Lecturers are designed to teach and research. Any other duties, especially if done excessively, destroy this primary designation.
Ma Chung boasts a teaching staff that comprise mostly young lecturers with at least Master’s degrees. What Ma Chung should provide is a conducive ambience for these lecturers to teach their subjects, conduct scientific research, and run social devotion programs that suit their disciplines.
To do so, not only do they need stimulating schemes like LPPM research grants or supply of latest updates on research grants from outside, but they also need special time allocation for writing articles, planning research, or conducting scientific investigations. Hey, they are lecturers, they are not simply teachers in some private course!
If such thing has not manifested yet, there are probably some causes:
First, Ma Chung lecturers are probably too swamped with their teaching hours and other non-academic duties. Teaching too many classes exhaust them because they have to make thorough preparation for each class they are teaching. If they still have to run here and there supervising an organizing committee for certain non-academic tasks, no wonder they don’t have any energy nor time left to mull about a research topic.
Second, Ma Chung lecturers are simply not interested in researching. Critical stance, long preparation, a lot of writing, and data analyzing are not things that appeal to them.
What Ma Chung needs is a constant encouragement from the top executives to keep them interested in researching. One or two lecturers who have won research grants or have finished outstanding research works may serve as role models for the others. ‘Healthy envy’ usually works best to silently motivate lecturers.
Senin, 29 Desember 2008
Healthy criticisms promote emotional intelligence
Maria Luciana said in her Forkomil presentation: “Praise others to encourage them!”.
Fine. Agree. Praises and compliments spur people to work harder in a happier state of mind. I myself have received a few compliments on my teaching, my blogs, my works, my façade, and . . . . .I find them ooooohh . . . how sweeeeett!
BUT, . . .
As I grow older, I need something else that will keep me alert and wary about my shortcomings. And that is criticisms. Criticisms, sincere and constructive criticisms are what I need in addition to honest compliments.
‘Criticisms are like manure’ I wrote in one of my postings last year. Without criticisms, I’d be lulled into self-complacency. I would think that nothing in the way I do things and the way I behave needs some improvements.
But here at Ma Chung people are very stingy in giving criticisms. They would rather compliment me, or, as the majority do, keep tight-lipped. The only criticisms addressed to me was given by my former staff member, who said that I need to talk more and discuss more with my staff. But that’s all.
Will 2009 watch me receiving healthy criticisms? Or will it just be the same as 2008? Let us wait and see.
So, coming back to Maria’s point above, I would recommend her my piece of conviction: “Emotionally intelligent people can strike the balance between giving praises and giving criticisms.”
How about that?
Fine. Agree. Praises and compliments spur people to work harder in a happier state of mind. I myself have received a few compliments on my teaching, my blogs, my works, my façade, and . . . . .I find them ooooohh . . . how sweeeeett!
BUT, . . .
As I grow older, I need something else that will keep me alert and wary about my shortcomings. And that is criticisms. Criticisms, sincere and constructive criticisms are what I need in addition to honest compliments.
‘Criticisms are like manure’ I wrote in one of my postings last year. Without criticisms, I’d be lulled into self-complacency. I would think that nothing in the way I do things and the way I behave needs some improvements.
But here at Ma Chung people are very stingy in giving criticisms. They would rather compliment me, or, as the majority do, keep tight-lipped. The only criticisms addressed to me was given by my former staff member, who said that I need to talk more and discuss more with my staff. But that’s all.
Will 2009 watch me receiving healthy criticisms? Or will it just be the same as 2008? Let us wait and see.
So, coming back to Maria’s point above, I would recommend her my piece of conviction: “Emotionally intelligent people can strike the balance between giving praises and giving criticisms.”
How about that?
Kamis, 18 Desember 2008
Employee Evaluation: The Right Attitude
Now ladies and gentleman, please don’t be too fussy about the way we evaluate your personality and performances as Ma Chung staff. The method has been designed very well to generate an objective, valid, and reliable measurement.
The evaluation is called 3600 evaluation, which means that you will be evaluated by more than one person, and the evaluation will be done more than once (once in every three months, as I heard). In addition to your superior, other staff members will also evaluate you. This will cancel out any subjective evaluation from any one of them. In other words, this technique ensures that a particular employee is being evaluated as objectively as possible. Any subjective evaluation which may come from one or two colleagues wont matter much, since the other colleagues will very likely come up with a more objective evaluation. Coupled with multiple evaluation, that is, once in three month, this makes a very reliable assessment system.
