Sunday, February 19, 2012

Oh, Sim Ann, what are you trying to say?

NCMP Yee Jenn Jong from the WP asked in parliament how many scholarships were given to foreigners and how these scholarship holders are tracked to ensure that they fulfil their obligation. He also asked if the quality of foreign scholars has fallen given countries like India and China are more affluent today and can choose to study elsewhere.

Here's a part of a report on answer from Sim Ann who is the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Education:

"She offered an indicator of how well foreign scholarship
holders perform:
Around 45 per cent complete their undergraduate studies with a
second-upper class honours or better; only 32 per cent of Singaporeans do as
well.
" - Straits Times, "
Foreign scholars closely tracked", 18 Feb 2011.[Link]


She was trying to say the foreign scholars we attract are of some quality in her answer to MP Yee - actually not too reassuring since 55% of foreign scholars get 2nd lower or worse . Actually there are better ways to answer Vee's question. Since he was asking about whether foreign scholars fulfil their obligation to work locally, all she needs to do is give us numbers to show that most of them do stay in Singapore to work after they graduate. If she can't give the numbers, it shows that the govt doesn't bother to track these scholars. In terms of scholastic performance, all she needed to do is show us the GPA of these students in the past few years to show there is no fall in standard and what GPA is required for them to retain their scholarship.

However, she chose to use statistics that show that foreigners are better than Singaporeans to answer the question. Maybe she is not aware of the sensitivities that exists among ordinary Singaporeans or the deep unhappiness over using tax payers money to fund the education of foreigners or the persistent suspicion that our elites have this elitist belief that their grand vision is held back by the untalented ordinary Singaporeans whom they don't appreciate.

What is she trying to say? Having foreign scholars is okay so long as SIngaporeans do worse than these scholars? It is a good thing Singaporeans cannot compete? Surely, a foreign scholar with an all expenses paid scholarship, competing against Singaporeans who sometimes have to take up part-time jobs like giving tuition[Like this feller] to make ends meet has an advantage and the difference in outcome merely reflects the unlevel playing field the PAP govt created. What about the NS men who had to run around in the field for 2 years before they restart their rusty academic engines - surely this looks very unfair to them.  Even if they are really better, Singaporeans are suppose to thank the govt for making their lives more difficult by this artificially induced competition?  What does this say about our education system at the primary, secondary, JC level? We put our children through such a tough education system with a complex chessboard style streaming system and the much celebrated "Singapore maths" only to have them lose to the competition at the tertiary level?

There are various interpretations of what Sim Ann is trying to say....and most of them are negative and running down Singaporeans wasn't even necessary to answer MP Yee's question....it doesn't even answer Yee's question since the foreign scholars are not affected by NS which takes half the Singaporeans away from their studies then put them back after a 2 year break. This is a lesson on how not to answer a question. The answer comes with a lot of emotional baggage, shows the bias in govt  for these foreign scholars and deepens the resentment for what the PAP govt is doing.

83 comments:

Anonymous said...

Came across this post recently on Facebook. I think its a very appropriate reflection of PAP's treatment of foreigners vs Singaporeans:

The Goatherd and the Wild Goats

A Goatherd, driving his flock from their pasture at eventide, found some Wild Goats mingled among them, and shut them up in a cave together with his own for the night.

The next day it snowed very hard, so that the Goatherd could not take the herd to their usual feeding places, but was obliged to keep them inside the cave. He gave his own goats just enough food to keep them alive, but fed the wild goats more abundantly, hoping that by doing so, they would stay with him and join his herd.

When the snow thawed, the Goatherd led them all out to feed, and the Wild Goats scampered away as fast as they could to the mountains. The Goatherd scolded them for their ingratitude in leaving him, when during the storm he had taken more care of them than of his own herd.

One of the Wild Goats, turning about, said to him: “That is the very reason why we are so cautious; for if you yesterday treated us better than the Goats you have had so long, it is plain also that if others came after us, you would in the same manner prefer them to ourselves.”

Moral: Don’t sacrifice old citizens for new FT pets.

Amused said...

Is the 32 percent local scholars or does it include non scholars?

Anonymous said...

These papist are a confused lots. Their party ideology and policies are in sharp contradictions to the needs and wishes of Singaporeans. So they have to fudge their public comments to both please the public and to be inline with party ideology and policies - an impossibility.

sgcynic said...

"She offered an indicator of how well foreign scholarship
holders perform: Around 45 per cent complete their undergraduate studies with a
second-upper class honours or better; only 32 per cent of Singaporeans do as
well." If she comparing foreign scholars with Singaporean ones? Otherwise it is alarming if the figures are for foreign scholars vs Singaporean students in general.

"If she can't give the numbers, it shows that the govt doesn't bother to track these scholars." More likely, the figures are bad, so they cannot be divulged.

Anonymous said...

Sim Ann long sold her soul to the devil. She herself admitted that she joined politics (i.e. the PAP) because it would be "smooth-sailing". If not, she would not have done so at all. She'll dump the party in a minute when the going gets rough.

Anonymous said...

