Don’t forget about us, says university students
-
Don’t forget about us, says university students
January 7, 2010
By Low Wei Xiang
Singaporeans might have plenty to cheer with the government’s announcement of price hikes and changes in the primary school balloting system to enhance the privileges of citizens, but they could be losing sight of the big picture.
Last week, the government announced that PRs and foreigners will pay higher fees to study in government primary and secondary schools. Singapore citizens also get twice the number of chances when balloting for places in popular primary schools. These changes are in a bid to draw a clearer distinction between citizens and non-citizens.
However the government might have lost focus on the more important issues.
Changes across primary and secondary school levels are likely to be well-received by citizens, but there would have been little difference with or without these changes.
Citizens and foreigners alike would still get their respective places in government primary and secondary schools. Perhaps the only difference would be that citizens now have an edge in popular primary schools – but an education in a primary school that is more or less popular would not result in substantial differences.
In addition, the effects of these changes are minimal, since only 4% of the primary and secondary school students are foreigners.
In contrast, foreigners account for 8% of polytechnic and ITE students and 20% of university students.1
While citizens should be heartened by the changes, we should bear in mind the bigger picture. If the government wants to enhance the privileges of citizens, there are bigger, more impactful issues in education of the higher levels to address.
Issue 1: School Fees Between Citizens and Non-Citizens in Tertiary InstitutesSchool fees for foreign students in Singapore’s government tertiary institutes are comparatively low since they receive the same amount of government subsidies extended to citizens and PRs, but how fair is this measure?
Scenario: If a student was newly enrolled into the following courses for Academic Year 09/10, the tuition fees payable annually for the 2nd year onwards would be as bolded (fees for the 1st year are lower for some schools) –
Course
Citizenship Status
Government Subsidies or Tuition Grants ($)2
Fees Payable by Student ($)
NUS / NTU Business
Citizen
19,000
7,000
PR
7,700
Foreigner
10,500
NUS Medicine / Dentistry
Citizen
88,200
18,960
PR
20,860
Foreigner
28,440
SMU Business
Citizen
21,900
9,600
PR
10,560
Foreigner
14,400
Polytechnics
Citizen
13,600
2,100
PR
2,310
Foreigner
3,150
The government has set the fees payable at 10% more for PRs and 50% for foreigners, however it is barely substantial in absolute terms especially when compared to the government subsidy. For example, to study a full year in NUS or NTU Business, a foreigner pays only $3,500 more than a Singapore citizen.
The question is this – why is the same subsidy extended to PRs or even foreigners?
Compared to subsidies awarded by other countries, if they even exist, Singapore arguably extends the highest subsidies to foreign students. Many countries and education hubs around the world bank considerably on foreign students to generate money.
For example, citizens of European Union countries pay £3,290 per year to study at Cambridge University, while foreigners pay £10,752 to £26,028 depending on the course.3
Closer to home at the University of Hong Kong, one of the top Asian universities consistently ranked higher than Singapore’s, citizens pay a composition fee of HK$42,000 while foreigners pay HK$100,000.4
Singapore intends to be an education hub, but does it intend to make money out of this venture too? The year-by-year increase of foreign students paying full tuition fees to study in local private institutions has generated substantial revenue, but has it all been channeled to subsidizing foreigners in government tertiary institutions instead?
One of the hallmarks of Singapore’s education system is that nobody deserving is denied because he or she cannot afford it. Ironically, this principle seems to apply to even foreigners. The government has to justify the reason for such high subsidies extended to foreign students, and where the money comes from.
Issue 2: Scholarships Between Citizens and Non-Citizens in Universities
Recent statistics are unavailable, but from 2001 to 2005, there were twice as many foreign as local undergraduates on scholarships in NUS and NTU. Most, if not all, of these scholarships are awarded by Singapore and its various agencies.5
The government needs to justify their preference in awarding scholarships to foreigners over citizens.
Coupled with the heavy subsidies, this certainly makes Singapore an attractive destination for many foreign undergraduates. The question is have we achieved our aim of attracting the top brains from around the world?
