When I asked the university to confirm that my daughter’s grades were below the cut-off point, the reply was that the ranking of results was confidential and that it was not obliged to answer my question. The university added that my daughter did not even qualify for discretionary admission.
Michael Koo, letter to the Straits Tmes forum page
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
…and 20% is reserved for foreigners with lower results, all expenses paid.
…and mm go china beg them to come sg and take pity leave on us, some behind in sg to help us ‘grow’. even our ‘founder’ has no faith in the local born ‘human stock’
and local males, remember to serve NS hor!
haha, mr koo, hope u did not voted for pap last time.
Personally, I thought it is rather clear that his daughter’s results are considered by the university administration to be insufficient for admission. While it may fulfill the basic requirements, she is much lower by comparison with other applicants, such that she does not qualify.
Mind you that, due to how the system in NUS works, this comparison of grades is, at least, faculty-wide; i.e. she is not only being judged based on those intending to study English Language, but also those majoring in Geography, History etc.. This could be the reason why Michael thought that there were some unfairness going on.
And as for any mumbo jumbo regarding places reserved for foreigners, all I can say is that there is probably no shred of truth in it. In fact, I’d wager a guess that, if there are no places reserved for Singaporeans, there would be a higher proportion of foreigners. This fact can apparently be deduced by any NUS students who observe the grade distribution amongst Singaporeans and foreigners.
we need transparency here.
there are obviously two camps: Jackson @ #2 who thinks so lowly of Singaporeans (In fact, I’d wager a guess that, if there are no places reserved for Singaporeans, there would be a higher proportion of foreigners) and Mr Koo and his well-wishers.
the questions then:
1. how many singaporeans, PRs and foreigners are accepted?
2. how much tuition fees are COLLECTED from singaporeans, prs and foreigners?
3. how many scholarships are given out to these groups?
4. what are the grades for students accepted across these three groups?
etc etc
till we get firm open answers from nus, i would much rather believe anecdotal evidence and personal observation.
step into nus and see for yourself how the university is flooded with prs and foreigners.
The University should have been more open and transparent in its
reply about why she failed to get a place iso giving flimsy excuses.
Why so secretive about ranking results without naming names of the
sucessful applicants which could lead to conspiracy theory of places being reserved for foreigners.
In fact if they could lay bare the criteria, successive cohorts would know
where they stand when applying for admission.
N … o w U……. S …h r o u d e d meh ……….
Jonah (#3):
To say that I think lowly of Singaporeans is perhaps a bit unjustified. All I’m saying is that there are reserved places favouring Singaporeans (which is actually a common practice for many universities worldwide for their local populations).
To answer (in a small extent) some of your questions:
1) I remember there is a page on NUS website with a list of such breakdown, but I’m not sure where. You can try looking around.
2) See this page. The tuition grant listed in the table is for all Singaporeans. Not sure about PR, but international students will definitely need to apply (with some contract). If you want the sum total, I think multiplying this with the NUS population gives a rough idea.
john (#4):
I don’t think NUS is secretive in terms of ranking criteria. In fact, if you read the original letter again, Michael said that past years’ ranking were given. It is only that this year’s rankings have yet to be revealed, perhaps due to administrative delay. And in fact, unless there is someone to pursue the matter, there is no need for NUS to urgently release this information, for its purpose is to give future applicants (which is at least a year away) an outline of accepted grades.
Oooops, it seems #6) made a wager when he knew nuts about the “system of shrouded meritocracy”. I will never do that if I knew that little about our education system. The fact that #6) cannot adequately answer #3)’s questions is testament that our university admission criteria has never been open and transparent. The magnitude of confidentiality abounds regarding the awarding of grades in our local universities too. Truth is, there had been too many under-the-table dealings everywhere. To let the cat out of the bag is pure suicide.
Rewrite no. 5 as ……
N …o w U……….. S……..h r o u d e d. meh ? ?
agnostic (#7):
Lol! What makes you think I know nothing when I wagered that guess (which, in any case, does not directly follow from this “system of shrouded meritocracy”)?
