The Asian Commercial Sex Scene  

Go Back   The Asian Commercial Sex Scene > For stuff you can't discuss with your Facebook Account > Coffee Shop Talk of a non sexual Nature

Notices

Coffee Shop Talk of a non sexual Nature Visit Sam's Alfresco Heaven. Singapore's best Alfresco Coffee Experience! If you're up to your ears with all this Sex Talk and would like to take a break from it all to discuss other interesting aspects of life in Singapore,  pop over and join in the fun.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 12-09-2014, 04:00 AM
Sammyboy RSS Feed Sammyboy RSS Feed is offline
Sam's RSS Feed Bot - I'm not Human. Don't talk to me.
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 467,288
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
My Reputation: Points: 10000241 / Power: 3357
Sammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond repute
Thumbs up Only 6% of singaporean university undergraduates receive scholarships

An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:

ONLY 6% OF SINGAPOREAN UNIVERSITY UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVE SCHOLARSHIPS


.node-article .field-name-link-line-above-tags{float: right;}.node-article .field-name-ad-box-in-article {float: left;margin: 15px 15px 10px 0;}.node-article .field-tags{clear: both;} Post date:
11 Sep 2014 - 9:25pm








Last week, I had written about how only 6% of Singaporean university undergraduates receive scholarships. But this isn’t even the real issue. Read on to find out why.
According to the Ministry of Education (MOE), “on average, about 14% of our undergraduates … in NUS (National University of Singapore) and NTU (Nanyang Technological University of Singapore) in 2001-2005 were on scholarships“. Of these, only “About one-third of the undergraduate scholars were local students.
Also, according to the MOE, “the MOE has capped the number of International Student (IS) at 20% of the total intake, while Permanent Residents (PRs) form only a small proportion. For example, in AY2011, IS comprised 18% while PRs were 4% of undergraduate intake.
In 2013, the total undergraduate enrollment at the NUS and NTU was 49,463. As 14% would be on scholarships, this would mean that 6,925 students would be on scholarships. Since two-thirds of those on scholarships would be foreigners, this means that 4,617 of those on scholarships are foreigners.
Next, since 18% of the students are foreign students, there would be a total of 8,903 foreign students. If 4,617 on them would be on scholarships, this would mean that 52% of the foreign students would be on scholarships.
Also, as only one-third of those are scholarships are Singaporeans, this would mean that only 2,308 Singaporeans would receive scholarships. However, there are 40,560 Singaporean (and PR) students, which means that only 6% of these students were on scholarships (Chart 1).

Chart 1
But, why is it there there are only 6% of Singaporean and PRs on scholarships while 52% of foreigners get to be on scholarships? Also, of the 6% of Singaporean and PR on scholarships, how many of them are actually Singaporeans?
Some commenters have suggested that 52% of foreign students had received scholarships because they might be performing academically better, and might thus have received the bulk of the scholarships.
However, is this truly the case?
It was revealed by the MOE that, “of all the international students who graduated from our Autonomous Universities in 2011, around 45% did so with a second upper class of honours or better“.
Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Education Sim Ann who is the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Education had also said that, “only 32 per cent of Singaporeans do as well“.
So, if there were 52% of the foreign students who had received scholarships and 45% of them had obtained second upper class of honours or better, doesn’t this mean that since 32% of Singaporean and PR students had obtained second upper class of honours or better that up to 40% of Singaporean and PR students should be on scholarships (Chart 2)?

Chart 2
Why then are there only 6% of Singaporean and PR students on scholarships, instead of 40%?
Something is terribly amiss here, isn’t it? There are at least 32% of deserving Singaporean students who should be receiving scholarships but who are not given a fair chance at it. Meanwhile, the PAP government has chosen to give scholarships to the foreign students, instead of deserving and needy Singaporean students instead!
Already, it is estimated that there are 28% of Singaporeans living in poverty. Thus, of the Singaporean students who enter the local public universities, would there be 28% who would have difficulties paying for their university fees?
Thus if there would be 32% of Singaporean students who would be deserving of a scholarship, based on how MOE had apportion the scholarships to foreigners, and if there would be 28% of Singaporeans who would need financial assistance, then why is it that only 6% of Singaporean and PR students are able to obtains scholarships?
Why has the PAP government made it so easy for the foreign students to receive scholarships but for equally deserving Singaporean students, they are made to pay their own way and have to graduate “with an average debt of about $20,000“?
Don’t you think that something is severely wrong here?
Majority Of Unemployed Singaporeans Are Tertiary-Educated Who Face Unbridled Competition
As I’ve written, among the unemployed workers in Singapore, a massive proportion of them are tertiary-educated Singaporeans. If this is the case, shouldn’t the MOE’s responsibility be first to grow the pool of tertiary-educated Singaporean students, and reimburse them first and foremost before giving scholarships to foreigners? Shouldn’t the PAP government build a core of tertiary-educated Singaporeans, instead of importing and funding for the education of foreign students, while leaving Singaporean students to fend for themselves, and causing burgeoning unemployment among the tertiary-educated workers in Singapore?
Is this how the PAP government should be treating Singaporeans – Singaporeans who have a stake in our country and who would need the support from the government to receive adequate education and then contribute back to Singapore?
Why is the PAP government not supporting Singaporeans but is instead giving away money to foreign students – in the hope that they would stay and contribute to Singapore?
I would be proud if my government is able to treat people in our neighbouring countries with respect and readily extend our support to them. However, when the PAP government isn’t even able to look out for its own citizens, but would choose to look out for the citizens of another country first, isn’t something not quite right here?
Where is the responsibility of the PAP government? Singaporeans – or rather 60.1% – had voted for the PAP because we expect the PAP to be able to look out for the needs of Singaporeans, but why is their priority on foreigners and not on Singaporeans?
The PAP Government Doesn’t Protect Singapore
This wouldn’t be the first case of the PAP government looking out for foreigners instead of Singaporeans. As I’ve also written, in the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) that Singapore had signed with India, there are clauses which protect the rights of Indian workers to work in Singapore because the Singapore government is not allowed to “require labour marketing testing” for the entry of these workers. Singapore is also required to “grant the accompanying spouses or dependent of the other Party the right to work as managers, executives or specialists.”
Also, there are no levies or quotas to the hiring of workers on Employment Passes and in the Fair Consideration Framework that the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) had introduced, because the MOM had said that it “does not review the merits of a firm’s hiring decision, as the firm is best placed to decide on which candidate can do the job,” which would mean that this “framework” – and not a law – wouldn’t protect Singaporean workers as well.
So, from all these policy decisions by the PAP government, it is clear that they do not seem to be interested in protecting Singaporeans, even as Singaporeans are equally deserving or in need of assistance from the government that we had voted in, precisely to help us for. Yet, the PAP government seems to have relegated it’s responsibilities, in not providing enough scholarships for Singaporean students, and in not enacting adequate policies and laws to protect the employment of Singaporean workers.






As a Singaporean, I am very worried. If the government that the majority of Singaporeans have voted for has chosen not to perform its duty and responsibility, then who else do we have to look to, to protect our lives and livelihood? Should we ask the Malaysian or Indonesian government to take care of us instead?
If the PAP government is not able to perform its duty as its elected responsibility, should we then vote to put in other parties in government who would actually perform their duty and protect the rights and needs of Singaporeans?
I am very worried now. Are you?

Roy
*The author blogs at www.TheHeartTruths.com


Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com.
Advert Space Available
Bypass censorship with https://1.1.1.1

Cloudflare 1.1.1.1
Reply



Bookmarks

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +8. The time now is 08:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copywrong © Samuel Leong 2006 ~ 2025 ph