Despite Sim Ann not knowing "how not to answer a question" as Lucky Tan put it, she had won the last election against even a Presidential material like Tan Jee Say! And with a respectable 60% votes!

And what's the use of being able to answer questions the way Lucky Tan wanted if you cannot win elections?

And also what's the use of even winning over 60% votes as opposition candidate and later got exposed by allegations and lost MP seat?

In whatever things people do, including blogging, make sure do what really matters for a desired outcome.

Anonymous said...

"In whatever things people do, including blogging, make sure do what really matters for a desired outcome."
Anon 19/2/12 11:24

And also "not do things" that has a undesirable outcome or no outcome.

Anonymous said...

A desired outcome also may not be what really matters.

So do or not do to ensure what really matters.

Anonymous said...

Come on lah Lucky. How many people these days even wants to be bonded by our government?

Have you ever asked yourself one simple question. Why are there so many bond breakers (uncountable) in the Brotherhood?

Maybe they know something that so many of these so called "elites" will never ever know even if they can lead ten life times.

Its best for a man not to eat out of the hand of the state like a dog. It is best to be a self made man even if it is impossibly difficult. That if you must know Lucky is the real education that no university can ever teach a man.

Anonymous said...

"...it doesn't even answer Yee's question since the foreign scholars are not affected by NS which takes half the Singaporeans away from their studies then put them back after a 2 year break."
Lucky Tan

But this NS issue is many years already and getting worse! How come not serious enough to affect at least 60% mandate for PAP?

Anonymous said...

A true patriot never takes anything from the state. He makes his own way like a climber to the very top with his wits and by relying on his resourcefulness. That in itself is the greatest education that life can impart to a man.

You take one of these so called super scholars and put them next to one of those brotherhood chappies and its like comparing a F-16 with a WW 1 biplane, outclassed, outperformed and outflanked. No basis for even a comparison. And yet we are all led to believe these scholars are the real elites. Dream on.

Anonymous said...

Knn I dont know what to say!

Anonymous said...

"She offered an indicator of how well foreign scholarship holders perform: Around 45 per cent complete their undergraduate studies with a second-upper class honours or better; only 32 per cent of Singaporeans do as
well."
- Straits Times, "Foreign scholars closely tracked", 18 Feb 2011.

This is a BIG WRONG in the comparison.

Comparing
% of foreign scholarship holders getting 2nd upper honour & above

versus

% of Singaporeans getting the same 2nd upper honour & above

is like comparing apple with orange.

This is because scholarships are given to foreign scholars who should have meet minimum requirement of the scholarship (this requirement is not transparent, it is not made public)
whereas
her statement in mentioning Singaporeans
means
any Singaporeans studying in local universities; these Singaporeans include non-scholarship Singaporeans (majority) and scholarship Singaporeans (minority).

There is no basic in the comparison.

Instead, the comparison should be

what is the

% of foreigner scholarship holders achieving 2nd class upper honour & above

versus

% of Singaporeans scholarship holders achieving 2nd class upper honour & above

in the same period?


Extend from this, another question to ask is

what is the

% of foreigners who are not under scholarships and achieve 2nd upper honour & above

versus

% of Singaporeans who are not under scholarships and achieve 2nd upper honour

in the same period ?


The next detail question to ask is

what is the frequency distribution of

foreigners who achieve
pass degree,
pass with merit,
3rd class honour,
2nd class lower honur,
2nd class upper honour
1st class honour

versus

Singaporeans who achieve
pass degree,
pass with merit,
3rd class honour,
2nd class lower honur,
2nd class upper honour
1st class honour

in the same period ?

This data is to further breakdown into various faculties and departments.


After asking all these questions,
we have to ask is
since she was a scholar who had done very well academically,
read economics in university,
was a high ranking senior public servant,
how could she have made mistake in the comparison that is wrong whether from the view of statistics or common sense?

Anonymous said...

It seems like 55% of the foreign students on Singapore government scholarship are quite average academically. The selection process is not rigorous enough, I guess.

As a Singaporean, I know how difficult it is to land a scholarship. I definitely expect foreign scholars to do much better than 45%. I believe if 2000 scholarships are offered to local students, we could do better than 45%.

I wonder if government should consider calling it sponsorship instead of scholarship if the percentage of good honours remain low for foreign scholars.

Anonymous said...

Yes, why would we need to use our taxpayers' money to fund the studies of foreign academic talents. If they are so talented, let their own countries fund them. And if the other countries don't, let it be.

Anonymous said...

"...how could she have made mistake in the comparison that is wrong whether from the view of statistics or common sense?
Anon 19/2/12 12:39

Does it matter that "YOU THINK" how could or whether she have made a mistake or not?

Unless you make yourself matter, who are YOU?

Anonymous said...

Over-reliance on the Party Against People is bad for Singapore.
The Party Against People is politically bankrupt.
Out of ideas and ideals.
Driven only by a love for money and profit.

Their vision of Singapore is really the vision of one man.
A very old man.
Who has admitted that he does not understand the younger Singaporeans.

Anonymous said...

