[20 November 1999]
Let Singaporeans pursue higher education
here
Last Saturday's Insight article
headlined "Are precious local talents being shut
out of NUS and NTU?" drew an outpouring of e-mail
responses from readers - 93 at the last count.
The report highlighted a growing
trend in which many students who failed to enter
the National University of Singapore and the Nanyang
Technological University excelled academically overseas.
It asked why they were not given the same opportunities
to study here.
Many readers argued that Singaporeans
should be allowed to develop to their fullest potential
here instead of being forced to study overseas.
Not only did this entail an enormous
cost of their families, they said, but it also meant
a loss of the university tuition subsidy which students
enjoyed on local campuses.
A recurring question in their e-mail
was: If well-known overseas universities can adopt
entry criteria which take a wider view of Singaporeans'
potential, why are NUS and NTU still basing entry
on examination scores alone?
They added that it was ironical
that overseas universities were giving local students
the chances denied to them by their own universities.
In a typical comment, Mr. Lim Zhiyoung,
who was rejected by NUS but accepted by Australian
and New Zealand universities, asked: "A reputable
university is prepared to offer me conditional entry,
why not NUS?"
Polytechnic graduate Lim Mei Yean
said that although she passed with a merit diploma,
NUS and NTU rejected her application and she was
compelled to pursue a degree through distance learning.
Many writers also took issue with
the local universities for maintaining that polytechnic
graduates have the same chances as A-level holders
in gaining admission.
"Let the figures speak for themselves," polytechnic
graduate Duane Ong said, noting that only 800 out
of the 17,000 students who graduate from the four
polytechnics every year are admitted annually, compared
to the 9,200 A-level holders.
Several said that if they were forced
to go overseas because of the perceived lack of support
from their home country, they would feel less attached
and rooted to Singapore and would thus be less inclined
to return.
If nothing is done to redress the
situation, then, as Mr. H. Lim put it, "You will
just have a whole lot of disillusioned, frustrated
Singaporeans like me who will probably head overseas
and never come back."
"Why should I come back when my
own country denies me the opportunity of a university
education?"
Several readers also suggested that
NUS and NTU re look their admission criteria and
make them more transparent for polytechnic graduates
and mature students.
Go the way of the overseas universities
which look at a broad range of indicators - including
personal essays, recommendations from teachers and
employers and face-to-face interviews, they said.
In the Insight report, the spokesmen
for NUS and NTU said they admit polytechnic graduates
based on their O-level and polytechnic grades and
work experience.
NTU president Cham Tao Soon said
that O-level results are taken into account because
there is no one standardized examination for the
polytechnics and the O levels are a common denominator.
He added that he was prepared to
take in more polytechnic grads but could not lower
standards just to admit more of them.
At least five readers urged the
Government to allow the use of CPF money for overseas
and part-time degree courses, arguing that an investment
in education was better than investment in property
and shares.
To ensure that the money will not
be spent on sub-standard courses, Mr. Allan Chong
said the authorities could draw up a list of approved
universities.
To make up for the loss of the university
subsidy which they would have enjoyed if they studied
in NUS and NTU, six readers made a plea for overseas
education to be subsidized.
Two university undergraduates, however,
wrote in defence of the present system, saying NUS
and NTU's degrees are well-recognised because of
their strict standards.
NUS student Jacky Tan said: "It
is not fair to those like me who toiled hard through
my A levels to make it to the local universities
only to have the standards diluted to admit more
polygraduates."
Another two readers cautioned against
taking the shorter polytechnic route to a university
degree. They wondered if the students could be trained
adequately in one or two years in the university.
Drawing from their experience in
a research institute, Dr. Goh Phuay Yee said that
those who took the JC route to the local universities
fared better in the workplace than those who took
the polytechnic route and went overseas.
Reprinted with permission from The
Straits Times, Asia
One. |