ST: "Polytechnic grads put squeeze on university places"
-
Did remember, cap on foreign student intake is 20%
As for record no of applicants, pls lor... ppl can apply to all the 3 uni lor... so exactly how many ppl really applied (at least to one uni) no one really knows
-
Originally posted by sbst275:
Did remember, cap on foreign student intake is 20%
As for record no of applicants, pls lor... ppl can apply to all the 3 uni lor... so exactly how many ppl really applied (at least to one uni) no one really knows
Since when the cap is only 20%? Source? -
Originally posted by FirePig:
Since when the cap is only 20%? Source?
If you were to see SMU's student demo, it's 60% A Lvl, 20% poly, 20% foreigners -
Originally posted by sbst275:
If you were to see SMU's student demo, it's 60% A Lvl, 20% poly, 20% foreigners
That's for SMU only though. NUS and NTU are probably more recognised overseas.If i am not wrong, there is no fixed % quota system for NUS.
-
Originally posted by onlooker123:
Article didn't say how many places in the Uni go to A-level holders vs Poly grads vs Foreign students.
this will never be revealed as it will cause Questions to arise
-
That's right 'A' level cert is equivalent to 'O' level cert in the job market.
what's important whether the tertiary paper is relevant in the job market.
which uni issued the paper is also relevant, for new entrant into the mkt. when you have gained experience in your field, then relevant experience matters.
nonetheless, the degree matters especially when you seek to upgrade your qualifications later in your work-life.
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Why, you of course. If you're dumb enoguh to believe that the number of places, rather than demonstrated ability, should dictate whether one has access to university education, you really ought to be cleaning toilet bowls.Mister Gedanken, do you think the world works that way? You're naive enough to believe that the world allows equal opportunities?
This is the survival of the fittest.
Then, let me give you an example. I have friends that scored 16-17pointers for their L1R4, but failed Mathematics and went into ITE, while people who fare badly for their aggregate averaging around 22-26pointers for their L1R4 are allowed into Polytechnic, what gives?
So does the 16-17pointers seems "dumber" to you, or the 22-26pointers?
Now tell me, does the world gives them equal opportunities? Tsk..
-
Originally posted by AugoeideS:
Mister Gedanken, do you think the world works that way? You're naive enough to believe that the world allows equal opportunities?
This is the survival of the fittest.
Then, let me give you an example. I have friends that scored 16-17pointers for their L1R4, but failed Mathematics and went into ITE, while people who fare badly for their aggregate averaging around 22-26pointers for their L1R4 are allowed into Polytechnic, what gives?
So does the 16-17pointers seems "dumber" to you, or the 22-26pointers?
Now tell me, does the world gives them equal opportunities? Tsk..
Now we all know that EMS is very important. IF I get someone with
EL - A2
SCI - A2
MATHS - F9
against
EL - C5
SCI - C5
MATHS - C6
I would take the latter, because there is a chance the former might fail the maths module twice and be thrown out within a year. And having good grades don't not mean the person is smart, he might just be a good memoriser. I have a classmate whose english is A. He can't present even his own oral script. Everyone took 3 minutes, he took 15minutes and stammered alot.
-
Originally posted by Agenda:
Now we all know that EMS is very important. IF I get someone with
EL - A2
SCI - A2
MATHS - F9
against
EL - C5
SCI - C5
MATHS - C6
I would take the latter, because there is a chance the former might fail the maths module twice and be thrown out within a year. And having good grades don't not mean the person is smart, he might just be a good memoriser. I have a classmate whose english is A. He can't present even his own oral script. Everyone took 3 minutes, he took 15minutes and stammered alot.
Another way you can look at it is the fact that there is also a possibility that the latter can fail or do badly in his or her EMS related modules in polytechnic studies.
As you know, everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses, a person who is not lingustically inclined would not go for law, literature, medial journalism related degree or diploma, but rather choose others that could use their strengths.
Conversely, a person who fare badly for Maths but scored well for English and Sciences can still do well in courses that do not requires advanced or intricate understanding of mathematical skills. If there's no mathematics-related module in the course curriculum, how else can that weakness adversely affects one's result in polytechnic for that matter?
Like you've said. You would choose the latter who is an average joe, rather than the former who have demonstrated ability for English and Science. So i guess it contradicts with what Mister Gedanken had implied.
As far as i remembered, the whole education system is just like a bell-curve distribution. You just can't have everyone smacked right up at the upper percentile, it'll ruin the economy and social construct of the community.