I definitely expect foreign scholars to do much better than 45%. I believe if 2000 scholarships are offered to local students, we could do better than 45%.
Anon 19/2/12 12:46

Not really lah. I think there is a quota for scholarships for local and foreign students.

So the foreign scholars are the best available ones for their quota lah.

Remember, best available is not necessary the best, but maybe better than the locals. And don't forget there is a foreigner quota that must be filled.

Anonymous said...

How come she doesn't factor in the fact that Singaporeans have to put up with compulsory ECA, school donation drives, having to compulsory study two languages and not to mention waste 2 years (used to be 2.5 years) doing national service? HEY here's an idea - force all the foreign students to do NS first and waste 1 year asking strangers for school donations on Saturday before being eligible for their scholarship!!!!!

Veritas said...

There is one more important thing that disadvantages Singaporeans.

PAP has take out F Math in JC. Even with F Math, PRC are 2 years ahead of us in terms of Math, without, its even worse.

This is the reason Singaporeans cannot compete in engineering and math in university.

This is one of the reason I oppose FT policy. Without FT students, MOE has to thing carefully the implications when they tried to rig our basic education syllabus.

With FT, they don care. MOE can do whatever they want to damn our students and eventually, they can still find qualified candidate oversea to fill requirements of university.

Today, I heard in some cases 80-90% NIE Chinese language program are FT. Without FT, MOE has to find ways to improve our students' mother tongue in order to have a steady stream of qualified candidate in NIE.

With FT, they don care.

Anonymous said...

Here in Japan, there is no National Service conscription nor reservists for any Japanese males or females.

They're able to focus on building their careers, university education, work, hobbies and retirement.

With regard to university education, the japanese are pretty certain of graduating as here in Japan, once you gained admission into university, it is very likely you will graduate. So it seems many japanese youths do not really pursue with rigor their uni studies. They're more inerested in working after graduation as the curriculum often changes.

More than 53% of japanese women in Japan has a 4-year degree and many mothers here have a Masters. Japan has the most educated mothers among the G8 countries.

The quota university admission in Singapore is creating a situation of uber dependency on foreign lobour in almost all aspects of the Singaporean economy.

Male Koreans serve 2 years of national service. They could opt how they would liek to do this. They could serve after high school. Or after graduating from university. They could also opt to split the 2 years and do take 2 years off uni to complete their NS. These 2 years could be spread into 2 discrete one year during their 4 year university studies. So, you could do one year NS in your freshman year, return and study for 3 years and take a year off do complete the last year of NS and then return for Year 4 of your final year university studies.

The key is flexibility.

Winking Doll said...

It is now year 2012. I guess what Fox wrote in year 2008 about the lack of transparency and accountability from the PAP government over foreign bond breakers (who don't even pay up their financial penalty) still holds true.

http://next-stop-wonderland.blogspot.com/2008/05/bond-breakers.html

Anonymous said...

Why have National Service and reservists for male Singaporeans when it seems that we're not protecting the country but rather the assets of the rich people in our country?

It is really unlucky to be born a male Singaporean in this world and in this lifetime.

Singapore sucks ass. It is not exactly many Singaporeans' cup of tea, these days.

Winking Doll said...

Also worth reading...
Fox's blog entry on NS and the FT sportsman vs the Singapore citizen sportsman. I guess the system is still the same.

http://next-stop-wonderland.blogspot.com/2009/12/st-forum-letting-athletes-train-in-lieu.html

IMHO, unless 60+% of Singapore citizens wake up from their la-la-land and reflect their concerns in their ballots instead of No Action Talk Only complaints, nothing will change for all Singaporeans. Lucky will continue to write about the same issues election after election.

Richard said...

When I first saw this report in the papers yesterday morning, 2 impressions came to mind:

(1) if these foreigner scholars are really talented, we should be talking about close to 100% completing their undergrad studies with second-upper honours or better! That only less than half made it just goes to show how slip-shod the pap government has been when they merrily handed out these scholarships;

(2) Sim Ann's use of the word "only" when referring to the 32% Singaporeans with second-upper and above really gets my goat. Come on, if it's an apple for apple comparison, ie. comparing a foreign scholar with a Singapore scholar (like her and other pap elite minions?), that's just fine. But you are talking about the average ordinary JC girl or just-completed NS boy who's up against an elite foreign student very well provided for by the pap government? Where is Sim Ann's sense of being a Singaporean? In fact, I daresay that our 32% local kids are doing very well vis-a-vis the very-well-provided-for 45% foreigners!

All in all, this nugget of information has left me seething with anger as a father of a son who is now serving his NS. In between his service commitments, he has to look for an overseas university because the local unis have no place for him, even though his results are filled with As. Even after securing a place, the next big hurdles to clear are NS deferment and study financing. And, yeah, all this while the foreigners are having it good with the pap government playing Santa Claus, dishing out $25k p.a. for each foreign undergrad.

The manner in which the pap government is mollycoddling foreigners stood in stark contrast to the way it treats its sons and daughters of the land. 2 words come to mind - HYPOCRISY. BETRAYAL.

