Wednesday, January 21, 2009

KG, My Foot

Up till now, I haven't talked much about staying in my university hostel.

Well, trust me, there's a very valid reason.
The reason being, as fun as it is staying on campus with a crazy bunch of friends, it is also very very very frustrating.

In the name of progress, the university comes up with all sorts of new, innovative, "groundbreaking" policies. But like many government policies (or any other policies for that matter), the policy-makers rarely spend time actually pondering and reflecting on the possible consequences or drawbacks or flaws (whatever you wanna call it) of such policies on, specifically, the university students.

As of now, the latest policy would be the Kompetensi Generik (KG) evaluations. As its name suggests, it is an evaluation of one's generic skills -- skills like social and leadership skills, communication, cooperation, discipline, punctuality, civic-mindedness etc.

Who does the evaluations and how is it done?

1. Mentors (from each student's faculty, and college/hostel)
2. College FELO (administrative staff)

1. Meetings with mentors
2. Questionnaire (online and hard-copy)
3. College activities

From this information alone, you can already see the questions popping out of your head; the flaws sticking out like a sore thumb.

1. Do the mentors (very few of them) actually have the time and energy to meet every single one of the students under their care?
2. How do we ensure the credibility of both the online and hard-copy questionnaire? Can we guarantee that every single student will answer and rate their own generic skills truthfully? Or realistically?
3. Can you actually tell a person's character by meeting that person for an hour a week? Some once a month for less than an hour?
4. And there are also those students who go MIA and you don't even know how they look like. How do you evaluate them then?
5. What about civic-mindedness? Can you say someone is civic-minded if you see them pick up the trash when you pass by them? Who's to say it isn't an act? And if you don't see them pick up trash, are they not civic-minded? Or do you rate them with a high level of civic-mindedness just because they tell you that they are during interviews?

The bottom line is: How can you rate someone you hardly know on something as abstract as generic skills, and expect it to be accurate enough to actually put it on paper -- a Supplementary Diploma -- that they will carry with them after they graduate to apply for jobs?

I don't see the rationale behind this extremely flawed system.

Rather strange than innovative, don't you think?


wen said...

I think.. There's not much a need of Supplementary Diploma when we are going to graduate with our Degrees..

It's a very donk donk KG lar...

Lisa ^^, said...

Ya la. Damn stupid thing jer...*grumble grumble*