PAPee: Bring in FTrash Can Up Varsity Stds!

[makapaaa]

If these 3rd World FTrash who can't speak a word in Engrish can bring up varsity standard, does it not mean that the Peesai education system has been a dismal failure? Should not the Education ministers, both past and present, resign in ignominy? Should not the whole cabinet resign for LYING about Peesai's education system being lumber 1?

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Varsity standards must be maintained
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I REFER to Mr Chen Zhaoguang's letter on Thursday, 'A right, not a privilege', and to recent letters on admission to local universities.
Our publicly funded universities have steadily increased the number of places available from 21 per cent in 2000, to 25 per cent of each cohort this year. By 2015, with the new university established, 30 per cent of each cohort will be able to study for degrees. This will create more opportunities for both polytechnic diploma and A-level holders.
Even as we expand places, we must maintain the standards of our public universities. Tertiary institutions in other countries that have lowered admission criteria to take in more students are worse off. Many have experienced a higher failure rate among their undergraduates or a drop in overall standards of their university graduates. We should not go down this route as the National University of Singapore (NUS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU) and Singapore Management University have gained international recognition for their high quality.
While our public universities can assure a place for eligible students, it is not possible to promise a place in the course of his choice. No system provides this. Popular disciplines like medicine and law in good universities worldwide are highly competitive and admission is strictly by merit.
Mr Chen asked about opportunities for late bloomers. Starting this year, the Ministry of Education will provide subsidies for part-time degree programmes offered by UniSIM, NUS and NTU. In addition, students' Post-Secondary Education Accounts (PSEAs) can be used to fund these part-time degree programmes. Tan Gee Keow (Ms)
Director, Higher Education
Ministry of Education

 

[makapaaa]

Sounds like an FTrash defending freebies to be given to FTrash!

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Writer missed points in letter on university admission
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I REFER to Mr Chen Zhaoguang's letter on Thursday, 'A right, not a privilege', which was a reponse to my letter last Friday, and would like to offer my rebuttals.
First, Mr Chen argued that we should cater to all who 'qualify' for university entry. But what does 'qualify' actually mean? Criteria given by universities are mere prerequisites, meaning prospective undergraduates have to meet these requirements to be considered. This does not mean a place is guaranteed should one meet these requirements, because a place depends on the relative results of other applicants. So, if qualifying simply means meeting these prerequisites, it is reasonable to expect a 'qualified' applicant to be rejected.
Next, I agree with Mr Chen that in a developed country like Singapore, a basic education should be a right. However, we are talking about university places here. There is a limit on the number of graduates the job market needs. As a result, university places are limited. Even in highly developed countries like the United States and Britain, graduates do not form the majority of the population. Hence, education is pretty much like a mass race. Everyone should be given a chance to take part, to compete for limited medals, but not everyone will come home with a medal. Similarly, everyone here should be entitled to a basic primary education, and given a chance to compete for a university place, but it does not mean everyone will get a place.
Mr Chen also wrongly stated that I suggested those who do not get a university place are those who do not work hard enough. The point I am driving at is this. Hard work allows a better chance of good results, and good results allow a better chance of a university place. However, we have to accept the cruel reality that hard work does not guarantee good results, nor do good results guarantee a university place. In the recent Olympics, many athletes worked extremely hard, achieved good results by attaining their personal bests, but did everyone come home with a medal? No. Simply because there are others with better results.
Finally, Mr Chen also missed my point when he said it is a contradiction to say one has to work hard, yet settle for any course one is given. What I am saying is this. Work hard for what you want, but if you still fail to achieve your goal despite your hard work, there is no shame in settling for second best. Furthermore, not everyone can afford, unlike Mr Chen, to go overseas to take the course they prefer, even with 'careful financial planning by their parents'. Calvin Ng