And why is it that my failure to answer every question implies that there is a lack in transparency in NUS admissions? This logical argument is absurd: if, say, I fail to defend certain actions of TOC (perhaps due to my ignorance), does that mean those actions are wrong? Moreover, why does it fall upon me to answer all questions? I am not speaking for NUS; I am merely suggesting where the solution may be found.
I may have gripes about how certain issues were handled in NUS, but I have never heard of under-the-table dealings. Since you suggested it, can you substantiate it? I am quite curious what it is all about.
To be honest, it was rather clear that this fella’s daughter did not make it in the first place.
But then again, so much for our parents’ and forefathers’ tax money that have contributed towards building these “local” universities that seek to exclude more, and more of our own countrymen. My sister who, also, didn’t make it, is flying to Melbourne next week. And I’m next to Oregon, come 2011.
Goodbye Singapore. You’ve made it quite clear that you didn’t love us. I’ve done my two years of NS, and so am I done with the country.
10) Davin Ng
Bye
When i firs applied to the UNiversity for the English Language course years ago, I was rejected even though I got ‘A’ for General paper and “‘A’ for my english literature. I was even nominated for the Angus Ross Commonwealth prize for literature, 1 out of 9 students nominated in the whole of Commonwealth countries.
When i approached the dean to ask why I got rejected when a fellow classmate of mine who had a 5 for GP got in, he said that was confidential and if i like I could appeal. But he himself would handle all appeals. I gave up and when to study Political Science and Sociology instead.
I spent all my secondary and collage years loving and studying hard for literature and did so well but in the end i got rejected without any reasons given.
I later found out that a large number of students who did extremely well in GP appylied for the the English Language course and many of them got rejected. Most of them were my course mates. We assumed that the University was just afriaid that students who were poor in english would flood the other faculties, so they moderated the entry standards accordingly
The system here does not allow you to pursue your interest. Everything is managed to ensure that the graduating students will be the best possible economic contributors in the future. I guess they never learned that passion is the real factor in ensuring success for anything.
When i firs applied to the UNiversity for the English Language course years ago, I was rejected even though I got ‘A’ for General paper and “‘A’ for my english literature. I was even nominated for the Angus Ross Commonwealth prize for literature, 1 out of 9 students nominated in the whole of Commonwealth countries.
When i approached the dean to ask why I got rejected when a fellow classmate of mine who had a 5 for GP got in, he said that was confidential and if i like I could appeal. But he himself would handle all appeals. I gave up and when to study Political Science and Sociology instead.
I spent all my secondary and collage years loving and studying hard for literature and did so well but in the end i got rejected without any reasons given.
I later found out that a large number of students who did extremely well in GP applied for the the English Language course and many of them got rejected. Most of them were my course mates. We assumed that the University was just afraid that students who were poor in english would flood the other faculties, so they moderated the entry standards accordingly
The system here does not allow you to pursue your interest. Everything is managed to ensure that the graduating students will be the best possible economic contributors in the future. I guess they never learned that passion is the real factor in ensuring success for anything.
Perhaps those who managed to secure a place in the Uni’s should be encouraged to share their views here and perhaps give a balanced view of the situation. Unless they also do not know why they got in, due the lack of transparency?
Jackson Tan,
Foreign students in NUS are academically superior because there are extensive financial incentives in place to attract international students. The incentives increase the pool of international applicants and allows NUS to be more selective with respect to the admission of foreign students. The truth is, if there were no tuition grants or scholarships for them, then the quality of foreign students would drop sharply since few would want to pay the sticker price for university education in Singapore. Correspondingly, if you lower tuition fees for Singaporeans or make more bond-free scholarships available for Singaporeans, particularly the academically superior ones, then NUS and other local universities would be able to attract more of such local students who might otherwise choose an overseas education.
I pitty some singaporeans.
Even in this recession, jobless from 3rd worlds are here to compete openly and on level playing field and can be unleveled to their advantage in the case of working for employers who favor hiring foreigners than locals for whatever reasons.
Nation the serve. 2 years of our time. To the post 65′ers who are now in their 40′s and 30′s, or late 20′s, maybe, 2.5 years of our time.
Jobs they fight on level playing field.
Salary , the employers enjoy the lowering of salary from foreigners, in many cases.