Anonymous said...

hi lucky

on another topic, Msia's cpf = epf dividend rate is trending up, till now 6%, our singapore at now 3-4%....

we hire bunch of scholars, cant they do better to beat the our neighbour msia??!!!

source

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/2/19/nation/20120219135718&sec=nation

Malaysia can!!!

Anonymous said...

Is Sim Ann a Pro Alien Politician from the Party Against People?

Anonymous said...

Bad news Mr Lucky. Majority of LOCAL FEMALEs agrees with Sim Ann.

Anonymous said...

I certainly don't want to defend Sim Ann's comments. But something internal in your post jumped out.

Do you really believe that a foreign student studying at university in Singapore -- even a foreign student on scholarship -- has an *advantage* over local students? A student away from home and family, in a city whose citizens are increasingly hostile to their very existence, who quite likely struggles with colloquial English usage. A student who may well be burdened with enormous family expectations, if from China likely the only child sent away from home with a mandate to succeed and not fail the family. That person has an *advantage*, in your view, over a local Singaporean who may well have home cooked meals and fresh laundry on weekend, who is a train ride away from family and friends, and who has succeeded in an education system designed to lead them to the university doors.

Now it's true a local uni student who has to work part time has extra pressure. So it's well and good you draw attention to that pressure. And NS may make the academic engine rusty, as you say. But the conceit of ignoring the possibility that the foreign student is under a different pressure, of possibly equal or greater weight, is remarkable.

The truth is that an international student body could -- and should -- increase the value and experience of tertiary education for Singaporeans and foreigners alike. But living here we become so steeped in meritocracy that everything becomes seen as a zero-sum game.

Veritas said...

////
The truth is that an international student body could -- and should -- increase the value and experience of tertiary education for Singaporeans and foreigners alike. But living here we become so steeped in meritocracy that everything becomes seen as a zero-sum game.
////

Please stop your lies. Singaporeans are not against real talent. I support 1000% more than you if PAP were to import Nobel prize laurates, field medalist...etc

Right now, the situation is racism against Singaporeans. In many courses, PAP rig our basic education syllabus. everything you can think off, to ensure foreigners have an edge over us.

Singaporeans are not allowed to take F Maths, while PRCs are 2-3 years more advance than us in maths.

Singaporeans males serves NS.

PRC given up to 1.5 years of English enrichment before they study in local uni, so as to give them unfair advantages. During that 1.5 years, they can slowly take some year one modules. Singaporeans has to take the full blow of academic load.

......
Many PHD program does not even has Singaporeans.

Close to 90% of YST conservatory are foreigners....etc

I see nothing short of PAP's discrimination and racsim against Singaporeans.

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...19/2/12 12:55
Does it matter that "YOU THINK" how could or whether she have made a mistake or not?

Unless you make yourself matter, who are YOU?"

It matters. So that people will not get hookwinked by one-sided picture (self-interest ?).

And if it is a mistake, why give or say it out in the first place.

Jessie said...

@ veritas

You seem to have a firm ground that a lot of foreigners are taking up the scholarships in Singapore and a lot of them which you deem , are not even suppose to be even there.

My question is
"Where do you get your statisics from ?
Have you asked yourself , in order to attract nobel prized calibre kind of students do you know how much benefits are countries around the world offering ? vs what singapore has to offer ? Let me tell you most of them have free tution fees and are most importantly not bonded. And in comparison we are still trying to bond them and hoping they will turn citizens why ? thats becuase we do not have these types of talent.And where are you getting your PHD data from ? care to share?

Do you know how easy it is to gain entry into the local universities nows a days ? at my tipe it was like top 5% of the poly cohort and now its like top 20% to 30% of the ranking can get in.

I think at the end of the day its how much you can prove your worth. Stop complaining . Learn from them and overcome them. The truth is we need to learn from our fellow talents in order to move forward

Anonymous said...

To 19/2/12 20:44

The point is: Local students are disadvantaged against foreign students, especially males.

Producing statistics on PHD and the origins of the numbers does not help understand why local students are disadvantaged.

I am very upset with the current situation being in favour of FT.
No amount of "budget" goodies is going to change my view about our Government.

Veritas said...

Re 19/2/12 20:44

Are you a crack pot? Have you read what Sim Ann say? 55% of so call "FT scholar" got 2nd lower and below. In short, PAP are throwing away monies to some very stupid alien.

You are really a goon. You know where I got all my statistic regarding local uni. haha. Many of the student profile are available on uni website.

////
I think at the end of the day its how much you can prove your worth. Stop complaining . Learn from them and overcome them. The truth is we need to learn from our fellow talents in order to move forward
////

The above passage really shows you are worthless. I think you need to learn alot from FT.

For me, I think FT need to learn from Singaporeans.

What make you assume that those FT are talent and we have to learn from them? Common show me a great scholar among them.

In fact, those racist FT has to learn from us, the most tolerant people in the whole world.

Anonymous said...

