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.