Related News
Home » Opinion » Opinion Columns
Do computer skills make for better profs of Chinese literature?
By Wang Yong |
June 5, 2009, Friday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
EVEN Microsoft and Google cannot explain why some of their products should make or break the professional careers of millions of Chinese talents in almost all fields - from academics to physicians to journalists.
Do you know the function of Ctrl + K or of F11, two features of Microsoft's Word 2003?
Do you know how to use Google for automatic translation from Chinese to English or the other way round?
Failure to answer these questions correctly, or many other similar ones, would result in your utter failure to move upward in your professional career, for example, from a junior journalist to a senior one, or from an associate professor to a full professor (in all but a few fields, such as computer science).
What in the world does knowing Microsoft or Google have to do with one's ability as a teacher of ancient Chinese literature, as a judge or as a journalist?
Suppose Microsoft closes its Word 2003 or Google goes belly up some day, will China be unable to produce excellent doctors, teachers, judges, or writers? The answers are obvious, but then, why do we have these artificial obstacles to professional advancements in China?
Bureaucratism
Microsoft and Google did not force China to elevate them to such a lofty status. The Ministry of Personnel decided in 2001 of its own accord that from 2002 on, computer competency tests would be indispensable to any Chinese - with a few exceptions like computer science majors - seeking a higher level of professional title.
It's less about worship of the West than about academic bureaucratism. If it were about worship of the West, the Ministry of Personnel should have known that even in the West, few professionals would be required to pass such ludicrous tests for a promotion.
For example, "show me your clips" - show me your articles - is the standard requirement for a journalist who seeks professional advancement in the United States.
In many American schools of journalism, veteran journalists naturally become professors. In China, sorry, study Microsoft and Google first. If you abhor Word 2003, you could try Excel 2003 or PowerPoint 2003.
In a 2001 document, the Ministry of Personnel said computer tests would serve the purpose of "spreading information technology in our society." Few would argue against that purpose. The thing is, what's the best possible way to spread information technology?
A tool is a tool
For most people, it's enough to know how to type, save, send and receive e-mails, and use search engines. Given enough practice, most people can crack the nuts of Word 2003 or whatever, but that's a task many don't consider worthwhile.
A tool is just a tool. Making it too complicated and an object of worship goes against the purpose of inventing a tool. It's like asking all Chinese chefs seeking professional progress to know how to use only US-made knives. You can't use a US-made knife? Sorry, you can't be a good cook of Chinese cuisine.
Except for bureaucratism that leads to foolish decisions, one could hardly think of any other reason why one has to know the function of F11 to qualify as a professor of journalism or Chinese medicine.
Microsoft has cut off MSN services in five countries, including Sudan and Syria. What if Microsoft cuts off all its services in China? Does that mean we can no longer spread information technology?
The computer tests - testing your ability to master many functions that are not necessary in daily spread of information - are largely the antithesis to "scientific development." These tests attest to academic bureaucratism run amok.
Do you know the function of Ctrl + K or of F11, two features of Microsoft's Word 2003?
Do you know how to use Google for automatic translation from Chinese to English or the other way round?
Failure to answer these questions correctly, or many other similar ones, would result in your utter failure to move upward in your professional career, for example, from a junior journalist to a senior one, or from an associate professor to a full professor (in all but a few fields, such as computer science).
What in the world does knowing Microsoft or Google have to do with one's ability as a teacher of ancient Chinese literature, as a judge or as a journalist?
Suppose Microsoft closes its Word 2003 or Google goes belly up some day, will China be unable to produce excellent doctors, teachers, judges, or writers? The answers are obvious, but then, why do we have these artificial obstacles to professional advancements in China?
Bureaucratism
Microsoft and Google did not force China to elevate them to such a lofty status. The Ministry of Personnel decided in 2001 of its own accord that from 2002 on, computer competency tests would be indispensable to any Chinese - with a few exceptions like computer science majors - seeking a higher level of professional title.
It's less about worship of the West than about academic bureaucratism. If it were about worship of the West, the Ministry of Personnel should have known that even in the West, few professionals would be required to pass such ludicrous tests for a promotion.
For example, "show me your clips" - show me your articles - is the standard requirement for a journalist who seeks professional advancement in the United States.
In many American schools of journalism, veteran journalists naturally become professors. In China, sorry, study Microsoft and Google first. If you abhor Word 2003, you could try Excel 2003 or PowerPoint 2003.
In a 2001 document, the Ministry of Personnel said computer tests would serve the purpose of "spreading information technology in our society." Few would argue against that purpose. The thing is, what's the best possible way to spread information technology?
A tool is a tool
For most people, it's enough to know how to type, save, send and receive e-mails, and use search engines. Given enough practice, most people can crack the nuts of Word 2003 or whatever, but that's a task many don't consider worthwhile.
A tool is just a tool. Making it too complicated and an object of worship goes against the purpose of inventing a tool. It's like asking all Chinese chefs seeking professional progress to know how to use only US-made knives. You can't use a US-made knife? Sorry, you can't be a good cook of Chinese cuisine.
Except for bureaucratism that leads to foolish decisions, one could hardly think of any other reason why one has to know the function of F11 to qualify as a professor of journalism or Chinese medicine.
Microsoft has cut off MSN services in five countries, including Sudan and Syria. What if Microsoft cuts off all its services in China? Does that mean we can no longer spread information technology?
The computer tests - testing your ability to master many functions that are not necessary in daily spread of information - are largely the antithesis to "scientific development." These tests attest to academic bureaucratism run amok.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