This , to me, translates into singaporean children, like your children, having to be BETTER, SMARTER, MORE HARD WORKING etc. Cos, foreigners can come from the whole of the rest of the world. Compete on level playing fields. Employers love them for lowering cost . But you come from singapore. If you are unfortunate to be just a mere mortal, work harder!!! If you happen to be born with some disabilities, good luck!. If you are not the creme of the crop, work harder than foreigners to stay ahead.
Injoy more good good.
may the force be with you.
Has talah vista , babu.
3) Jonah on July 8th, 2009 4.38 pm
‘we need transparency here.
…..
step into nus and see for yourself how the university is flooded with prs and foreigners’
===============
I need to add to yours. Its not just in NUS.
Its in public places, in work environments.
Its in basically all hawker centers and shopping malls.
For IT, visit any MNC IT department , if you get the chance.
Even in ‘their’ sector, you can find many.
I recall feeling like in india when i was actually in SIA IT ‘room’ which is the size of like 1 football field.
What is the reason for hiring a singaporean?
I have my own reasons.
But my question is to you, other than me.
I am itching to find out from you.
Wow, i wonder what’s up with having so many PRs and FTs ?
I had a dream just now.
I dreamt that all these contributed a lot of new citizens.
and then they vote and then we hug each other and shout majulah singapura!
whazzup dog?
@Jackson – You base your conclusions on the facts that are presented. This should be the case, for we need that solid evidence, and not just anecdotal evidence and personal observation and also the excuse for believing and drawing quick conclusions using the latter. (Sorry Jonah). This trust in hardcore evidence is important for us to differentiate the truth(based on the facts) and the ambiguous information. However Jackson, there are sometimes where the truth(based on facts) is bended. Just take note of that.
@Fox – “Foreign students in NUS are academically superior because there are extensive financial incentives in place to attract international students.” Can you show me some links to the incentives and the placements and figures.
@To all – This is Singapore. The government strongly encourages competition, diversity as well as meritocracy. It ties in the theory of evolution, if you are weak, you will be left behind. (Opinion: Singapore is a paltry 44 years old. Like any other country, they want to evolve and become the best country in the world and longest lasting empire, hence they require the brightest minds and bodies. History: The ancient Persians employed many mercenaries from many of their conquered territories in the conquest of Greece. The ancient Romans modeled their infrastructure from Greek architectural designers. The US recruited Werner Von Braun ( Nazi Research Scientist) to research in NASA and also Albert Einstein to make the first atom bomb. There are many more but to substantiate my point that Singapore is just doing what any other country is doing)
So thank you for hearing me out
Ivando,
According to MOE (http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/parliamentary-replies/2006/pq20060213.htm#Scholarship), one third of undergraduate scholarship holders in our local universities are local. This means that for every local student holding a scholarship, there are TWO foreign undergraduate scholarship holders. International students only form 20 percent of the total undergraduate population.
@Fox
Thank you so much for the clarification. That is to substantiate my point again that Singapore wants to be the best in the world, to prove to people that we are a cut above the rest of the other countries. And hence we need the best of the best not just from Singapore. These are some facts. Just need some more personal opinions to get things going cause I can’t think. =D
ivando @ 19 and 21
Singaporeans are now the minority, the outsider, in our own country. Everywhere I go – whether to the malls, food courts, in MRT trains or on the streets – I’m surrounded by swarms of foreigners. As for these foreigners being “the brightest minds and bodies” and “the best of the best”, you make me laugh! They are so ordinary and unexceptional that to call them “foreign talents” demeans the word “talent” and robs it of its meaning.
@Clear eyed
Perhaps you misunderstood me, and I have pushed my point too strongly across. It is true that you see ‘swarms of foreigners’. However, the population ratio of locals to foreigners is still higher than a margin. They are not a minority in terms of population size, however the locals seem to be a minority because of the “biased” behavior and treatment of the government towards foreigners. And most of you feel that the government should take care of its people.
I did not say that they were the brightest minds and bodies and the best of the best. Singapore wants the best of the best. So in addition to their already present local talents, they want to expand their current talent pool to include people in other countries.
