WHEN I shared my intention to read for a Master of Public Policy, I received either one of two responses. On one camp, there was the sigh of exasperation followed by cynical comments, while the other camp expressed simple goodwill, wishing me the best of luck in returning to student life.

Personally, I am inclined to diagnose my situation as a mid-life crisis at the tender age of thirty-four. Society dictates that a woman my age should be “settling down” – comfortable in middle management career-wise, perhaps even married with a kid or two; not having given up a “stable” career in academia and studying for yet another degree despite having a PhD.

Well, I don’t get labelled a heretic for nothing!

It was comforting however, to meet fellow heretics at the Blavatnik School of Government in the University of Oxford. All of us had been accepted into the 2017/18 batch to be a part of the vision to achieve “a world better led, better served, and better governed.”

The diverse background of the students this year – from NGO workers, social entrepreneurs, financial managers, lawyers, medical doctors, government officials, politicians past and present, civil servants and former academics cum heretics (and these are only those I’ve managed to say hello to) – shows that contrary to popular belief, policy is not merely restricted to those in government.

The philosophy behind governance could be applied in businesses, schools and universities, and of course, government; while the School assures us that by the end of the programme, we will all be “critical consumers of economic thinking” through its Economics for Public Policy classes.

While subjects such as politics, law and evidence-based case studies of public policy might be classed as more ‘niche’ and governance-focused, the interactive teaching style of these classes can benefit many from diverse sectors in everyday dealings with any form of governance. We will also be undergoing classes on applied policies, and work in teams for “Policy Challenge”, an intensive module built around case study discussions, team building exercises and a rigorous policy exercise.

Students are given current issues to discuss and debate, forcing us to take a stand that we may not normally take (for example, I consider myself politically liberal but the policy challenge states that I should take a conservative stand on Brexit, an exercise that I find challenging indeed).

At the end of three terms, students are required to undergo a summer project, where we are expected to put into practice what we have learnt throughout the year.

In short, the Oxford MPP is more intensive, mimics a high-pressure work environment and is not as strictly academic compared to other Masters programmes. Some say it is akin to an MBA, while others have commented that it is a professional Masters programme.  

Two weeks in, I must admit that I am struggling with what I have been reassured is “the Oxford Impostor’s Syndrome”. Everyone else seems to be geniuses while I feel inadequate, almost stupid.

Most of my classmates have experience with government and public service or at least have studied social science subjects that include politics, philosophy and economics. I cannot claim that occasionally reading The Economist gives me any advantage!

Our first morning as a batch placed us in small groups of six and required us to answer the most imminent question of all – what is the path that has led us to an MPP programme?

One common theme running throughout the responses was a sense of frustration and unsettlement with ongoing events happening around the world, with each of our countries, and with ourselves.

We may have varied reasons to undertake this Masters programme, yet all of us aspire to be a part of a better world, or at least find new ideas and try new solutions towards improvement, being responsible for the problem.  

What I also find refreshing is the culture of transparency which the Dean (and consequently the School) chooses to imbibe. We are encouraged to have honest conversations, and already I found myself respectfully disagreeing with fellow students who thought highly of US President Donald Trump and his policies.

It is invigorating to be able to have open conversations on “uncomfortable” topics, without being shut down or risk being interrogated by authority figures who disapprove of such public discourse, as is wont to happen back home.

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum…” so says Noam Chomsky in ‘The Common Good’.

Taking a year off to study may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but to actively engage with different opinions, thus shaking one’s comfortable routine and to immerse oneself in a different culture and social norms could well be a good balm to soothe a weary Malaysian soul. – October 8, 2017.
 

* Lyana Khairuddin is currently reading for a Master of Public Policy at The Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford; funded by Chevening-Khazanah Scholarship. Lyana was formerly a researcher at Penang Institute.The opinion here is her own and does not represent the views of her funders, the School or university.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.