Ultimate Career

An interesting news I read yesterday on a Singapore newspaper TODAY. While measures can be put in place to control the cheating in such public examinations, mindsets must be changed with foremost priority. Indeed, very good questions were asked by the media in China:

“if those aspiring to be civil servants do not even possess basic integrity, how can they hope to be leading examples of the community, let alone ensure social harmony and national development?”

“Many of these candidates will assume leadership positions … Will they abuse their powers for personal gain? Will they be corrupt?”

At this moment, the answer is a resounding “Yes!”

The integrity of a person is not he/she does when everybody is watching but what he/she chooses to do when NOBODY is watching.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this issue.

******************************************

PUTTING AN END TO CHEATING

Wednesday January 21, 2009

Methods may have changed, but not the desire to get ahead
MARIA SIOW
East asia bureau chief
TODAY

IN THE past, candidates for the Chinese imperial examinations would cheat by slipping tiny bits of paper with answers written on them into the examination venue.

Last November, some candidates sitting for the annual civil service examinations resorted to using neatly disguised wireless transmitters. Some wore micro ear plugs to receive radio broadcasts during the nationwide examinations. Others found proxies to take the tests.

The highly-competitive nature of examinations is hardly in doubt. Over 775,000 vied for 13,500 civil service jobs – or 59 contenders for every position.

Three hundred candidates were caught in the examination halls, while over 700 have “shared much conformity” in their examination scripts, said the State Administration for Civil Service, adding that cheating was done through a distinct “division of labour”.

A group would scan the answers using discreet devices such as “high-tech buttons and pens”. Another group would compile the answers, while  others would transmit them. The administration said some of the cheating devices, such as surgically implanted ear plugs, were impossible to detect.

The offenders, mainly from Beijing and Liaoning, were disqualified and barred from local and central civil service examinations for five years.

While the methods of cheating may have changed, the desire to get ahead hasn’t.

In ancient times, it was the promise of prestige and higher social status for the successful candidate and his family. Now, even though a job with the government is not the sort of iron rice bowl it once was under Maoist China, it is still seen as a relatively stable one.

But unlike the old days, the response to last week’s cheatings can only be described as explosive.

A Xinhua news agency commentary noted that “if those aspiring to be civil servants do not even possess basic integrity, how can they hope to be leading examples of the community, let alone ensure social harmony and national development?”

A Guangzhou Daily editorial questioned: “Many of these candidates will assume leadership positions … Will they abuse their powers for personal gain? Will they be corrupt?”

Some candidates found guilty of cheating claimed they were wrongly accused. Over 20 candidates from eight provinces hired lawyers to look into their cases. But the authorities argued that the results of cheating were “rigorously and scientifically assessed”.

So, why the uproar given that cheating is common in a country where pressure to pass competitive college entrance examinations is intense?

Part of the anger has to do with the record number of offenders. The more than 1,000 found guilty was a five-fold increase from 2005 where 360,000 candidates sat for the examinations. But the main reason for the uproar stems from growing public scrutiny on the quality of public officials and governance.

The current Chinese leadership has often stressed on the importance of being people-centred by improving public service performance, and institutionalising  management and accountability structures.

The leadership has also popularised an expression which it said public officials should be mindful of: “Listen to public opinion, think of the public’s distress, worry about the public’s worries, think about what the public is thinking, help the public when they are in need, and solve the public’s difficulties.”

Which is why efforts have been made to do just that, whether it is in encouraging the public to call up their public officials, such as in Kunming, or inviting the public to evaluate public servants’ performance, such as in Changsha.

Clearly, in a country where there are no avenues for the ordinary citizen to put public officials in and out of office, a quick and transparent response to a major public outcry is crucial to maintaining social harmony.