Should Citizens Get Priority for University Admission?

I have not been following this matter closely. But my understanding is that this year, many Singaporeans haven't been able to secure a place in our local universities. This is despite scoring A-level grades which, in previous years, would have enabled them to do so quite easily.

The question then arises - should Singaporean citizens get priority for university admission? After all, a high proportion of university places now go to foreign students.

I was rather surprised by these two bloggers' opinions on the matter - Bart JP and Aaron Ng. They didn't seem to think that citizens should get priority for university admission.

But of course citizens should get priority.

Let's take it one simple step at a time.

Should a country and its government provide education opportunities for its people? Certainly.

That's a big reason why citizens pay taxes. So that the government can build kindergartens, primary schools, secondary schools, universities etc.

After all, we want our citizens to be well-educated, don't we? Our economy needs a skilled workforce, doesn't it? (Duh. That was so self-evident that it's absurd I even have to point it out).

Next question. When is a Singaporean citizen good enough to deserve a place in our local universities?

Well, if you had access to the relevant data, you could simply check the "market rates" from previous years. They would be a good indicator.

For example, if you looked at data from the past five years, you could say: "To get a place in NTU Engineering, you should score at least ____. To get a place in SMU Business, you should score around _________. To get a place in NUS Law, you must usually score _________." Etc.

Check with your junior college principal. JC principals usually keep track of such things. The "market rates" may vary a little from year to year, but typically they wouldn't fluctuate that much.

But apparently, this year the "market rates" did jump wildly. Like the Shanghai stock market, the market basically went mad. Previous years' rates no longer apply. Everything went haywire. University places are sharply short; and at least part of the reason is that local universities are absorbing an ever-increasing number of foreigners.

The basic point still remains. It is the responsibility of the government to provide adequate education opportunities for its citizens.

And right now, it seems that the education opportunities are simply not enough.

So it looks like we just might be beginning to revert back to the 1970s, when Singapore was a 3rd world country and many citizens didn't have a chance for higher education.

So much for progress.

Anyway, how did this rather surprising turn of events come about - that students scoring quite decent grades are simply not able to get a place in our universities?

Heh. Actually there's nothing surprising about it. Look at our property market. Look at our residential rental rates. Look at the crowds on our MRT trains and in our food courts. Look at the endless jam on the CTE.

And then look at our university situation.

See the pattern? Due to a massive intake of foreigners in recent years, our resident population has exploded. We've become the 2nd most crowded country in the world. And our current infrastructure just can't cope.

To their credit, both the URA and the LTA already saw this coming and they've been scrambling to make the necessary changes.

But the Education Ministry didn't see it coming. Neither did the local universities.

And that, simply, is that.

Ask not what your country will do for you. Because in Singapore, the answer is - not much.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

Stop Right There, Mr Alfian Saat

Alfian Saat is a very talented person.

I've met him before - only once. That was years ago. A small group of Singapore writers were having an informal, impromptu supper at a kopitiam after a literary event at the former National Library. Alfian and I were both in that group.

Alfian was still a medicine student at NUS then. At that time, he had published only one book - One Fierce Hour. But even then it was already pretty evident to me that he was extraordinarily talented.

In subsequent years, he went on to write more and more - poetry, short stories and plays - winning just about every award there was to win in Singapore. After graduating from NUS, he never did pursue a medical career. I hear that he's currently a full-time playwright.

The very unusual thing about Alfian was that his writing was heavily political and anti-establishment - and he was apparently able to get away with it. The establishment (meaning the National Arts Council and other government bodies) not only permitted his works to be published and performed, but gave him grants, awards and so on.

Occasionally, I wondered where the government would draw the line. But Alfian is Alfian, and I know that he will constantly be pushing boundaries and exploring his political interests. For example, check out this very recent photograph of Alfian with, gasp, none other than political exile Francis Seow:

Recently, it seems that someone somewhere in the Singapore government has decided that maybe enough is enough. Alfian was working as a relief teacher in a secondary school, and the principal was very happy with his performance. However, the Ministry of Education insisted that Alfian's contract be abruptly terminated.

The principal was mystified. Alfian was puzzled. When pressed for an explanation, the Ministry itself simply gave meaningless answers obviously designed to hide the truth (whatever the truth was). See for yourself.

Since the Ministry gave such meaningless answers, we can only guess what the real reason behind Alfian's termination was. My guess is as good as yours. And your guess is ....?

Baca Selengkapnya »»

Good Books

A reader asked if I read self-improvement books. I certainly do.

To begin with, I read lots of books in general, and a sizeable portion of what I read are "how-to" books. I have "how-to" books on raising little kids; meditating; investing my money; photography; Microsoft Excel; law; business; banking etc etc, and for obvious ulterior motives, I also like to buy recipe books for my wife.

And yes, my "how-to" collection includes many titles on self-improvement, including titles by Stephen Covey, Napoleon Hill, Anthony Robbins, Tony Buzan, Brian Tracy and other lesser-known authors.

I’m aware that many people feel strangely adverse about self-improvement books. It goes beyond mere disinterest – it is actually an adverse feeling about the entire genre.