-
i dun think it's the poly grads who are stretching the seams but the foreign students intake numbers
look left right front back of u in class, how many are foreign students?
and think about why ur fren was unable to make it into uni with u -
Originally posted by FireIce:
i dun think it's the poly grads who are stretching the seams but the foreign students intake numbers
look left right front back of u in class, how many are foreign students?
and think about why ur fren was unable to make it into uni with u
blame it on the worship on "foreign talents" and add the love from SPGs on average angmoh joes. -
Originally posted by AugoeideS:
Mister Gedanken, do you think the world works that way? You're naive enough to believe that the world allows equal opportunities?
This is the survival of the fittest.
Then, let me give you an example. I have friends that scored 16-17pointers for their L1R4, but failed Mathematics and went into ITE, while people who fare badly for their aggregate averaging around 22-26pointers for their L1R4 are allowed into Polytechnic, what gives?
So does the 16-17pointers seems "dumber" to you, or the 22-26pointers?
Now tell me, does the world gives them equal opportunities? Tsk..
How exactly is survival of the fittest not the same as equal opportunities?
The 'fitter' ones merely make better uses of that 'equal opportunity'.
-
we have ourselves to blame (partly) for the influx of foreigners...
it's a major socio-economic issue...
but then again, competition is good...
our students are taking education for granted, always complain about sch work.....
the foreign students act as a wake up call
time for locals to pull their socks up and continue the rat race...
é€‚è€…ç”Ÿå˜ -
JC students will also need good grades to go to uni... just like poly...
-
Originally posted by eagle:
How exactly is survival of the fittest not the same as equal opportunities?
The 'fitter' ones merely make better uses of that 'equal opportunity'.
You've probably answered your own question.
This equal opportunity could possibly equate to the quota stipulated by the universities for their undergraduate programmes. So technically, everyone could have this equal opportunity of entering universities.True, but what i meant to Mister Gedanken is the brutal truth that not everyone who have demonstrated their ability to study are allow this 'equal opportunity' in a sense, because there is this quota.
Everyone is competing for this limited number of vacancies, henceforth, the survival of the fittest.
As such, am i wrong to say that this quota is a limiting factor dictated by the people up there to ensure that only the best of the best are allowed into the universities?
As such, am i wrong to conclude that the existence of such a limiting factor, are solely not because there is no land space in singapore, nor there are not enough taxpayers money, nor whatsoever other less credible reasons, but the fact that the authorities are in fact, governing the number of people receiving tertiary education (i mean Bachelor and above) such that the bell-curve ratio would not be upset to a point where such qualifications would be deem worthless?
And that's why i said, if any tom, dick and harry can enter universities, who does the blue collar jobs? The degrees will become worthless and everyone would be the same.
-
Originally posted by AugoeideS:
You've probably answered your own question.
This equal opportunity could possibly equate to the quota stipulated by the universities for their undergraduate programmes. So technically, everyone could have this equal opportunity of entering universities.True, but what i meant to Mister Gedanken is the brutal truth that not everyone who have demonstrated their ability to study are allow this 'equal opportunity' in a sense, because there is this quota.
Everyone is competing for this limited number of vacancies, henceforth, the survival of the fittest.
As such, am i wrong to say that this quota is a limiting factor dictated by the people up there to ensure that only the best of the best are allowed into the universities?
As such, am i wrong to conclude that the existence of such a limiting factor, are solely not because there is no land space in singapore, nor there are not enough taxpayers money, nor whatsoever other less credible reasons, but the fact that the authorities are in fact, governing the number of people receiving tertiary education (i mean Bachelor and above) such that the bell-curve ratio would not be upset to a point where such qualifications would be deem worthless?
And that's why i said, if any tom, dick and harry can enter universities, who does the blue collar jobs? The degrees will become worthless and everyone would be the same.
But you are already contradicting yourself.
First, you state that "You're naive enough to believe that the world allows equal opportunities?" and ended your post with "Now tell me, does the world gives them equal opportunities?"
Then you tell us "So technically, everyone could have this equal opportunity of entering universities."
Aren't you contradicting yourself?
True, but what i meant to Mister Gedanken is the brutal truth that not everyone who have demonstrated their ability to study are allow this 'equal opportunity' in a sense, because there is this quota.
The main question here is, are you considering this 'equal opportunity' given to people from the moment they are born or from the moment they are applying for it?