This brings us to the importance of informing all Ma Chungers the criteria and the scoring technique that are used to evaluate them. This is what HCD has yet to do. Such information will promote fairness, openness, and trust from all Ma Chungers. They know what criteria they are evaluated against, along with the scores, the scoring technique and the weightings. More importantly, HCD has to provide at least a rough guideline about how each score (from 1 to 7) corresponds to a particular behavior. What kind of behavior should deserve a 1? Or 2? Or 7? If this guideline is at least communicated to all Ma Chungers, a ‘wild’ interpretation like “I only give 7 for a perfect person,”, “7 is only for God” won’t come up.
A man suggested that an employee who performs poorly in most of the 12 Ma Chung characteristics but excels in one of the characteristic be transferred to another unit which may fit his or her outstanding skill. No way. The instrument of 12 Ma Chung characteristics is about personality, not cognitive prowess or technical expertise. If you score low in this instrument, the message is simple: your personality has been widely perceived as bad. Despite your genius mind or excellent technical prowess, as a person you suck, period. Regardless of the unit you are transferred to, you will likely be a pain in the neck for others, because your personality is simply annoying.
Another question: will Ma Chungers be judged by their personality only? No, of course not. That’s why some other measures are being devised which encompass your personality, your professional skills, and, if you are a lecturer, your Tri Dharma achievements. So it’s a very elaborate, thorough, all-round evaluation. Each will be evaluated in almost all aspects. This means: you have a greater chance to prove that you are a kind person, a smart and hardworking staff, and, if you are a lecturer, a lovable teacher, and a potential scholar.
Then a rather silly question: who will evaluate HCD? Oh, puh-leazeee; only God is the only being not to be evaluated. I mean, look at Patrisius. He was subjected to the very instrument he designed, scoring only 69 in the last semester, but then racking up to 82, 89, and 92 this semester. So, (1) HCD must be evaluated, too; (2) Patrisius’ case is exactly what I call “positive washback effect” in testing: the more you realize you are being evaluated, the harder you push for better and better performances.
Having said that, I would like to underscore the importance of reviewing the instruments regularly. We at DPM routinely evaluate our own instruments on the basis of suggestions and even complaints from lecturers and students alike. Some items may have to be dropped because they are confusing; some items may have to be reworded so as to make them clearer; some may have to be added because the standard demands so, and on and on. Constant reviewing is vital.
If the evaluation system runs well, you can be sure that in the long run Ma Chung will employ high-quality, capable and amiable staff and lecturers who never stop improving their personality and professionalism from time to time.
Ma Chung rocks!
The evaluation is called 3600 evaluation, which means that you will be evaluated by more than one person, and the evaluation will be done more than once (once in every three months, as I heard). In addition to your superior, other staff members will also evaluate you. This will cancel out any subjective evaluation from any one of them. In other words, this technique ensures that a particular employee is being evaluated as objectively as possible. Any subjective evaluation which may come from one or two colleagues wont matter much, since the other colleagues will very likely come up with a more objective evaluation. Coupled with multiple evaluation, that is, once in three month, this makes a very reliable assessment system.
This brings us to the importance of informing all Ma Chungers the criteria and the scoring technique that are used to evaluate them. This is what HCD has yet to do. Such information will promote fairness, openness, and trust from all Ma Chungers. They know what criteria they are evaluated against, along with the scores, the scoring technique and the weightings. More importantly, HCD has to provide at least a rough guideline about how each score (from 1 to 7) corresponds to a particular behavior. What kind of behavior should deserve a 1? Or 2? Or 7? If this guideline is at least communicated to all Ma Chungers, a ‘wild’ interpretation like “I only give 7 for a perfect person,”, “7 is only for God” won’t come up.
A man suggested that an employee who performs poorly in most of the 12 Ma Chung characteristics but excels in one of the characteristic be transferred to another unit which may fit his or her outstanding skill. No way. The instrument of 12 Ma Chung characteristics is about personality, not cognitive prowess or technical expertise. If you score low in this instrument, the message is simple: your personality has been widely perceived as bad. Despite your genius mind or excellent technical prowess, as a person you suck, period. Regardless of the unit you are transferred to, you will likely be a pain in the neck for others, because your personality is simply annoying.
Another question: will Ma Chungers be judged by their personality only? No, of course not. That’s why some other measures are being devised which encompass your personality, your professional skills, and, if you are a lecturer, your Tri Dharma achievements. So it’s a very elaborate, thorough, all-round evaluation. Each will be evaluated in almost all aspects. This means: you have a greater chance to prove that you are a kind person, a smart and hardworking staff, and, if you are a lecturer, a lovable teacher, and a potential scholar.
