# data[].attributes.body
Thavam. Centre Director singaporean vs international. needs to be someone familar with the local context. not that it can't be international, but needs familiarity. also optics.
WY. understanding context is so key to CCE. not all can understand the local context. for example comments about how we need to be narrower... might not understand where we already are. but at the same time, think about the future.
WY. the idea that the "centre manager"
DKom. Ther person will really need to understand the local pysche and perspective. singapore or not.
TV. CCE has a strong political aspect to it. the director will need to be highly aware of that.
WY. staffing. the kind of reserach composition of staff. need reserachers, people who are familiar with schools. research experts. a core group from the Centre, but revolving staff groups that come in. on secondment. from schools.
DKom. the range of staff that needs to be included. on MOE side when we define CCE2021, it was quite a wide range, not just citizenship and values, but also child psychology and well-being, and future readiness that goes into ECG... this broad range needs to be represented to have that broad range.
SC. how about schools KPs, should they be seconded to the Centre? maybe to work with NIE faculty members. thinking about structures and mechanisms that can be put in place.
WY. do NIE colleagues... see these roles as being able to attract faculty members who might be keen to join the Centre as Centre faculty... or to continue in their AGs... what possible models
Jasmine. all faculty will be quite concerned about promotion aspects. young faculty members have 7 years to be promoted. need to teach, publish, research etc. promotion and tenure is university wide. all will want to be tenured first. research scientists don't need to look at that as they are on contract. so need to look at appraisal system. scholarly work that we do, need to be published, and the tier of the publications are a real implication. all about scholarly worth... in order to get your tenure.
WY. that's a very useful perspective. maybe we can look at a core group, and some degree of rotation and secondments. for GB we have our core specialists, as well as a rotation... we have the base of researchers, with a roation of practitioners coming in for a good sense of what is happening on the ground.
TV. the centre will need... a mix of MOE specialists, as well as people with more scholarly bent. but take Jasmine's point that it needs to be attractive for scholars... compared to MOE specialists who are not so concerned about the publishing credentials. but we need both. a mix of MOE people and research scientists.
WY. will we consider retired personnel from schools. e.g. teaching fellows.
TV. what would the role of teaching fellows be at the Centre?
Jasmine. teaching fellows who are seconded to NIE come to teach. all they do is teach, as their appraisal is tied to MOE. but for NIE, publishing is so intrinsic. as education researchers, we are compared to other reasearchers outside the field of education.

# data[].attributes.body
DHUM.
HC. leadership. CCE is multdisciplinary. do require that leadership will also be multidisciplinary. would be ideal to find a person who can be a reseracher, but it also very astute in terms of how they work with people and think of an organisation. someone who is multidisciplinary. failing to find one particular person, perhaps the team, or the advisory council to come in.
DHUM. share that perspective, but probably quite difficult to find that all in one person. even someone like Ms Ho, with her good standing, might not have the research knowledge. not possible for one person to straddle so many. like DGE said, the Director will need to know how to navigate. to helm the centre at the start. even with the advisory body to give advice, the Director will still need to work out details on the ground. maybe a Head and two deputy heads. even the other areas that you want to go into, might need someone to look into leading reserach into those areas.
CS. someone who is visionary. as for administrative matters, having good deputies will help, but the visionary aspect will need to be from the Director.
SC. how could the the twinning...
DHUM. will need to work on the philosphy and goals quite clearly. really be clear about the objectives from the start. agree that being able to clearly paint out the vision will be very important. at the start. maybe think big and start small. don't want to be too spread out at the start. build strength in core areas. progress in phases.
DHUM. the centre itself and its mission... sounds like a "supercentre", may be crippled by not knowing how to navigate nd negotiate what the centre is able to do within the university setting and context. good to get it out of the way first and be clear about how it's going to be done.
SL. stability and dynamic. phases. rather than either/or,  perhaps should be "and". the centre will be a "supercentre" as mentioned. establish the foundation... should happen concurrently, not necessarily one or the other.