Also, I fail to see how the original phrase of "demonstrated ability" by Gedanken is to be meant solely on academic ability, which is clearly the only ability you are concerned about right now.
-
university education for poly grads is just a waste of time unless the poly grads want to go for honours and higher. The normal bachelor degree is just slightly better than the diploma. It is mostly those good honours students who will get the better high end jobs. If you want to waste 3 years of working opportunities + pay more than 18k of school fees + miscellaneous fees in addition of your 15k poly school fees and have a debt of more than $30k at the end of your course, go ahead.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
But you are already contradicting yourself.
First, you state that "You're naive enough to believe that the world allows equal opportunities?" and ended your post with "Now tell me, does the world gives them equal opportunities?"
Then you tell us "So technically, everyone could have this equal opportunity of entering universities."
Aren't you contradicting yourself?
The main question here is, are you considering this 'equal opportunity' given to people from the moment they are born or from the moment they are applying for it?
Also, I fail to see how the original phrase of "demonstrated ability" by Gedanken is to be meant solely on academic ability, which is clearly the only ability you are concerned about right now.
Sorry to disappoint you. What i've meant by "so technically, everyone could have this equal opportunity of entering universities" is that on the book, or rather, in theory, it seems like everyone can have this equal opportunity of entering universities. But practically do you see that happening? That is why i said, although the world implies equal opportunities, do you believe it? I am not contradicting myself, you have just got to read everything and not nitpicking sentence by sentence just to refute me, really.
As to your second question, i have already defined what can be an exemplary of an equal opportunity.
Intuitively speaking, it is not too far of a connection between demonstrated ability and academic ability when we are talking about academic instutitions. If you think that what Mister Gedanken meant was extra-curricular, or non-academic merits or that sort, then, let me ask you a question, what is the primary reason for people who wants to enter academic institutions like NTU and NUS?
If demonstrated ability does not refer to academics in this context, then?
-
To be frank, do u think it is good for everyone to be degree holders ? If everyone becomes degree holders, then degree means nothing at all. In tis world we need people to work as degree holder but we also need more people doing other jobs like army, police, technicians etc...
-
im certain there's no % cap on the number of foreign students in NTU.. simply by observation..
the irony of it all la seriously.. our own students cannot go into local uni, not becoz they are incapable, but becoz the govt is asking ppl to come from overseas to study at our universities.. and then amidst all this one chinese scholar tio a leukemia and those who do not donate are accused of being cold blooded.. seriously.. where is the singapore where i used to hear ah bengs playing loud music at the back of the bus and in the mrt? i only hear banglas paa laall praaprppalla-ing and china ppl speaking mandarin which i as a chinese cannot comprehend..
and b4 some pros come and tell me "hey dude if u aren't capable enuf dun blame others", i want to highlight that this is not even about capability.. this is about having a place to stand in the mrt without banglas and china ppl pushing me..
-
Originally posted by AugoeideS:
Sorry to disappoint you. What i've meant by "so technically, everyone could have this equal opportunity of entering universities" is that on the book, or rather, in theory, it seems like everyone can have this equal opportunity of entering universities. But practically do you see that happening? That is why i said, although the world implies equal opportunities, do you believe it? I am not contradicting myself, you have just got to read everything and not nitpicking sentence by sentence just to refute me, really.
As to your second question, i have already defined what can be an exemplary of an equal opportunity.
Intuitively speaking, it is not too far of a connection between demonstrated ability and academic ability when we are talking about academic instutitions. If you think that what Mister Gedanken meant was extra-curricular, or non-academic merits or that sort, then, let me ask you a question, what is the primary reason for people who wants to enter academic institutions like NTU and NUS?
If demonstrated ability does not refer to academics in this context, then?
Opportunities are given from young. As you have mentioned it yourself, there are limited vacanies. The selection process starts way before your application for university. By the time you can complain that there isn't equal opportunities in entering a university, it merely means you have wasted many other opportunties before hand. We are not talking about the minorities that are more equal than others; we are talking about commoners like the rest of us. Do you seriously believe that you had less or more of a chance to enter a university than me the moment you were born?
What I want to tell you is, this is not a case of 'equal opportunity' at all, but rather, a case of elitism, of which I'm standing on neutral grounds.
By the way, NUS and NTU do take into account CCA records; it is a bonus to entry. In addition, another form of ability is the ability to pull strings; there are definitely people who did it successfully and entered an academic institution.
