We’ll just have to make do with what is there now. Regardless of the analysis by statisticians, it does not change/help those who’ve applied for bursaries – they are still poor!

Yep Sobri, the local govt did not distinguish these 2.

I re-read Sze Hian’s article. >, referring to those whose scholarships were given for outstanding students with good character.

If it’s realised that a certain race is more poor than other races (according to who applied for the bursaries), then collecting such statistics is useful in determining WHAT lifestyle habits/choices may be causing poverty for that race.

Currentlly what the government are collecting (place of residency of those awarded bursaries) is effective only to a certain degree.

If so, then perhaps we should also question the fact that some racial groups are over represented while some are very much under represented!

Do we want to go into such matters?

There must be a distinction between Bursaries and Scholarships.

Given their criteria, if Bill gates went to the Learning Lab BEFORE he made Microsoft, they would have rejected him outright too.

So do not be perturbed by educational institutes/enrichment centres who want to choose the people/students they want to teach. Such institutes have politics all of their own. They may miss out on students who could have been the next potential Einstein (Einstein was called STUPID by his teachers! NO KIDDING!)

I suggest to give your “business” to those who are willing to take your children’s education “more sincerely”. This “rejection” was anything but a kind one. I’d be interested to see what contract they had with your colleague!

However there should be the beginning of some transparency so that citizens are able to accept the statistics when they are finally revealed.
By the way, recent statistics can suggest that top scholarships are going to the female gender with a mix of foreigners – interesting to suggest rightly or wrongly that it may be difficult to deal with local NS men who are getting vocal to the point of challenging the system

In some western countries – university places and scholarships are allocated to minorities – and the definition of minorities is not based on race but on many other factors like location of birthplace, father’s occupation, etc…..
In other area involving foreigners , award of scholarships are based on a strict quota – locals are given the places first, then the quota for foreigners are filled up – there is a policy and consistency.

As Singapore open up, much spotlight will be placed on university places and scholarship awards; questions will always be there once the system is not transparent.

Look at the previous debate on foreign sports talents – have Singaporean accepted them yet ? The controversies involving sports talents disappearing half way thru their “scholarships here” are still fresh in people’s mind. Sometimes it make one wonder if Singapore has got its priorities right ? Have the investments paid ? How are the foreign imports doing – can they win a medal at Beijing after failing in Sydney and Athens?
The focus now should be on the economic slowtown, solving problems of inflation, cost of living and really helping the poor and the old who cannot cope; yet on tv and news, one can find the President and Minister enjoying the Beijing Games ! What insensitivities to show at such an uncertain and difficult times with the admitted bumpy road ahead for Singapore.

Will Singaporeans believe that there is really a level playing field in the awards of scholarships ?
Openness is the key. Courage to face the people, and not to hide behind the non answering system is a must henceforth if the people and government are to move on to close the diversive gap. Civil servants are well paid, Goverment are voted in – the system must be accountable, perform and show results or be shipped out.

Those interviews are to ascertain if you are really what the documents say you are. For example a student of excellent English and who’s produced straight As in other subjects as well, will not speak broken English during the interview.

Sorry for topic diversion, but I think Sze Hian was talking about scholarships that is given to the poor; I don’t think he’s not talking about scholarships given to those who’ve produced excellent acedemic results.

The definition of scholarships/bursaries have been blurred (unfortunately) – Ben’s definition of “scholarship” and “bursaries” is more accurate.

Usually those who receive scholarships (or more accurately described by Ben as “bursaries”) due to family’s low income//poverty are not required to attend interviews; they only need to provide prove that they are for example, single parents with low income or families with hardships, etc.

The Singapore Bhuddist Lodge is one such charity that helps needy students simply because students are deserving of an education no matter what the parents’ problems may be, provided students are willing to work hard etc.

Scholarships that require excellent academic and non-academic results along with good character and moral values are those that do not necessarily look at where students live. Those kind of scholarships will call for face-to-face interview/s with parents or the students (or both), but that is NOT to ascertain or confirm if the student is born into, or if student is currently living in landed properties.

@ Landlord All that you said is true except not necessarily for this “Children born into landed homes or semi-d need scholarship because it will give opportunities for a fast-track career in some govt agencies. “.

Scholarships in the ‘class’ of Presidents’ scholarships do not place high priority for those born into or currently live in landed properties. Statisticians sometimes forget what you’re born with may not be what you have now. A good example will be Paris Hilton’s future children/descendants.

>>>>Quoted by Ben: However, the purpose of bursaries is specifically to provide financial aid. Here, affluence has everything to do with eligibility, i.e. the rich should not be able to apply for it. Bursaries are what I strongly advocate to be provided for the needy.

I strongly agree but somehow I feel the government is using the wrong way to ascertain the eligibility. Why? Because poor/needy families can still be living in a landed property because of the charity and kindness of the property-owner. I know it’s rare but it’s possible. If I live with a wealthy relative, it does not mean that relative is supporting me to raise my children for example.

A little off-topic here: There are many poor whose relatives do not help them (I am not about to say whether they deserve it due to past behaviour or family conflicts).

One way government CAN help is to make support by FAMILY or RELATIVES mandatory but this is a double-edged sword – do people want to be responsible for their relatives’ unfortunate circumstances or would they view it as clearing someone else’s shit?

There are also many poor people above 55/60 whose children has NEVER supported them. 11 children, 1 dead, 2 live with them and the other 8 act like complete strangers. Those senior citizens have not had the heart to sue their children for monetary support even if the current law allows. Tell me if you feel something is wrong here. What can be done?

The purpose of a scholarship is not to provide financial aid to needy students. Scholarships are either (a) prizes awarded based on merit or (b) contracts to secure and train prospective employees for the organization.

For example, the prizes that are awarded to the top academic student, best sports person, best artwork, or best essay, without any strings attached. Family affluence should not be considered.

Another example is an agreement in which the organization sponsors a person for training, and in return, the person works for the company or the community upon graduation. The organization selects candidates based on merits whether academic or not. Family affluence, again, should not have any bearing.

However, the purpose of bursaries is specifically to provide financial aid. Here, affluence has everything to do with eligibility, i.e. the rich should not be able to apply for it. Bursaries are what I strongly advocate to be provided for the needy.

Children born into landed homes or semi-d need scholarship because it will give opportunities for a fast-track career in some govt agencies.
A job is guaranteed for scholarship holders !