C'.

 

Again, how meritocratic is this?

 

If these scholars are put on an even footing with the farmers, same starting point, same running equipments ..., I dare say the results at the finishing line will be astonishing.

 

Comments?

Where did you get the info from...especially the part about back to back promotion? Just curious.

[KARTer]

Personally, i will not want to comment too much on this as most of us here knew these too well.

 

But, speaking of civil service in the highest echelon of this country, even meritocracy is not being actively practiced despite what has been repeatedly said and drilled into our minds throughout the mass media.

 

So, my question to threadstarter is how possible is it for meritocracy to exist within the lower realms of our civil service if the top doesn't take it too seriously?

who the person knows is more important than how good he actually is...... in terms of joining/staying in the elites' club..

[Ngck]

It seems, in the civil service, a lousy scholar who so long he don't screw up big time, will end up in a higher position than an excellent farmer (non-scholar), even if the farmer is better and more productive than the scholar.

 

How meritocratic is this?

 

Scholars can easily get back-to-back promotions and continually top level performance grading, while a farmer will never be considered for back-to-back promotion (no matter how good) and worse, performance grading after every promotion is a default 'C'.

 

Again, how meritocratic is this?

 

If these scholars are put on an even footing with the farmers, same starting point, same running equipments ..., I dare say the results at the finishing line will be astonishing.

 

Comments?

 

Study hard

 

[Aimnfire]

real life senario

 

scholar stir/create sh1t and fark off leaving farmers to clean the mess up

then when the mess is clean up scholar comes back and claim credit for the job well done

[Gukubird]

real life senario

 

scholar stir/create sh1t and fark off leaving farmers to clean the mess up

then when the mess is clean up scholar comes back and claim credit for the job well done

 

 

I thought should be like that?

 

Scholar hire FT to stir/create sh1t leaving farmers to clean up the mess

The FT claim the credit for the job done and the Scholar pat himself on the back for having great foresight

[Aimnfire]

I thought should be like that?

 

Scholar hire FT to stir/create sh1t leaving farmers to clean up the mess

The FT claim the credit for the job done and the Scholar pat himself on the back for having great foresight

 

thats why i said real life senario

[Good-Carbuyer]

It seems, in the civil service, a lousy scholar who so long he don't screw up big time, will end up in a higher position than an excellent farmer (non-scholar), even if the farmer is better and more productive than the scholar.

 

How meritocratic is this?

 

Scholars can easily get back-to-back promotions and continually top level performance grading, while a farmer will never be considered for back-to-back promotion (no matter how good) and worse, performance grading after every promotion is a default 'C'.

 

Again, how meritocratic is this?

 

If these scholars are put on an even footing with the farmers, same starting point, same running equipments ..., I dare say the results at the finishing line will be astonishing.

 

Comments?

Our meritocratic is based on the academic exmination reasults that repeatedly failed ancient China, generations after generations, dynasty after dynasty. Sure to fail. Example: CPF = Chronic Provident Failure...

These are the A-team that creates their own self employment with all the chronic issues we are facing. Example: multi-millionaire ministers, inflation...

Solve problems? They create problems to look indispensable

[Good-Carbuyer]

And that is the reason why many excellent farmers choose to leave the civil service and its charade of meritocracy. Where's the meritocracy to speak of when the government is just paying lip service to it? I will say the priorities of this country has already gone wrong quite sometime ago.

 

Put a tortoise and a hare on the same starting line and you can be sure the hare will finish first no matter how much it rests along the way. That's uniquely Singapore for you. The story of the hardworking tortoise winning the race eventually doesn't apply here.

 

If i'm the tortoise in the race, i will leave the hare to run its own race and venture off the track to chart another path of my own.

So sorry. My observation is that tortise not allowed to race. Example: how could a flood be mistaken for ponding by an engineer? Only 'experts' allowed to tinkle with solving the flood with most expensive/least productive methods

[Good-Carbuyer]

I do not like the way you put it. However you are telling the truth

[Good-Carbuyer]

At the rate we're heading, maybe elites must be recognized when they're babies in future

Some exmpted from NS already

[Good-Carbuyer]

Personally, i will not want to comment too much on this as most of us here knew these too well.

 

But, speaking of civil service in the highest echelon of this country, even meritocracy is not being actively practiced despite what has been repeatedly said and drilled into our minds throughout the mass media.

 

So, my question to threadstarter is how possible is it for meritocracy to exist within the lower realms of our civil service if the top doesn't take it too seriously?

Mercy-mercy. Can try recommend solutions instead of questioning TS?

[Good-Carbuyer]

Study hard

I do not like the way you put it, since you support the chronic repeated failure methods