These same people wouldn’t hesitate to buy a recipe book, if they were into cooking. They wouldn’t hesitate to buy a book about how to look after a dog, if they had just bought a dog. But they wouldn’t even want to be seen in the self-improvement section of a bookstore, holding a book with a title like "How To Succeed in Life" or "Time Management for Dummies".

It’s interesting to examine the reasons why.

I think that some people feel that self-improvement books are for dysfunctional, inadequate people, who already have difficulty coping with everyday life and therefore need some self-improvement. According to this logic, if you buy a self-improvement book, you’re admitting to yourself that you’re dysfunctional and inadequate.

Heheh. If you subscribe to such logic, then you have some big insecurities to face up to. Enough said.

Others may feel that self-improvement books are full of good advice that can’t be followed. In other words, they doubt their own ability to apply whatever ideas they might come across in a self-improvement book. It is true that if you don’t apply the good advice that you read in a self-improvement book, then it will be of absolutely no value to you.

However, it is also true that if your mother, teacher, mentor, pastor, boss, doctor or best friend gives you good advice, and you don’t apply it, then the good advice will also be absolutely of no value to you.

If you go through life doubting your ability to apply the good advice, ideas and suggestions that come your way, then life will be quite challenging indeed. You’ll just have to rediscover and reinvent the wheel again and again. Others would have faced the same challenges in life as you have, and they would be willing to share those lessons. But if you do not wish to learn from the experiences and insights of others, well, you’ll just have to struggle on, on your own.

Now, of course I am not saying that everything written in a self-improvement book is going to be relevant, useful or appropriate for you. Similarly, not everything that your mother, teacher, mentor, pastor, boss, doctor or best friend tells you is going to be relevant, useful or appropriate.

Still, it seems wise to pay at least a little attention to what they have to say, and think about it. Take what you find is useful, and leave the rest behind.

I am also not saying that the application of good advice is always an easy thing. Then again, because good advice comes in many different forms on many different topics, it cannot be the case that it is always a difficult or impossible thing.

Incidentally, you could jolly well think of holy texts and ancient scriptures as the original how-to books. For example, you could regard the Bible as a big how-to book entitled "How to Have Eternal Life After Death in Heaven". You could also think of Buddhist texts as how-to books entitled "How to Seek Happiness and Avoid Suffering".

Whether you’re a Christian or a Buddhist, the application of such good advice could, in either case, seem very difficult or even impossible. But as a Christian or a Buddhist, you would know that the most foolish thing you could do is not to try.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

Interesting Post

A Dialogue Concerning Two Medias, from the Singapore Angle. It summarises recent developments in Singapore's mainstream media and blogosphere, and makes some attempts to predict the future. An excerpt:

Specialist bloggers changing the landscape of Singapore: A respected blogger (who I cannot mention) once offered this view to me, "Celebrity and controversial blogging is the thing of the past two years, and what comes after that is specialist blogging." Of course, celebrities like Mr Wang, Yawning Bread, Xiaxue and Mr Brown are always there, but the emphasis is changing in view of market forces. Socio-political blogging has suffered with the departure of several high profile young bloggers and the lacklustre activity of other bloggers. Of course, as old bloggers depart, new ones will emerge.

The funny thing is that this post comes at a time when I am already shifting away from sociopolitical blogging, to other kinds of topics that interest me.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

In Search of Higher Purpose

A number of readers have written to ask how they should go about finding their Purpose in life.

This question has several implicit assumptions. Firstly, it is assumed that each person DOES have a Purpose in life.

Secondly, it is assumed that the Purpose ought to be discoverable now or in the near future, as opposed to, say, at a much later stage in life.

Thirdly, it is assumed that each person only has ONE purpose.

Of course, none of these assumptions are necessarily true. For example, it may well be that the Universe hasn’t assigned a specific Purpose to you that you are supposed to discover – instead you'll have to choose your own Purpose and stick to it.

Or it may well be that you do have a Purpose assigned to you by a Higher Power, but this Purpose will unfold itself to you not now, not tomorrow, but 5, 10, 15 or 20 years later, when the time is right.

Or it may well be that you could have several different Purposes at any given time, or alternatively you could have a Purpose at a particular time, and another Purpose at another time in your life.

Now let’s look at all this in a practical way, by revisiting Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

People wondering about their Purpose in life are actually wondering what they should be doing at Level 5, when they get there.

But maybe they should get there first, that is, climb right up into Level 5, and then their Purpose (or Purposes) will become clear to them.

In other words, take care of your Level 1 – 4 needs first, and then (and only then) may your Level 5 needs become crystal clear to you.

Remember, Maslow’s needs are hierarchical. A person facing big challenges at Level 1 would be unclear about Levels 2 or 3. A person who is facing big challenges at Levels 2 or 3 would be unclear about Level 4.

And to be clear what you want at Level 5, perhaps what you need to do is to fully address your Level 1 to 4 needs.

Consider for example, Gautama Buddha, who was once a prince. As a prince, he had power, respect, authority, riches, royal luxuries, palaces, guards, servants and furthermore, parents who loved him so much that they did not want to know him to know that pain, suffering or death existed.