The origins of most foreign students in Singapore are restricted to countries from ASEAN, China, and India. It seems as if Singapore has not succeeded in attracting talents from the international stage, including those from the US and UK.
If even the high number of scholarships and subsidies do not attract bright students from around the world, perhaps it is time to revise our policies on making Singapore a top educational destination.
More importantly, this comes when the government is seeking to draw clearer distinctions between citizens, PRs and foreigners. It is thus also time to consider if the subsidies and scholarships extended to foreigners are unfair to citizens and their tax money, especially since they have done little in attracting the intended crowd to our shores in the first place.
Issue 3: Bond Periods of Non-Citizens
PRs and foreigners who accept the subsidies must serve a 3-year cumulative “bond period” in the form of employment in a Singapore-based company upon graduation.
The exceptions are those in NUS Medicine and Dentistry, the most expensive courses. Citizens and non-citizens alike who graduate from these courses have to serve a bond period with the Ministry of Health
What raises eyebrows, however, is that their bond period lasts for the same number of years.
The need for an obligatory bond is understandable due to the high subsidy, but why is the length for PRs and foreigners the same as citizens? If the reason is that tuition grants awarded are of the same amounts, this goes back to the initial question – why do they receive the same government subsidy as citizens?
From the table above, students in these two faculties receive the same government subsidy of $88,200.
In other words, for a year in these highly competitive courses worth over $100,000 (adding government subsidy and payable fees), a foreigner has to pay merely $9,480 more than a Singapore citizen.
For a foreigner, does this mean that $9,480 is the price tag of remaining a foreigner instead of a PR or citizen, since the subsidy and obligatory bond period are the same?
Unofficial sources also mention that the 3-year bond period for foreigners can be dissolved without monetary penalty if they are unable to find a job. These foreigners are thereafter barred from living, working or studying in Singapore, although it would barely affect those who use Singapore as a stepping stone to foreign lucrative markets.6
The above is confirmed by the MOE Tuition Grant agreement. Clause 2(1)(c) states that the student “shall (unless unable to obtain any employment within one (1) year after completion of the Course or re-employment within (1) year after his/her resignation or dismissal from or cessation of his/her employment) work in Singapore for a period or periods totaling in the aggregate three (3) years”.1
If these foreigners receive the same subsidies and are then allowed to go “scot-free”, are we being fair to the citizens and their money? What makes a citizen different from a non-citizen then?
These are questions that the government has to answer so that being a citizen still has its privileges.
Issue 4: Places in University Between Citizens and Non-Citizens
The government also has some way in dealing with ground sentiments that there are too many foreigners in our local universities, who could be potentially taking up places of equally deserving locals.
In 1998, then Minister for Education Mr Teo Chee Hean assured that places taken up by foreign students in local universities are capped at 20 percent7, although it seems to have been overshot in 2007 when foreign students got 4,218, or 22.2 percent, out of the 18,999 places in the 3 local universities.8
It is pertinent then to note that in the top 10 universities ranked by Times Higher Education, competition for places by foreign students are arguably stiffer compared to Singapore’s. However these universities, especially those from the US, generally have a lower proportion of foreign entrants.
This can be seen in the table below.
Course
Country
Ranking by Times Higher Education
Proportion of Foreign Undergraduates
From various sources*
From Times Higher Education website
Harvard University
US
1
8.9%
8.3%
University of Cambridge
UK
2
15%
14.8%
Yale University
US
3
9%
18.4%
University College London (UCL)
UK
4
26.7%
26.9%
Imperial College London
UK
5
34.4%
34.7%
University of Oxford
UK
5
14%
12.8%
University of Chicago
US
7
13%
7.8%
Princeton University
US
8
10%
9.6%
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
US
9
9%
9.1%
California Institute of Technology (Caltech)
US
10
11%
9.4%
National University of Singapore (NUS)
SG
30
Unavailable
26.7%
Nanyang Technological University (NTU)
SG
73
19%
25.7%
Singapore Management University (SMU)
SG
-
17%
23.0%
*Sources are listed at the end of the article. Note that some figures provided by sources could be rounded or from recent years due to the unavailability of figures for this year. Statistics only account for undergraduates, i.e. postgraduates are not included.
