UNIVERSITY ADMISSION
JC students deserve priority
POLYTECHNICS lure students with glossy brochures and spiels about their fabulous courses, but fail to tell them how difficult it is for them to enter local universities via the poly route.
How many 16-year-olds will forgo sexy-sounding courses like communications and finance over subjects like physics, chemistry or mathematics?
Ironically, these polytechnic brochures often boast of how many of their graduates enter university. But they are silent on the reality that employers value degrees more than diplomas.
Polytechnic graduates cannot have it both ways. They must know the Government spends more to train a polytechnic graduate than a junior college (JC) student.
So they cannot expect a second bite of the cherry with the same priority in university admission as JC students who complete two years of school and hold only an A-level certificate.
Polytechnics pride themselves on hands-on training while JCs arm a student with more in-depth grounding in core subjects to prepare them for university.
To JC students, university is and has always been their final destination. To poly students, their end point, in Singapore at least, should be their diploma.
If they want to go beyond that in Singapore, they should choose the JC route. If they do not qualify, it is not the Government's fault.
Nothing should stop them from pursuing their dream overseas, but they cannot expect greater access to local universities just because it is costlier to study abroad.
A place in a good local university is a limited resource and should go to the most deserving; in this case, those who qualify for JC and have consciously decided to take the JC path to prepare themselves for a university education and not a diploma.
In the past, a JC education was called 'pre-university' education, and it is precisely that.
So it is time polytechnic graduates accepted the implications of their decision to choose between polytechnics and JCs, and not gripe that the system is unfair.
Lee Beng Tat
Taken from: ST Forum
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_514733.html
**************************
I can't believe this guy! He is so........head stuck in the clouds. SERIOUSLY!
How can anybody even write something so offensive, snobbish, and ignorant! Polytechnic should be the end point?? University should go to the most deserving?? Who are you to quantify who are the most deserving people! Just because people go to JC, so they're more deserving? Well, I come from a JC, but I don't see how much more deserving I am to get a place just because I studied a bunch of so-called core subjects that served little purpose to help me through my university syllabus.
Seriously Mr Lee here, have you ever been to a university? Have you counted the number of people topping their cohorts every year? If things go by your most-deserving logic, could you kindly explain the substantial amount of ex-polytechnic students in the dean's list?
And I for one, chose the JC path, because what I wanted to study was only available in university, and not in polytechnic. And for those who chose polytechnic path, does not mean they do not intend to move on to university. What's wrong with honing your applied skills before going to university? I would say it in fact preps one more for university than JC. Why do you think some polytechnic students are allowed direct entry to 2nd year in university? If JC prepares us more for university, why don't they just allow all JC students to admit straight into Year 2??
So, compared to a person who has taken applied stats in polytechnic, and me from JC who took physics, how much more deserving and prepared am I to go to university than a polytechnic student?? I don't get where this chap is coming from, but he obviously has gotten his facts all wrong.
Yes, if JC students do not go to university, they'll end up jobless and useless after A levels. But face it, if you were the university admission team, would you choose an undeserving JC student who screwed up his 'A' levels just so that he won't end out there on the streets begging for food for the rest of his life, or would you choose a straight As polytechnic student already-equipped with relevant skills to continue a more advanced varsity education? So is the university meant to be some charitable organization that admits people so they won't be jobless for the rest of their life, rather than a place to further hone a person's strengths to a fuller potential?
Ok, I sound a tad like I'm putting down myself and other fellow-JC people. But isn't that the reality? At the end of the day, I can only say most JC students only fare slightly better in language as compared to polytechnic students (and it's not even always the case). I don't feel polytechnic students fare any or much worse in maths, science, or other arts subjects (well, depending on whether their module was arts- or science-oriented).
More importantly, polytechnic students have gone through 3 years of varsity education already, and while JC students come from a more rigorous/rigid/rod-learning environment prior to university. I don't see why polytechnic students should be valued any less than JC students, yea?