# data[].attributes.body
SC. looking at other centres, they have a high degree of autonomy. they are strong individual researchers, but they pull together a team.
DWC.
WC. group 2 discussion on the work to be done will have a bearing on the structure and organisation, including the ratio of MOE and NIE staff.
JY. all 3 parts are interrelated and need to link them all together. for example for accreditation, the centre will need to reside in a university for accreditation. pieces need to be connected. for research as well, we need to access university resources, but also MOE resources.
DWC. this centre is probably not like anthing that exists. how AGs work - we get AGs to come to teach students. AGs get "full time equivalents" The Centre will need to draw in people from the AGs to teach. you can't staff the Centre with all the teachers, as it will become very bulky. teachers will come from AGs, but also from MOE specialists. however, we are doing both inservice and preservice. because we are doing preservice, it needs to be within NIE so that it can be included directly in the NIE programme. so that it can be included in the (BOS). original thought was that it could be like CRPP, with Director, Co-Director, Associate Directors... and some of these could be NIE staff. The PDM paper... the part about leaning close to MOE... doesn't really sound like a governance structure.
EDAST. agree that this Centre is unlikely to be anything seen before. existing Centres... are largely driven by NIE, with MOE support on the side. this CCEC will likely be different... key difference is the larger MOE presence, not just the professional expertise, but also the strategic decision making. roles like Dean, Vice Dean etc, will certainly be necessary. But also need to consider some kind of advisory council / team. how about other NIE Centres?
DWC. Most centres will have their panels of advisors. then there's also MNWG, and NIE Council. will there be some separate body?
EDAST. there might be some advisory body with strong MOE presence. there's already the NIE Council so there won't be another Council. it's like how some independent schools have a Board of Governors.
DWC. so... this Centre will be a physical centre, with a parallel setup including admin/finance etc. quite different from something that resides within NIE.
EDAST. we haven't reached that level of detail in discussions.
WC. at meeting, we did
DWC. NIEC is a separate entity, so it cannot be a base.
EDAST. will be bigger than CRPP and solec.
DWC. so it will be a centre within NIE. how large should the advisory... body be?
EDAST. to  be discussed
EDAST. as part of the concepts to be worked out, we will need to discuss the way the secondments from MOE will be done.
EDAST. when we set up new organisations, there will always be some kind of advisory body, sometimes chaired by DGE. for AST, the advisory evolved to be the Teacher's Council, chaired by DGE. composition can evolve. maybe in startup phase, MOE and NIE leadership can come in to advise. then as it stablisises, the body can evolve into something else.
DWC. agree that we will need to account to Director NIE and DGE in the first place. we should have people externally to advise on direction.
WC. wonder whether there might be input in the form of "external consultants", maybe once or twice a year.
EDAST. possible for the advisory body to have both. maybe can have phase 1 and phase 2. perhaps initial set up  more involvement of leaders from both sides
JY. will need to scope and assign specific roles for external consultants involvement.
WC. will need to consider whether the Centre will be involved in policy formulation, or focus more on practice.
DWC. PS might be quite interested in having research to inform policy. although policy making might be quite sensitive.
DWC. perhaps some focus on research. some focus on curriculum, not on NIE programme, but on CCE curriculum. associate deans or assistant directors overseeing different areas.
JY. we also learn from existing international models - need to avoid having too much dependence on individual strengths. in the long term, they face succession problems. like the MNWG model, chaired by DGE and Director NIE, perhaps the initial phase
EDAST. do we see the Centre Director being local, or from overseas?
DWC. what is the balance between research and practice? if focus is on research, overseas is ok. but if focus is on practice, such as preservice/inservice... might want someone with understanding of local
WC. if focus on NE will be important, important to have someone local with an understanding of local contexts.
EDAST. first phase more likely on PD, inservice/preservice courses... and the reserach aspect can grow over time
DWC. overseas reserachers won't really be interested in running... perhaps can have "endowed professors" to bring in big names, but not directors
JY. big names can lure in reserachers... international branding. but focus on the local aspect
EDAST. there might be culture shock if we bring in international reserachers who are not familiar with local context. might be better to start with someone who understands our local context well. not about paying someone from overseas, but we don't want to have that person pack up within a short time. so if we want someone from the local community, what are some considerations?
KM. general recognition that it's good to have early sight of who will be the centre director, so the discussion can move forward. so it's good to discuss... who will lead the Centre, and the kinds of structures.
JY. like profile development.
EDAST. a key question is whether the person is expected to be an academic with a PhD, or more of a CEO type of leader, with experience in leading complex setups. so that we can propose to PDM.
DWC. personally, i think it will be good if the person is an academic who is respected... to come up with programmes (research).
JY. agree with that... since it will be set up within a university setting... will need someone with credibility.
EDAST. that will narrow the field quite significantly
DWC. we don't have to narrow it down to CCE research angle. that will open up the field.
EDAST. for example, someone like Ms Ho Peng, not necessary with the academic angle
DWC. Ms Ho Peng would be a great advisor. For director... maybe someone like Pak Tee? someone who understands academics, has trained NIE staff, is familiar with MOE and NIE, well-regarded ... or someone like Prof Rebecca Ang - she's a psychologist, understands the context, knows how to navigate/manage AGs
WC. Pak Tee has worked on CCE matters as well
DWC. the person will have to come and join NIE.
WC. tenureship... to be attractive
JY. agree that things like tenureship at NTU will be an attractive aspect
EDAST. if some other name is surfaced, who is not an academic... how will that be received. just for example, someone like Ms Ho Peng
WC. based on her standing and reputation, would think that she would
JY. perhaps for the first few years, where it's a very specific role... perhaps for the first 3 years. with a co-directorship.
EL. co-directorship model is good start
EL. consider ELIS when it was set up. many people were approached, EL specialists, but many of us were tied to our institutions, and for various reasons were not able to take it up. but for ELIS we wanted someone who would be able to command the attention. eventually they gave up the idea of an ED for ELIS, and it became a principalship. throw up a name... Prof Lee Wing On... we need to bring up all these ideas. close to retirement renowned professor.

# data[].attributes.body
test

# data[].attributes.body
- Interrelation to other discussions in other groups.
- the Centre will need to be sited within NIE due to the preservice component.
- some kind of "advisory" body will need to be figured out.

# data[].attributes.headline
1. What considerations should we bear in mind when setting up the governance structure for the Centre (e.g. accountability, staffing needs)?

# data[].attributes.subject
1. What considerations should we bear in mind when setting up the governance structure for the Centre (e.g. accountability, staffing needs)?

# data[].attributes.headline
2. What considerations should we bear in mind for manpower resourcing of the Centre (e.g. faculty members, practitioners, policy makers)? 

# data[].attributes.subject
2. What considerations should we bear in mind for manpower resourcing of the Centre (e.g. faculty members, practitioners, policy makers)? 