From the above table:
A comparison with the Times Higher Education (THE) website against other sources reveals different figures for various reasons. While differences for most schools involve less than 2 percentage points, a few (in red font) paint rather different pictures of the proportion of foreign undergraduates in the respective universities.
Unfortunately, these universities include that of our local ones, possibly because PRs are included as “foreign nationals” by THE. Perhaps the government would like to clarify with THE on how the figures were obtained.
Regardless of the accuracy of the figures, the crux is this.
The mix of foreign presence brings immeasurable benefits, but there are some who would be interested in the government’s justification for the cap of 20 percent compared to say, 15 percent, which seems to be the trend with at least 7 of the top 10 universities. This is also despite the higher competition for places by foreigners in these universities.
While 20 percent might also be an acceptable figure to many, the government certainly needs to provide more assurance when they say citizens are given priority over foreigners in local universities. Barring discretionary admission, this would mean that the lowest admission grades of foreign students, including non-scholarship holders, are higher than that of citizens.
Amidst complaints that admission criteria are inconsistent and unclear, the 3 local universities have put up representative grade profiles on their websites showing the grades attained by students admitted the previous year into the respective courses.
This should be taken one step further – perhaps there should be a further differentiation between the grades of admitted citizens and foreigners to prove that citizens indeed given priority, especially in competitive faculties like engineering with a high number of foreigners.
With rising cries that foreigners are taking the places of locals, it is time for transparency by the government and assurance that this is not the case and that the interests of citizens are not disregarded.
Conclusion
While the changes for primary and secondary schools do go some way in placating citizens, the real and important issues of education have not been answered. If the government aims to draw a clearer distinction between citizens, PRs and foreigners, it should look into the above issues. Only then will Singaporeans be assured that our interests as citizens are safeguarded and still matter to the government.
Sources
1http://www.filmo.com/singapore.htm
2http://sam11.moe.gov.sg/tass/menu/index.htm
3http://www.cam.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/international/finance.html
4http://www.hku.hk/acad/ugp/finance_fee.html
5http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/parliamentary-replies/2006/pq20060213.htm#Scholarship
6http://forum.channelnewsasia.com/viewtopic.php?t=267341&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
7http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/1998/010898.htm
8http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20070720-19051.html
*Sources for table
Harvard University
http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/03/harvard_admissi.html
University of Cambridge
http://www.cam.ac.uk/international/life.html
Yale University
http://www.yale.edu/admit/international/index.html
University College London (UCL), Imperial College London
http://www.hesa.ac.uk/dox/dataTables/studentsAndQualifiers/download/institution0607.xls
University of Oxford
http://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/international_students/index.html
http://www.cherwell.org/content/8122
University of Chicago
https://collegeadmissions.uchicago.edu/admissions/classprofile.shtml
Princeton University
http://registrar.princeton.edu/university_enrollment_sta/common_cds2009.pdf
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
http://www.universityparent.com/mit/2009/08/20/mit-international-students-and-scholars
California Institute of Technology (Caltech)
http://www.admissions.caltech.edu/about/stats
Nanyang Technological University (NTU)
http://www.ntu.edu.sg/AboutNTU/NTUataglance/Pages/UndergraduateStudentenrolment.aspx
Singapore Management University (SMU)
http://www.smu.edu.sg/about_smu/pdf/Statistical_Highlights.pdf
Other sources
https://share.nus.edu.sg/registrar/info/ug/UGTuitionCurrent.pdf
http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/oad2/website_files/finaid/tutionFees.pdf
http://www.smu.edu.sg/admissions/fees/tuition/index.asp
http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/education/iej/articles/v3n2/v3n2.pdf
http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/parliamentary-replies/2005/pq19042005.htm
http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20070720-19051.html
http://www.singaporeangle.com/2006/09/impact-of-international-students-in.html
http://frankcomment.blogspot.com/2007/07/foreign-undergrads-is-20-target-or-cap.html
About the Author:
Low Wei Xiang, a self-dubbed writer with journalistic aspirations, has found himself graduated from Hwachong Institution, released from the army, and is currently thrown back onto the streets. He is also a self-confessed owl and sleeping is his secret passion, although it clashes with his other interests. Aged 20, he writes short stories on top of serious stuff, and will be entering NTU’s Wee Kim Wee School of Communications and Information in 2010.