Yes, I do agree that a place in university should be given to the most deserving people. But please do not quantify a whole group of people blindly as deserving just because they come from a certain background. Open your eyes wide and remove those "colored-glasses" that blind you. There are more deserving people out there than that small little well you are looking out of.
there is actually some truth to his letter to ST. Though perhaps the tone or language may not be correct, but i don't disagree to his ideas.
ReplyDeleteI don't think he really means that JC student are more deserving of a place in uni than poly students, but rather, they deserve priority because of the curriculum.
you may also be too quick to put that there are substantial number of poly students in dean's list. there are also many students, poly or JC who drop out of uni.
ultimately university should never take in more poly students than JC students. It's not about capabilities or who's more deserving. It's because this type of education system simply cannot be sustained because of logic and the cost involved. If you are planning the education system in sg, you want the majority of capable students to get to uni in the most efficient way. for those who chose the poly path, they should be given a chance to pursue a degree, but there must be a cap.
Ultimately, if one intends to pursue a degree, he/she is better off going to JC (unless you're talking about not confident in GP etc, but that's besides the point).
perhaps to add on. By using logic.
ReplyDeleteYou have a poly student and a JC student. Assumption is that we have a way to determine that they are both of the same capacity to learn at a higher level.
Question: If you were the education minister, who would you choose, the JC student or Poly student?
I have already invested $5000 in the poly student compared to $500 for the JC student. I will need to invest another $20,000 more in university education. Both will eventually attain roughly the same level of qualification output. I would choose the JC student definitely. Not because I am biased, but because it's more logical to do so.
I think that's the point that Mr. Lee is trying to drive at.
Yes, I do get the point about the costs involved.
ReplyDeleteBut we can't just look at the costs involved in the prior education they've been put through. Everybody has a choice right from the beginning whether they want to go to JC or poly. If they choose to go to JC, pay a cheaper school fee, and take a bunch of core subjects that are of low value-addedness, so be it. There are people who likewise, recognise that by choosing to go to poly, they are paying a much higher fees, but learning things of value-addedness, and modules that have been tweaked to practical relevance.
I don't think these poly students should be given lesser priority to further education after they have gone through so much to ensure that they built a strong foundation of much more practical relevance. By imposing such a quota, they are actually missing out on many potentials that bring with them practical knowledge rather than a bunch of so-called core modules that are either irrelevant to uni or would be re-taught anyway.
such an interesting debate! =)
ReplyDeletei agree with ah gong but i see it in another manner. i feel that the quota is quite important so that students who did not do as well in olevels has a place to go to and a 2nd chance to succeed in life or move on to uni.
can u imagine what will happen if the university does not set quotas on how many percent of student population shld come from uni or poly, or say if 50% come from uni and 50% come from poly. then top students who did well in olevels are likely to pick the poly education cos it looks much more attractive. through the poly education, one is guaranteed a diploma as compared to a useless alevel cert, one can get to take subjects he/she wants, obtain practical trng that puts the person in better place to enter uni. den the top students would most likely choose the poly routes over jc and take up all the poly places.
when that happens, what should students who did not do as well in olevels do? they cannot enter a poly becos the aggregate is so high, and cannot enter a jc. they will have to end up in ITE. in some sense, the top students in polys are taking away their chance to excel in the practical curriculum and getting at least a diploma.
therefore, i feel it is still important to set a certain cap for university admission so that top students will not end up choosing poly routes over jc and take up too much places in poly. this is to let students who did not do as well in olevels have a chance to continue studies.
if there is a quota set such that universities still take more jc students, then a top student with an ultimate aim to study university will likely pursue the route simply becos they have an advantage and it is the fastest way to do so. this will free up more places in the polys so that others can enter.
with more places, those in ite who did relatively well can also move on to study poly to get a diploma. if the aggregate of polys are set so high, ite students will find it very hard to move into polys to get diploma.
i do agree that we should not stop poly students from entering poly if they did well. so i think the current split of about 80-20 or maybe eventually 70-30 is good enough. this ensures that the jc students still have priority so that students who want to enter uni ulitmately will still choose it and it does not neglect the needs of outstanding poly students.
then those who did not do as well in olve can still enter poly to get their diploma instead of getting deprived of places.