Indeed I also agree with you that they are ordinary, but so are we. Singapore is just doing its part to survive and sustain as a country. The point that I made earlier is to give an opinion about the accusations that were being made that foreign talent are given higher priorities in education.
Once again I am trying to give an unbiased view of this situation
Ivando,
Higher priorities ARE given to foreign talent. Scholarships are more readily available for foreign students to study in our local universities. That’s why the ratio of foreign undergrad scholarship holders to locals is 2 to 1. With such financial incentives, it is no wonder that the average academic quality of the pool of international applicants is higher. If the same incentives were applied to our local universities, then the academic quality of the pool of local applicants will increase.
Hi All,
Education is a big business in countries that have good education system. In Australia, it contributes AU$11 billion annually from foreign students. So, I could imagine the same thing could be applied in Singapore. So, dont be surprised if most the portion goes to foreign students as they’re spending big money for education. Think about education fees (which is definitely higher than Singaporean) and then about other things that foreign students spent (housing, food, etc) during their study in Singapore.
So dont need to worry so much on this one. It is big business after all.
Rubbish. Most of the foreign undergraduates in our local universities are subsidized or supported by the government.
I’m not from NUS, but I have some idea of how admissions are done. My knowledge stems from my role as the coordinator for the NBS/NTU undergraduate IT program.
My understanding is the universities get a composite score computed by MOE. The formula for that score is tweaked every year, but it is calculated based on your 3 highest A level results, GP, the project, and some other factors. The schools have a limited number of applicants they accept. There are only so many faculty members and classrooms after all. The common decision is to just sort everybody by this composite score, and cut off where the number of students is equal to the quota that year.
In the case of the original complainant, that ‘D’ grade would have seriously pulled down the composite score.
Regarding foreigners, if the foreigners go through our Poly/JC system, they are handled in the same way. There’s no favoritism. But seriously, some of those foreign applicants that go through our JC and poly system are damn competent. They’re good not just on paper, but in terms of the overall package.
The real problem is foreigners who come in based on their education in their own country. For this, the universities have to make a judgement call as to how well the foreigner’s grades map to our local equivalents. In many cases, the foreigner’s cert is actually superior to ours. In other cases, the foreigner’s cert is inferior. There isn’t a good way for local universities to judge these things.
There’s also problems in that cheating to get academic marks is rampant in certain countries. For those countries, you can’t trust any piece of paper provided to you. In fact, you can’t even trust them when you interview them, because someone else could be posing as them for the interview!
Also, note that in many cases, foreigners are mainly admitted into programs that Singaporeans don’t want to go into. For example, computing related degrees remain unpopular with Singaporeans, even though there is huge industry demand. There are controls built in to prevent foreigners from switching out of these programs.
The above is a simplification of the actual process, but captures most of the essentials. In certain schools (like NBS/NTU), only a certain percentage are admitted based on the composite score alone. Everyone else is screened via an interview. NBS also accepts a limited number of applicants based on outstanding achievement elsewhere- for example, if an applicant has successfully set up a profitable business.
Also, frankly, our local universities today have a mindset that we are competing with each other to get the best students. While certain faculties are faced with overwhelming student demand, there are faculties which have lower than expected numbers of applicants. The original complainant appeared to have focused entirely on getting into NUS English. His daughter should have applied to other faculties and schools that would have been more receptive.
[Little advertisement for all you JC/Poly folks out there who want to apply to any of NTU's several computing degrees]- This is info I get from our careers office. Take the total number of job offers in our career office for IT grads. Minus the total number of students in an IT related degree. Despite the fact its a recession, the number is a positive number.
@sloo are you referring to NUS in your comment? did you apply like 20 years ago?
for those who didn’t know, to study what you like in fass in nus now, you have to qualify for the faculty first, then bid for the exposure (basic) module for the major… bidding for the exposure module is okay, usually you’ll get it in your second sem if not your very first…
I have a problem with this:
“According to MOE (http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/parliamentary-replies/2006/pq20060213.htm#Scholarship), one third of undergraduate scholarship holders in our local universities are local. This means that for every local student holding a scholarship, there are TWO foreign undergraduate scholarship holders. International students only form 20 percent of the total undergraduate population”
I shall remind myself of this when I next vote.