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/01/07/dont-forget-about-us-says-university-students/
-
TARGET:1 MILLION DOLLAR JOB THAT NEEDS A MASTERS DEGREE
WHAT U HAVE GOT NOW:FREE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL EDUCATION
RESULT:NO MILLION DOLLAR JOB.
-
Taken from the MDA website.
The Media Education Scheme is an initiative to build and nurture manpower capabilities as well as the talent pool in the media industry (for TV, radio, film, publishing, animation, and games sectors). It targets Singapore citizens and permanent residents who wish to pursue full-time tertiary education in media-related courses both locally and overseas at undergraduate and postgraduate media-related courses levels at reputable institutions.
Media Education Scheme (Overseas)
The Scheme covers tuition fees of up to S$40,000 per year, or subject to a maximum of S$100,000. The scheme carries a two-year service commitment to Singapore. Upon returning from their studies, recipients will have to fulfill the service commitment and are required to work in media-related companies. As international exposure and experience is desirable and encouraged, students need not start their service commitment immediately upon graduation, but can choose to do so over a five-year period.
Media Education Scheme (Local)
The Scheme covers tuition fees of up to S$10,000 per year, subject to a maximum of S$20,000. There will be no service commitment attached to the scheme.How generous our government is, giving out grants with loads of cash to PRs.
My MY colleague could actually asked me if the Singaporean government would sponsor him to get a Masters in Business Admin.
I pretty much told him to not tell me if he tried because i'd probably lose my temper right there.
-
hmmm.....computer games!!!me wanna make ps2 call of duty type of games!!how come they never advwrtise thois media scheme one????just hide their schemes under tons of media n expect miracles or something...
i guess if i need to go overseas to learn how to make those call of duty games then they need me to bond for 2 years with tcs....aka employment !!
too bad i already ledft spore.
-
Wah wall of text that I can't be bothered to read but I do agree that this difference in pricing for education is just a scam by the PAP to convince us that citizens are better than foreigners when we are actually all the same
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
Taken from the MDA website.
How generous our government is, giving out grants with loads of cash to PRs.
My MY colleague could actually asked me if the Singaporean government would sponsor him to get a Masters in Business Admin.
I pretty much told him to not tell me if he tried because i'd probably lose my temper right there.
Guess is just one of those i get to spend on who i want....
One of our minister was here a couple of years ago to meet up with overseas singaporean including Singaporean students. To encourage SG to go back.... So a question was asked publicly...why the Singapore Govt Don't offer more scholarships funds for singaporean? where singaporean have to scout for grant or scholarship ?
Infront of about 80 Singaporean students, The answer from our dear minister....was that money throw out and never recovered....He would "preferred to spend it at home.
So i was surprised to read what was posted in the article about overseas educational scheme....
-
singapore citizenship is just liability after liability.
it is totally worthless. no social safety net. 20-30yrs of NS liability. too much rules and fines. high cost of living. undemocratic democracy.
-
Don't worry your govt kills poor foreign students now and then....
-
for fun in what they call playing....must be some fucked up people.
-
Originally posted by deathmaster:
singapore citizenship is just liability after liability.
it is totally worthless. no social safety net. 20-30yrs of NS liability. too much rules and fines. high cost of living. undemocratic democracy.
Get out if you can! The world doesn't revolve around the island city called Singapore -
Originally posted by Miracles&Prophecies:
Get out if you can! The world doesn't revolve around the island city called Singapore
How to get out?I am sure there are many people wanting to get out of singapore but they can't
-
they want us to make call of duty games in spore????that would be like finding snow in spore........
-
i got out by a miracle.
-
1 year before elections, say start favouring citizens.
1 year after the elections, say start favouring the foreigners and PRs.
Politics, politics.
Haiz.
-
I REALLY HOPE UNIVERSITY PLACES WILL INCREASE FOR LOCALS. AND ONLY 10% GOES TO FOREIGNER.