Scholarships aside, as it is, only about 40% of A level grads enter the local universities each year(my figures may not be accurate but its abt less than than half). The 60% are either those who are so rich that they go off to a good uni in the US/UK, or the majority that have to go abroad because they cannot qualifiy for a local university.With the easy PR and citizenship, the constant import of talent in the workforce, is there still a need for MOE to set aside a mandate that 20% of the local uni's intake has to be foreigners? Especially when you know these foreigners don't really consider Signapore a first choice education destination. If MOE wants internalisation in the classroom, exchange students are already there to fulfill that need. Let more locals into the local universities. We lose alot of the young Singaporeans when they study abroad. They never come back!

Veritas said...

I have written in my blog regarding my former teacher Law Choi Look of NTU EEE.

I like him very much but his 100% FT labs piss me off big time.

I have written on many other labs, YST conservatory...etc Please do your homework.

And one my previous comment, I mention the parity of mathmatical skill of PRC and Singaporeans.

Why I knew it so well? To be direct, I was a passionate MOE math teacher. I have worked beyond my job scope by travelling on my expenses to PRC and Taiwan and buy up many of their pre-uni math book.

And to be frank, MOE piss me off big time. I feel they are damning our students.

With FT, whatever MOE sabotages on the curriculum, they get away with it, because if local students cannot make, they get from a pool 7 billion candidate all over the world.

We need to plug the FT floodgate, so that MOE have no choice, but to train our students properly for uni requirements.

Anonymous said...

"We need to plug the FT floodgate, so that MOE have no choice, but to train our students properly for uni requirements."

And how do we do this?

We vote out the anti-Singaporean party called the Pro Alien Party.

Vote wisely in GE 2016.
Your children's future depends on it.

Anonymous said...

There is no problem as we see that 60.1% of Singaporeans approved of all these.

Anonymous said...

The questions to ask are:

1) Do we have data that is further segmented into Singaporeans, PRs & international students?

Given that education is very highly subsidised, how many international students have gone onto convert to PRs after graduation, and how many PRs have gone onto convert to citizens? And if not, why?

2) NUS/NTU operates on a bell curve system. Certain faculties awarding 1st/2nd/3rd class honours admit candidates with much better results. NUS Business & Chem Engine have a 3 As (A-level) requirement. This could mean that a non-honours student from a more competitive course could have done better than or at least be on par with honours students from less competitive courses (or universities even).

As such, it is difficult to subject a ballpark university-wide figure of 2nd-upper honours students vs non-2nd-upper, to a viable comparison.

3) I notice alot of people complaining about foreigners depriving locals of places in uni. I disagree, as it is (hopefully) not a zero sum game.

What should be asked is: How many local students rejected by NUS/NTU have gone on to obtain honours in their respective universities & whether the universities accepting these rejects are of international standing. If this number is significant, then university admission committees ought to be asking themselves if the international students they are bringing in are indeed more qualified than the local students they have 'displaced'.

I understand many students (esp from poly) who have trouble affording an overseas education are disadvantaged by such a quota. Perhaps there could be a financial scheme where banks offer favourable rates for educational loans for this group of people.

4)In other developed countries, the foreign student community is pretty vibrant, and locals do not feel much of a threat from them, as their local laws curb employment of non-local graduates.

What has the local student community gleaned from the 20% international student population? Does NUS/NTU have such a culture, where strong friendships are forged between locals & non-locals? Have you worked often on joint projects in your CCA with international students? (let's exclude PRs/Malaysians in this case, they've managed to integrate pretty successfully)

On the same note, I don't think Singapore has to worry about losing Singaporeans who have studied abroad. Most will have to return as their families are here, and they will have trouble finding jobs or medical/legal placements abroad.

5) Foreign students usually seem more motivated. If you were away from family obligations, had no financial worries (the difference between what locals & foreigners pay is relatively low in Singapore compared to other developed countries, especially when our tertiary institutions are highly regarded in Asia), and did not partake in any CCAs, the chances of staying focused on your studies would be much higher. Of course I'm not implying that CCAs in NUS/NTU should take low importance, for without these non-academic endeavours, the universities would be less vibrant.

Anonymous said...

There is waste of effort and energy to talk about foreign students' performance and scholarship given to them. NUS and NTU are just interested to be ranked among the top of the world class universities regardless of what rotten systems they are operating. Why foreign students? Why foreign professors? Why Yale-NUS etc joint campus? etc etc. All these have only one aim, that is to be ranked among the top world class universities. If you really want a good education, go to a foreign university that emphasizes in real education and research and not just numbers (papers, foreign students, foreign professors) to be ranked high. Excellence in university research and education is not about ranking to be the top but to be able to produce thinkers who can shape the future of the mankind. Only when a university can produce its original real influential thinkers, it is world class without having to ask for this status. Whether the university is world class or not is what others see it to be, not ranking. After all, there are many rankings and all are subjective. The correct yardstick for world class university is its research output that has impact on mankind and not just number of papers (this is academic pollution) or even citations (again academic pollution if there is no real significant impact). In terms of this, NUS and NTU are very far behind. I am afraid they will never close the gaps because they are still a manpower machine to generate workers for the economy. Because they are still doing only 'sure' commercial valued research which is required by the economy again. Everything is about economy, GDP, nothing more. You can interpret such constraint is actually part of lack of academic freedom in a broad sense. It is all about GDP and money (like the Yale-NUS fundraising. It is about economy, stupid.