The 20% is a fake figure. Judging from what you see in the campus, I can honestly tell you it is 30 or 40% !! I too shall remind myself of this when I next vote
Here we have free loading foreigners taking up so many places in our local universities…..and locals who have to pay their own fees but cannot get into them…..and our elites still wonder why our emigration rate is so high?
some time back i got to know someone from middle kingdom. that person currently studying in NUS and i was told does not need to pay a single cent. even better is that there is no bond. the best part is that that person now holds PR and does not intend to stay in sg. will leave sg once study completed.
i don’t know how true this is but it left a bitter taste in my mouth.
no free lunch for sg’reans but to foreigners?
Well, since some people here like to grudge foreigners usurping NUS places from local students, that the Singapore government is disadvantaging Singaporeans, that NUS is overrun by foreigners, I think I shall do a bit of homework and spoon-feed these people some data.
NUS
NUS Annual Report 2008: Pg. 34, Student profile: 2007/2008
Total: 23,330
International: 5,198 (22.28%)
University of Melbourne
Facts and Figures about the University: % International Enrolment
2006: 25.90%
2007: 27.00%
University of Tasmania
2008 Students Summary: Student Enrolment 2008
Total: 22,600
Full-fee Overseas: 4,875 (21.57%)
Harvard University
2007/2008 Factbook: Student enrolment (Fall 2007)
International student: 20.1%
Looking at the numbers, the proportion of foreigners are not out of the typical percentage for an international university, isn’t it? So unless one complains that NUS:
1) is faking statistics,
2) should, for whatever reasons, have a lower-than-par international population,
I don’t think it is a valid accusation that NUS or the Singapore government favours foreign students.
Perhaps it could be true that NUS or the Singapore government is too lavish in terms of scholarships to foreigners so as to make these numbers on par with its peers. But I think this is another issue altogether from student intake statistics, and I’d like to see some similar comparison of statistics as well.
Correction to above:
Last sentence to penultimate paragraph ought to read: I don’t think it is a valid accusation that NUS have too many foreigners.
You are not comparing like with like.
1. Only 10 percent of the students in Harvard College, the undergraduate division of Harvard University, are international students.
2. You shouldn’t use Australian universities for comparison because Australia has a large thriving educational industry in which many universities deliberately try to attract large numbers of fee-paying international students.
“Perhaps it could be true that NUS or the Singapore government is too lavish in terms of scholarships to foreigners so as to make these numbers on par with its peers. But I think this is another issue altogether from student intake statistics, and I’d like to see some similar comparison of statistics as well.”
I don’t know why these two issues are not related.
The size of the applicant pool and intake is obviously related to the financial barriers to admission. If only full-fee paying students are admitted to our local universities, then the international undergrad population would fall drastically.
“I don’t think it is a valid accusation that NUS have too many foreigners.”
You are setting up a strawman. That’s not the accusation many people made. The accusation is that the Singapore government provides excessively large amounts of financial incentives to attract international undergraduates. This in turn swells up the foreign undergrad population in our local universities.
Fox (#35):
With regards to Harvard, I must admit their statistics is quite massive. I did have trouble finding information with regards to undergraduates (pg. 9 of factbook), and this is further confused by the separate classification of categories such as Asian/Pacific Islander (I assume they meant US citizens but of that ethnicity). But in any case, where does that 10% figure of yours come from?
Anyway, I did not deliberate choose Australian universities; I merely chose a couple that occurred to me at random. I initially also went looking for data on Cambridge, but I couldn’t find them. But I’ve snooped around for some others, and here’s the data for University of Manchester:
University of Manchester
Facts and Figures – Students and staff (for 2008)
Total: 26,160
International: ~7,400 (~28%)
Fox (#37):
You are setting up a strawman. That’s not the accusation many people made. The accusation is that the Singapore government provides excessively large amounts of financial incentives to attract international undergraduates. This in turn swells up the foreign undergrad population in our local universities.