Then a rather silly question: who will evaluate HCD? Oh, puh-leazeee; only God is the only being not to be evaluated. I mean, look at Patrisius. He was subjected to the very instrument he designed, scoring only 69 in the last semester, but then racking up to 82, 89, and 92 this semester. So, (1) HCD must be evaluated, too; (2) Patrisius’ case is exactly what I call “positive washback effect” in testing: the more you realize you are being evaluated, the harder you push for better and better performances.
Having said that, I would like to underscore the importance of reviewing the instruments regularly. We at DPM routinely evaluate our own instruments on the basis of suggestions and even complaints from lecturers and students alike. Some items may have to be dropped because they are confusing; some items may have to be reworded so as to make them clearer; some may have to be added because the standard demands so, and on and on. Constant reviewing is vital.
If the evaluation system runs well, you can be sure that in the long run Ma Chung will employ high-quality, capable and amiable staff and lecturers who never stop improving their personality and professionalism from time to time.
Ma Chung rocks!
Senin, 15 Desember 2008
End-of-Year Note (1)
It is exciting to witness the drastic changes at a fledgling university like Ma Chung. Changes have taken place, the power map is shifting; if you are smart and cautious, you’d mull over the changes, use them to anticipate what is coming in the years to come, and start playing your cards in order to promote the most conducive working atmosphere at Ma Chung.
Gone is the once popular lecturer who is good at motivating but does poor jobs in managing the curriculum. A good lesson: a brilliant motivator is . . . . a brilliant motivator, that’s it. You cannot expect someone to be an all-round player. One only excels in a certain area of expertise, but definitely needs the assistance and contribution from others to accomplish tasks in the other domains. Remember what Patrisius said in one of his Moment of Truth presentation: everyone only plays a slice of the whole circle. To get the whole circle to function properly, other people with different skills, talent, and specialties need to be given equal chances to play their roles.
Then there are three Indian ‘lecturers’ who came only to screw up the teaching quality with their reckless preparation and unfriendly demeanor. Beware! Our students are getting sick of them, and unless proper actions are taken to remedy the situation, our students will turn their silent fuming into loud protests, and that’s bad. My suggestion: stop these Indian amateurs from teaching! Now! We just cannot afford to entrust our students to these low-qualities teachers.
A laudable thing: EPSBED is now in good hands. This routine reporting to the Kopertis is vital, and a very timely transfer of a formerly Quality Assurance staff to the Academic Affairs will hopefully ensure constant and proper reporting of EPSBED to the Kopertis.
My directorate, meanwhile, is running a series of evaluation and is going to make a year-end reporting of the major aspects of the university: managerial skills, advisory skills, teaching performances, and qualities of facilities and academic atmosphere. Wait, 2009 will witness me and Prita shape these important elements with a series of training and workshop.
Ma Chung rocks!
Gone is the once popular lecturer who is good at motivating but does poor jobs in managing the curriculum. A good lesson: a brilliant motivator is . . . . a brilliant motivator, that’s it. You cannot expect someone to be an all-round player. One only excels in a certain area of expertise, but definitely needs the assistance and contribution from others to accomplish tasks in the other domains. Remember what Patrisius said in one of his Moment of Truth presentation: everyone only plays a slice of the whole circle. To get the whole circle to function properly, other people with different skills, talent, and specialties need to be given equal chances to play their roles.
Then there are three Indian ‘lecturers’ who came only to screw up the teaching quality with their reckless preparation and unfriendly demeanor. Beware! Our students are getting sick of them, and unless proper actions are taken to remedy the situation, our students will turn their silent fuming into loud protests, and that’s bad. My suggestion: stop these Indian amateurs from teaching! Now! We just cannot afford to entrust our students to these low-qualities teachers.
A laudable thing: EPSBED is now in good hands. This routine reporting to the Kopertis is vital, and a very timely transfer of a formerly Quality Assurance staff to the Academic Affairs will hopefully ensure constant and proper reporting of EPSBED to the Kopertis.
My directorate, meanwhile, is running a series of evaluation and is going to make a year-end reporting of the major aspects of the university: managerial skills, advisory skills, teaching performances, and qualities of facilities and academic atmosphere. Wait, 2009 will witness me and Prita shape these important elements with a series of training and workshop.
Ma Chung rocks!
Langganan:
Komentar (Atom)