As in your example
Then, let me give you an example. I have friends that scored 16-17pointers for their L1R4, but failed Mathematics and went into ITE, while people who fare badly for their aggregate averaging around 22-26pointers for their L1R4 are allowed into Polytechnic, what gives?
it merely means that the 22-26pointers who entered had more ability to enter.
Let's say you apply for Stanford or Cornell university with perfect A level grades, and you do not get in. However, someone with lousier A level grades got in. Why? Their application process includes teacher's recommendations and essays on describing yourself. Academic ability alone does not guarantee you a place; many other factors count.
-
Originally posted by purpledragon84:
im certain there's no % cap on the number of foreign students in NTU.. simply by observation..
the irony of it all la seriously.. our own students cannot go into local uni, not becoz they are incapable, but becoz the govt is asking ppl to come from overseas to study at our universities.. and then amidst all this one chinese scholar tio a leukemia and those who do not donate are accused of being cold blooded.. seriously.. where is the singapore where i used to hear ah bengs playing loud music at the back of the bus and in the mrt? i only hear banglas paa laall praaprppalla-ing and china ppl speaking mandarin which i as a chinese cannot comprehend..
and b4 some pros come and tell me "hey dude if u aren't capable enuf dun blame others", i want to highlight that this is not even about capability.. this is about having a place to stand in the mrt without banglas and china ppl pushing me..
banglas mostly sit at the back of lorries or pickups to go to work
me and my army frens call it the bangla tonner
-
Originally posted by eagle:
By the way, NUS and NTU do take into account CCA records; it is a bonus to entry. In addition, another form of ability is the ability to pull strings; there are definitely people who did it successfully and entered an academic institution.
As in your example
it merely means that the 22-26pointers who entered had more ability to enter.
Let's say you apply for Stanford or Cornell university with perfect A level grades, and you do not get in. However, someone with lousier A level grades got in. Why? Their application process includes teacher's recommendations and essays on describing yourself. Academic ability alone does not guarantee you a place; many other factors count.
The part about NUS/NTU considering CCA records are under 'Discretionary Admission Scheme', an optional scheme for those who have excellent CCA records to boost their chances of admission, but primary criteria are academic results, nonetheless. Afterall, you're entering an academic institution, what else would they look for as the primary criteria?
I do not understand what you're trying to bring across in this statement: "As in your example
it merely means that the 22-26pointers who entered had more ability to enter."
To me, it seems like you are saying that 22-26 pointers have more potential to enter something (lol i don't know what) compared to 16-17 pointers.
I know, other factors count too, but ultimately your academic results is still the primary criteria, like it or not. It is a moot point.
And in regards to your example, it is, still afterall an example. Perceived outcome of admissionary decision by Cornell or Stanford does not equate to the actuality of the outcome. This, neither you nor i can conclude unless we have substantial empirical evidence.
-
Originally posted by AugoeideS:
The part about NUS/NTU considering CCA records are under 'Discretionary Admission Scheme', an optional scheme for those who have excellent CCA records to boost their chances of admission, but primary criteria are academic results, nonetheless. Afterall, you're entering an academic institution, what else would they look for as the primary criteria?
I do not understand what you're trying to bring across in this statement: "As in your example
it merely means that the 22-26pointers who entered had more ability to enter."
To me, it seems like you are saying that 22-26 pointers have more potential to enter something (lol i don't know what) compared to 16-17 pointers.
I know, other factors count too, but ultimately your academic results is still the primary criteria, like it or not. It is a moot point.
And in regards to your example, it is, still afterall an example. Perceived outcome of admissionary decision by Cornell or Stanford does not equate to the actuality of the outcome. This, neither you nor i can conclude unless we have substantial empirical evidence.
22-26 pointers have more potential to enter is totally different from them having more ability. Anyway that's beside the point.
Yes, academic results is the primary criteria. But you are still missing the point that 'equal opportunity' still exists for most of us (not talking about white horses); everyone has the same opportunity to do well and go into a prestigious university. Whether they make use of that opportunity is a different matter.
With regards to your last paragraph, do you understand how their application process works? Have you ever applied for admission to these universities? Perhaps if you have applied before, you would understand that academic qualifications is, although a main criteria, not a guarantee against those with lower qualifications than you. This is my main point.
-
lao ying is trying to say while academic results should be of foremost concern for uni entry, universities also look into other factors like community involement, ECA awards, leadership qualities etc. cos universities want to create a healthy blend of undergraduates of various backgrounds to create diversity so each one can learn from one another.
btw hi yi ge.