If I’ve unintentionally setup a strawman argument, then I apologise, because this is not what I wanted to do. Indeed, I do agree with the argument questioning if there is an unreasonable proportion of scholarships and financial aids given to foreigners. This is a valid argument, and indeed your argument.
But I’m not targeting you. I’m replying to those who say that there are too many foreigners in NUS. And I seek to question their arguments, because it seems to be founded on impressions and anecdotes.
Jackson Tan (#38),
1. Look at the percentage of international students in Harvard College. See http://www.provost.harvard.edu/institutional_research/FB2008_09_Enrollments.pdf
2. How did you get 7400 for international *undergrad* students in U of Manchester? Did you exclude EU students?
3. UK universities are not good for comparison because they have a large educational industry too. That’s not surprising because English is widely spoken in the rest of the world and for those who can afford the cost of going overseas, they would naturally gravitate to universities in Australia and the UK.
Even so, the proper comparison would be the percentage of international undergrad students in the ALL the universities of UK. We are not comparing universities but university systems.
“But I’m not targeting you. I’m replying to those who say that there are too many foreigners in NUS. And I seek to question their arguments, because it seems to be founded on impressions and anecdotes.”
What they really mean is that there are too many non-full fee paying foreign undergrad students in NUS. The term ‘too many’ really assumes that there is a numerical threshold. You assume that number to be ~20 to 30 percent based on full fee-paying enrollment in some UK and Australian universities. That’s not valid because international undergrad enrollment in NUS is largely non-full fee paying. You’re just not comparing like with like.
“But in any case, where does that 10% figure of yours come from?”
Page 4 of http://www.provost.harvard.edu/institutional_research/FB2008_09_Enrollments.pdf. Look for the number ’680′.
Fox (#40 – #42):
Regarding Harvard, I stand corrected. I wasn’t aware that Harvard College was the undergraduate section of Harvard University. As for Manchester, I think the EU students are not included. Like I said previously, the statistics are not easy to gather; I do wonder if there is some website that list these numbers all in one table…
What they really mean is that there are too many non-full fee paying foreign undergrad students in NUS. The term ‘too many’ really assumes that there is a numerical threshold. You assume that number to be ~20 to 30 percent based on full fee-paying enrollment in some UK and Australian universities. That’s not valid because international undergrad enrollment in NUS is largely non-full fee paying. You’re just not comparing like with like.
If that is the case, then I’m not targetting them. The reason why I spent time digging up those data is because of some assertions that foreigners are flooding our local universities. While it is true that, if one were to walk around certain faculties such as science and engineering, there seems to be quite a lot of foreigners around, that impression may not be accurate. While these faculties have high proportion of foreigners (30%? 40%? I dunno…), but there are other faculties with low proportions. This is why I feel that accusations such as that made by tew ah seow (#30):
The 20% is a fake figure. Judging from what you see in the campus, I can honestly tell you it is 30 or 40% !! I too shall remind myself of this when I next vote
is unjustified.
As for subsidised international students, I do agree that the government may be leaning over the railing too much in helping them. More opportunities ought to be given to local students. Yet, at the same time, I’m not deaf to the government’s motivation: they want some of the graduates to stay in Singapore. Is this justified? It’s another huge debate altogether.
Overseas Singaporean
I don’t hear of a single UK local complaining that locals got squeezed out by foreigners for a place in their Universities. If this is obvious, you can be sure their media will cover the story and ST will be the first to pick this up.
Jackson Tan
From my cursory glance across the comments made on this issue, most seemed to be unahppy about the fact that there are excessive financial assistance to the foreigners (almost nothing for Singaporeans who served NS, unless they can prove beyond doubt that they are poor to the point of being derelict) rather than the proportion of foreigners in the local universities.
I am all for being meritocratic for entry requirements, but from my personal experience, there are many local grads who do better in their undergrad courses but are not offered financial assistance of any form despite being equal to their foreign counterparts.
I know, for I was one, I grad with 2 upper honors at over a time where my family was in serious financial trouble and all I was offered was some pathetic bursary of SGD1000 a year. I had to give tuition to 2 kids to support my personal expenditure. My fellow undergrads from overseas then were provided with full scholarship with hostel and personal allowances (enough for them to buy textbooks, upgrade laptops on top of their day to day expenses). Some of these graduated with 2nd Lower or 3rd Class honors.