Amused said...

The extend of free scholarships given to foreigners at the expense of local students is unheard of outside of Singapore. Further, no justification has been given to support this program. For example, you give tax credit to bring manufacturers and jobs to Singapore. What does the free scholarship bring?

I predict that they will drastically cut down the program in the coming years because it is indefensible.

Anonymous said...

http://www.tremeritus.com/2012/02/19/moe-scholar-from-prc-there-are-more-dogs-than-humans-in-singapore/

So this is the kind of 'high quality' scholarship-talent-material we're talking about here.

A chinese professor was expelled from BJ university when he recently went on TV and call all the Hongkongers are British-running-Dogs.

Now a chinese student on our scholarship courtesy who tout he has 'great attitude' is calling singaporean uncles 'barking dogs'.

Why do we need this kind of 'locusts' in Singapore who come and suck my resources, taxpayer money, and my children a precious space in university?

Why don't Sim Ann come clean about the real facts?

Anonymous said...

23.09 I disagreed that many students who went overseas returned. I am not sure whether my circle of friends is representative,mso far those who went overseas, none has returned so far. Many of them are married with foreign spouses and none will ever return

Anonymous said...

Chinese get very touchy when they are equated with dogs. They like to view themselves as victims of racism by pointing out to the "No dogs & Chinese allowed" from the distant past.

Yet, the moment the mainlander Chinese perceive themselves to be strong, their first instinct is to reveal their own racist tendencies by calling others as 'dogs'.

Anonymous said...

"Have you asked yourself , in order to attract nobel prized calibre kind of students do you know how much benefits are countries around the world offering ? vs what singapore has to offer ? Let me tell you most of them have free tution fees and are most importantly not bonded."

Anon 19/2/12 20:44

No they don't offer much benefits. In fact, all they do is to set up a conducive enviroment that encourages creativity, learning and the excitement to succeed.

The entry bar to such uni is also set very high. Unless you are that good, you won't enter.

Vast majority of Singaporeans who attend such colleges in US or UK pay full fees, either by their own pockets, or scholarships paid for by Singaporean taxpayers.

Those top varsities don't go around throwing money, begging foreign students to join them. It is the other way round, where foreign students line up around the block to plead for a chance to join.

Anonymous said...

I still don't understand why they have so much money for foreigners but no money to give transport concession to our Poly students.

The said...

The fact that they are scholars - shouldn't the figure be 100% or close to 100% for those getting firsts or second uppers?

Anonymous said...

" ... but no money to give transport concession to our Poly students."

We may need a lot more Opposition Members of Parliament to make that happen.

Anyhow, poly students can't vote right?

Anonymous said...

Why is she comparing a scholar funded by Singaporean taxpayers with ordinary Singaporean student? Ain't these scholars supposed to bt th creme de la creme and only 45% got second class honours? Does that mean all Singaporeans who got second class and above deserve a scholarship?? Surely if a foreigner who 55% fall below second class honours deserve a scholarship, surely all Singaporean uni students deserve scholarhsip since so many of us got second class honours?

Anonymous said...

I wonder what the definition of 'govt scholarship" here?
Did Yee Jenn Jong ask for it?

There are so many different kinds of scholarship floating around, some camauflouge as part corporate(GLC) part govt. So does that all count? If not, maybe the % is even higher.

But one thing for sure. Singaporeans really have to wake up. They are doing this only for their long term benefits..to cultivate these 'contacts/assets/talents' however you want to call it, so that when they do leave and go back to their countries, one day they become useful to the PAP when they become princelings. Nothing more...it is to help keep PAP in power. You think they are here to think about your children...lmao.
That's what our taxpayers monies go to.
And people stupidly chase for these degrees, put their children through stress, pschylogical torture, tuition etc etc...just so they can keep in the rat's wheel, while others are going by the back doors on the name of 'talents'...lol

Anonymous said...

Don't think Lucky Tan is being fair. Some of what Sim Ann's said quoted out of context. As far as I can see, Sim Ann answered Yee's question candidly.

It is no secret that the Government bring these foreign students in on scholarships is to expand our manpower pool, so that employers and investors would want to stay in Singapore. Indirectly this create jobs for Singaporeans. The idea is clearly not aim to give foreigners a free education. One has to look at the macro picture and not just the micro one.

The Government has already pledged last August to increase 2000 university places over the next few years will all go towards Singaporeans.

Some recycling old criticisms at the Government... move on already.

Anonymous said...

Singapore needs foreigners as scholars, no question about that. And we have to take what is best available to us.

But when the best available is not necessary the best, or become worse later, that's where problems arise.

Apply not just to foreign scholars but also job seekers or even political leaders on both sides.

Anonymous said...

I think humans, even if paid millions, have little or no control over what and who is best available.

That's why there is such a thing as luck or fate.

If you are lucky, you get the best.

The Pariah said...

That's Ms Sim Ann's version of Ms Ting Pei Ling's "I dunno what to say" - viz, giving a REPLY that is a NON-ANSWER. That too is a PAP Art.