In other words, Gautama Buddha had just about everything that anyone could want, at Levels 1, 2, 3 and 4.

And that, perhaps, was why he was eventually able to launch into such a determined, inspired effrt into satisfying his Level 5 need (in his case, the need to understand the ultimate meanings of life).

And eventually he attained Enlightenment – but that is not the point of my post. The point of my point is – perhaps you can discover your Purpose only after satisfying your every other lesser purpose, goal, desire or ambition first.

And then your Purpose – the one with the capital P – may finally unfold itself to you.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

Recommend a Psychiatrist

A reader has asked me to recommend a good psychiatrist in Singapore, for treating kleptomania. If you know of any such psychiatrist, please email me at soknenk@gmail.com or leave a comment below. Thank you.

Baca Selengkapnya »»

So Is Life Rosy or Not?

One of my readers, Mr Han, requested that I comment on the following letter which was published in the Straits Times:

ST Forum, June 4, 2007
Future not so rosy for working-class S'poreans

MANY Singaporeans must be celebrating at the moment, with the buoyant economy, high employment, higher salaries and, for private home owners, skyrocketing property prices and 'en bloc' frenzy.

However, is the current state of the economy and future as rosy as it appears for most working-class Singaporeans?

According to data published in a report on the wealthiest cities in the world by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC) on March 11, Singapore ranks 36th out of 70 cities based on gross domestic product (GDP) in 2005.

A look at the rankings will reveal that, apart from Singapore, all the cities in the bottom half are in Second and Third World countries.

Singapore's GDP of US$129 billion (S$197 billion) pales beside other Asian cities such as Tokyo (US$1.19 trillion), Hong Kong (US$244 billion), Seoul (US$218 billion) and Shanghai (US$139 billion). In fact, we are only slightly ahead of Mumbai (US$123 billion).

These rankings are arrived at by using purchasing-power-parity exchange rates.

However, unlike Singapore, our Asian counterparts in Hong Kong seem to have more to look forward to. The projections for city wealth in the year 2020 show that Hong Kong is likely to rise to 14th position, while Singapore is likely to decline to 40th.

The study (taking into consideration deduction of taxes and social-security contributions) reveals that net salaries in Asian cities such as Tokyo, Dubai, Seoul and Taipei will surpass Singapore.

However, these sobering statistics apply only to the average Singaporean citizen. The top bracket of earners in professions such as medicine, law, banking and, of course, within the ranks of the Government, will earn as much, if not more, than some of their counterparts worldwide.

What do these figures tell Singaporeans? We can conclude that even though we pay a relatively low rate of personal income tax, the net amount of wages we take home leaves us in the bottom half of the 70 cities in the PWC report.

Edmund Khoo Kim Hock

I'm no economist, but this letter doesn't strike me as being particularly well-reasoned. In fact, it reminds me of Edmund Khoo's other recent letter to the Straits Times.

The same difficulty arises here - Edmund seem to form his conclusion first, and then only formulate arguments in favour of it. In the process, he loses objectivity and mangles the facts. Next time, try analysing the facts first, BEFORE forming a conclusion.

Here's one big mistake that Edmund makes:

Singapore's GDP of US$129 billion (S$197 billion) pales beside other Asian cities such as Tokyo (US$1.19 trillion), Hong Kong (US$244 billion), Seoul (US$218 billion) and Shanghai (US$139 billion). In fact, we are only slightly ahead of Mumbai (US$123 billion).

GDP can be used as an indicator of various things. However, if the intention is to use GDP as an indicator of the average citizen's standard of living (and that's clearly Edmund's intention), the least we could do is look at GDP on a per capita basis. That is, take the GDP and divide it by the size of the population.

That's because GDP is basically a measure of how big an economy is. A big city with a large population could have a GDP much higher than a small city with a small population. But on a per capita basis, we would realise that the average person in the big city isn't necessarily any richer, and in fact could be much poorer, than the average person in the small city.

The report that Edmund cites is based on a comparison of cities and GDP. In this report, Singapore is ranked 36th out of 151 cities , approximately in the same range as cities just as Shanghai (32nd), Melbourne (33rd), Mumbai (37th) and Rome (38th).

However, Shanghai and Mumbai are MUCH more populous than Singapore; while Melbourne has a slightly smaller population than Singapore; while Rome has a much smaller population than Singapore. If you go by a per capita approach, you'd probably see that the relative rankings of these cities would change quite a lot.

Now, if you compare countries based on GDP on a per capita basis, Singapore fares much better than 36th out of 151. Wikipedia tells us that Singapore would be ranked 25th out of 182 countries.

Of course, countries like Denmark, Sweden and Finland still rank far above us (8th, 10th and 12th). This is despite the fact that like Singapore, these countries are quite small, and not well-endowed with natural resources.

According to MM Lee Kuan Yew, the governments of these countries are even "mediocre", and therefore their ministers deserve to be paid much, much less than Singapore's PAP leaders.

An entirely believable claim, as long as you choose to disregard the facts.

Baca Selengkapnya »»