I am confident this oddity in logic prevails today.
Why is this so? I served my NS. Shouldn’t I be given whatever my government can afford and offer these chaps? If they are better, so be it, but they are not. What have these foreigners done to deserve access to the taxpayers money that are denied to me (and other locals) who had served NS for the country.
I have done NS and tried to love this land. However, it despise the son of this land. For that, I will leave if I can, so my children will not be used and discarded like I was.
“I have done NS and tried to love this land. However, it despise the son of this land. For that, I will leave if I can, so my children will not be used and discarded like I was.”
Let your heart stay here and work for the betterment of this country – even if you need to leave physically due to better work prospects in some other country. Do not let your service (NS) go wasted just like that.
I suspect that there is a lot of subjective criteria and approaches involved. The banding process cannot stand out for public scrutiny, period!
When you do things subjectively, mistakes will certaintly occur; human judgement is full of errors. Such mistakes h/w may sometimes be fixed on a case by case basis, if you push hard enough.
So much for our 1st world education system!
I think this issue reflects a bigger malaise of the PAP gahmen’s ‘growth at all cost’ strategy – that the current gahmen may be less interested in who is growing the pie or how the pie is being distributed than in just growing it, resting perhaps on the tired old assumption of a rising tide’s ability to raise all boats but the scarier thought is a suspicion that the gahmen has become distant and disrespectful of citizenry rights. And this suspicion is all the bad press about how elitist the gahmen has become with the public furor over Wee Shumin’s rant, the PS’s overseas culinary holiday etc.
The malaise also requires the notion that Singapore’s economic dependency and vulnerability on the world-at-large vis-a-vis its historical legacy of entreport mercantilism necessitates a kind of citizenship that is more fluid & ambiguous than that of the nation-state model, hence the call for Singaporeans to be ‘gracious’, ‘open-minded’(but only on certain matters) etc in order to integrate foreigners into our society via campaigns etc.
Now this seems incongruent with what a lot of us Singaporeans are saying – that we have participated in nation-building via NS, that our parents’/grandparents’ contribution to the nation etc should count for something more – like meeting our and/or our children’s aspirations for higher education; that we could have done more to cultivate & equip Singaporeans via a more equitable education system like increase university places; incentivize small/medium enterprises that cater to local needs first(before even dreaming about ‘conquering’ the world) instead of throwing tax-breaks at big businesses, or subsidizing /mitigating their capital/investment risks and paying for their ‘foreign talents’ with tax-deductibles etc(which all come at the expense of Singaporeans in one way or another through a prudent/conservative Budget management practice).
I wonder if the present PAP gahmen has lost its groove. And that we should be looking very hard at reforming fundamental aspects of our system and governance in a way which can articulate and accommodate our expectations, allowing them to flourish but at the same time also deal with our (capability & capacity) limitations. But given that the present gahmen system churns out Ministers & MPs who are bureaucrats rather than independent critical thinkers, we Singaporeans will remain at the mercy of a (hopefully still) benevolent gahmen.
We need to think more about the fundamentals (of our system) in order to identify the root-causes of all these malaises, otherwise the Michael Koos and many others will keep surfacing and we will keep treating them like topical issues.
33) Jackson Tan on July 9th, 2009 2.50 pm
I am itching to know how you prove that is the truth?
But I would at the same time say that I TRUST it is the truth.
But in the digital age, Trust is not a dirty word but if you can prove what you say is better.
45) Roy
I understand what you mean. I know a Malaysian chap who don’t need to serve NS. His results are mediocre and graduated with only 3rd Class.
But at least you managed to get a place in local university which is subsidized. What about poly students who have to pay at least $60k at overseas universities? Many poly students get accepted at 1st tier overseas universities and graduate with at least 2nd Upper. The government don’t offer any help to these group of locals. Are these local talents worse than foreign students from 3rd world high schools?
We have a group of local talents ready to serve Singapore but the government prefer throwing money at dubious foreign students. Many of these foreign students simply disappear back home or USA after getting a free education here. I personally know a few such foreigners.