Well, such is the "top quality" of our new PAP MPs slated for bigger roles in Government as political office holders .....

What more do I need to say to my 60% fellow Singaporeans who voted for PAP in GE 2011?

Ng Eng Hou said...

The government likes to run down on Singaporeans, because again and again, we still fall for this belief that Singapore can't live without MIW. Our property prices will drop if MIW is being voted out of power. Goh Chok Tong even said many years ago that Singaporean men are kiasi (scare died), kia boh (scare wife) and kia cheng hu (scare government)!

Sad To Say, Our Past Behavior Deserves This Kind Of Superb Treatment From MIW!

Anonymous said...

@ ANON: 20/2/12 13:21
"Some recycling old criticisms at the Government... move on already."

We'll move on AFTER the criticisms have been adequately addressed.

How about recent legal action against bloggers?
Can we say "Some recycling old criticisms at the bloggers... move on already." ??

Anonymous said...

As a parent I believe ALL our NS Men should be given free scholarship and bursaries in local University before any foreigner is given a free scholarship. If not, why serve NS, risking our limb and life.

Anonymous said...

As long as the prata party feels that foreigners needed to starve off enrollment from locals, Its not bothered abt using taxpayers money to realize this aim. Singaporen first policy is a fallacy and The prata A party obviously believed an intellectual educated class comprising of new foreigners further this cause of maintaining its hegemony. People like sim think their high pay cansend their offspring overseas so talk with indifference

Anonymous said...

To anon 21/2/2012 13:21

Clearly commentator is pap troll.

"quoted out of context"
"Indirectly this create jobs for Singaporeans."
"Some recycling old criticisms ..move on already."

Motherhood statements, but no micro solutions.
So what you created 2000 seats to local students. Are these people getting free sponsorships & scholarships?

There's no move on until you account for every dollars of taxpayers money spent not on Singaporeans, but on foreign students. Where're the explicit benefits so far?
Just come clean with your facts.

Anonymous said...

If this is a school exam Ms Sim Ann will get a big ZERO for totally missing the question.

Anonymous said...

But Ms Sim Ann gets full marks;
from her political masters;
for avoiding the question.

Ms Sim Ann;
Do you answer to your constituency who voted for you?
Or
Do you answer only to your own political party?

Anonymous said...

I have seen a girl from Vietnam who got a scholarship from NTU. She is rich and not even bother to work in Singapore although she has been offered PR soon after she has completed the study. I discussed with my friend who has many years working in Vietnam. He gave me the answer: The Vietnam agency appointed by NTU to distribute the scholarship gave some of it to the related people who are able to complete the study but not necessary who are very smart.
I think that partly explain why the honours degree % of foreigner who got our scholarship is not as high as most of us have expected.

Anonymous said...

Sim Ann, can you explain why after so much money is spent on the foreign "talent", we have one "talent" branding Singaporean as dogs? Explain pls.

Anonymous said...

"Sim Ann, can you explain why after so much money is spent on the foreign "talent", we have one "talent" branding Singaporean as dogs? Explain pls."
Anon 20/2/12 21:43

As Anon 20/2/12 14:00 had said, it depends on luck lah.

If got this type of foreign talent, just our bad luck lah.

Luck cannot control one lah, even if paid million dollars to control it, right or not?

Anonymous said...

Sim Ann as parl sec of MOE should know better than to provide such statistics. Her statement is in fact flawed.

It is invalid for to compare the foreign scholarship holders with the local general student population.

All scholarship holders whether local or foreign are selected based on a more vigorous selection regime. That goes without saying.

So, if Sim Ann wants to make a statistically correct comparison she should have compared apple with apple i.e. foreign scholarship holders with local scholarship holders.

I am quite sure if you use her method of comparison in other countries, you would get the same result as you are comparing an elite group with a group of mixed capabilities from scholars to those who barely made it into uni!

But, I am hardly surprised by the way she spoke as my impression of Sim Ann is that she is in some respects an 'air head'. I got this impression when I heard her gave a speech soon after the GE - it was one that is full of sweet nothing because in it she said nothing that meant anything substantive or meaningful.

Anonymous said...

But why Tan Jee Say team lost to Sim Ann team in GE 2011?

Some more it was lost 40 : 60, which was not a narrow loss.

And some more Tan Jee Say lost again in PE 2011. And it was worse, he got only 25% in PE 2011.

Tan Jee Say no luck?

Anonymous said...

"And some more Tan Jee Say lost again in PE 2011. And it was worse, he got only 25% in PE 2011.

Tan Jee Say no luck?"

Another airhead!

Anonymous said...

Anon 20/2/12 22:52 said something very meaningful and substantive. Definitely not airhead.

Every opposition must therefore think and analyse and overcome it. If not, no use to be opposition.

Anonymous said...

Does this means if there is a war...not ONLY must i defend the farktard PAPies...i must also defend with my life these other parasites PAP bring in...

Sorry...i don't intend to lift a finger...if i have to die...i make sure everyone of the above dies with me too.

MisFITs-No-More said...

So - we have a Vice Principal that enjoy prostitution.

We have Princpals/Educators who enjoy Pornography.

We have Educators who have molested and harrassed our school children.

We have Educators who put hidden cameras in the school toilets.

We have Universities who allowed these sub standard & overflowing of scholars on singaporeans' taxpayer money, not to mention deprive our childrens a school place.

We have a System that purposefully set these quota because the MP Lawrence Wong thinks that some people should just eat dog food. Not everyone can be and should be a university talent.

We have a System that keeps depriving and demolishing the locals their aspiration and pride so that in another 20yrs time, the govt can say - we have to import these foreign talents because we don't have enough singaporean talents (of university level) to do the jobs.

ONE WORD.

MOE - You have fucking let the whole SIngaporeans down.

I am tired of your discrimination and consistently screwing my and the future generations of our future. Whoever is the MOE HEAD - you deserve to step down until you account to everyone your misdeeds!!

Anonymous said...

What rubbish have we brought to singapore, threatening singaporeans with knife. And paying for him to study here, give him food and lodging and PR , followed by job and then citizenship without NS he probably would not want it and likely to go to germany or home to further career.

We should sent him back to Germany who is his current employer so he can personally experience the friendly nazism against foreign trash like him, before he gets so ungrateful about Singaporean's hospitality and unthinking generosity.

AhGong said...

MOE Head is a person by the surname Ms Ho.

Think related to a certain Ho in another GLC.

Of course, hand to heart, she is there on her own merits lah..

Anonymous said...

All along we know PAP treat foreigners better than Singaporeans. The reason why Singaporean
males are made to serve NS is because they are cheap labour to protect all the beloved foreigners and the PAP elites as well as their assets they have accumulated. Sim Ann's answer only serve to confirm what Singaporeans already know. The Ministers appointed are specially selected to serve the interests of the party not the citizens.

Anonymous said...

We give them the scholarships, they insult us as dogs + others. They think that we are the fools. Indeed, we are the fools.

Search Engine Optimization Solution said...

nice discussion going here.

Anonymous said...

It is very true. I was appalled when recently spoke to a lady who is working in Ipoh as a pharmacist telling me that she is coming to SG to study her PhD in Duke university. Best of all, she just applied through Internet, got herself a placement after interview; all her studies and lodging paid for! When asked, if she needs to be bonded. She shrugged and said no. So easy, even she herself is still in unbelief! I politely smiled at her but my mind was full of questions why scholarships are given so freely to foreigners!!!!

Anonymous said...

Anon 21/2/12 23:34

Maybe not enough Singaporeans are qualified or want to apply for this type of scholarships.

So naturally they give the vacancies to the foreigners lah. And if Malaysian and Chinese, maybe lagi welcome and even given citizenship if she apply!

Anonymous said...

The point is not about who has an advantage. If you want a scholarship from a foreign country you should be *excellent*. You should AT LEAST a 2nd upper, a very mediocre grade, no matter how handicapped you were. The question is not whether 45% is high but why it is not 100%.

SG scholars who get sent overseas have to meet certain bars or else their scholarship will be forfeited, so why does this not apply to foreigners?

I suspect the reason is because the foreigners who do get recruited are of a very low quality. Normally the very top tier will go to USA and the 2nd tier will stay at top universities at their home country. Not many want to come to SG in the first place, and by forcibly casting our nets wide we are only able to recruit average or slightly above average students.

Anonymous said...

As for the people complaining about postgrad programs monopolized by foreigners, just so you know a PhD from most depts in NUS isn't very valuable (NTU is essentially scrap paper). It will not land you a job at any of the local univs, nor any credible research university around the world. Your options upon graduation is essentially to take a non-PhD job or return home to a far lower ranked university to teach.

This is normal: most good universities hire 'upwards' -- ask any of your NUS lecturers. (And yes, I am an academic.)

Hence a PhD from NUS or NTU only makes sense if you are a foreigner and want to go back home to work; if you are a local and want to work at NUS or NTU you need a fairly strong degree from a top research univ in US.

On the other hand, if that student was only able to make it to NUS for his postgrad, I won't miss him if he leaves. I'm more concerned with convincing the good SG students who could get into top US postgrad programs to return --- those are the real local talents.

Anonymous said...

Lucky,

In today's Voices in TODAY,MOE has now clarified that Ms Sim Ann gave the wrong information as 45% represented all the international students,and not only scholars.The figure given for scholar is now 67%.So it is question now is whether the 32% figure given was also for local students,or local scholars.I think the opposition MPs should try to get an answer.

Anonymous said...

Hi lucky

if you check the hansard carefully, Sim Ann did not use the word ONLY.

regards
Objective

crapcrab said...

I think Sim Ann's comment is not a fair comparison. She should compare with the percentage of foreign scholarship holders with 2nd upper honours and above against singaporean scholarship holders with 2nd upper honours and above.

Anonymous said...

Hi, as of what i know, those FT who are invited by Sponsorship if under performs, are asked to leave.

i am not sure if the 55% are asked to leave or pay back etc...