Profile
Age: 26
Archives
April 2010
May 2010
August 2010
February 2011
April 2011
May 2011
June 2011
=)
Tagboard
ShoutMix chat widget
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
JC or Poly?
http://www.asiaone.com/News/Education/Story/A1Story20100412-209755.html
There is this debate going on recently about diploma holders being really capable and more of them should be allowed access to the varsities in Singapore.
Here is some statistics that I picked up from the article I read. For a cohort of about 30,000 students, about 30% goes to JC, 60% goes to Poly and 10% to ITE. Out of the students that goes to JC, 70% of them would be able to enter a local university. However, this figure for the Poly students is only about 15-20%. "In all, 34,500 O-level school leavers were posted this year to post-secondary institutions. Of the JCs, polys and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), the five polys had the largest share - just over 20,000 students, while the JCs received 11,000 students and the ITE 2,800.... Every year, 70 per cent of JC students get into one of the three local universities, compared with only 15 per cent of polytechnic students who manage it."
Taking a look at the picture on a whole, this means that out of a cohort of 30k, about 6000 (0.7 x 0.3 x 30k) would make it to university through JC and 3000 (0.2 x 0.6 x 30k) would make it to the varsities through Poly. There have been calls made to increase the number of Poly entrance to 50% of the Poly cohort, which means pushing the numbers of Poly graduates in university to double the current figure.
First of all, I believe there is a need to look into the difference between a JC and a Poly. I believe the JC is indeed (as what the papers have been saying) a place where the basics of academic progress is driven into the students. It is a preparatory course for students who want to go into the frontline of research in the university. Well, at least this applies to the Science stream. Rigorous mathematics and derivations behind great theories are taught and emphasized in classes, research methodologies are introduced into exam components etc. After completing JC, the students look forward to a university education where their skills picked up in the 2 years of college are put to test. (Well, they do not have much choice anyway as an A level cert is worth almost NOTHING otherwise.)
As for Poly, I believe the focus is more of the practicality of the skills learnt at work and not really into the research frontier. Theoretical work is not in the main course package, therefore leading to the need for "advance maths classes" for the students to be on par with the JC peers. At the end of the 3 years, they graduate with a diploma which can be a ticket into the working world. I am all for students who heads to Poly with great O level grades. They really do know what they want to do and opts for a more specialised course. If they are able to pull through as the top students of the Poly and wishes to pursue further studies in universities, that's even better! I have known of really good Poly students excelling in university.
I am pretty skeptical about the request to increase the number of Poly students in local universities. I guess we have to look at a couple of issues. Firstly, having completed a skilled diploma, why do the students want to push onto university? Is it because its the Singaporean mentality of the need for paper-chase or is it for the pursuit of interest or just because it would fetch more pay eventually? Secondly, what is the capacity of our local universities? A level graduates with decent grades are reported to have been REJECTED by local universities due to high competition , leaving them with 2 choices: self sponsor an overseas education or be stuck with a piece of useless paper (not much of a choice aint it).
I believe it is definitely reasonable that the university maintains a high percentage of A level graduates gaining entry to the varsity due to the nature of the coursework that A level syllabus prepares the student for. Students that took the Poly path with outstanding O level grades, and eventually shining in the Poly should also be given a go at the local university, which accounts for the 20% of the Poly graduates gaining entry into the local universities.
Both parties definitely want a bigger share of the pie but it is important to strike a delicate balance in the figures. While reading the touching stories of parents of diploma holders wiping out their entire saving to sponsor a overseas education, we have to keep in mind that there are MANY such stories revolving around A level graduates as well. The main difference is that the diploma is a pretty useful piece of paper while the A level certificate is a useless piece of crap in this case (it's meant for university entrance, but you have been rejected!).
http://www.asiaone.com/News/Education/Story/A1Story20100412-209755.html
There is this debate going on recently about diploma holders being really capable and more of them should be allowed access to the varsities in Singapore.
Here is some statistics that I picked up from the article I read. For a cohort of about 30,000 students, about 30% goes to JC, 60% goes to Poly and 10% to ITE. Out of the students that goes to JC, 70% of them would be able to enter a local university. However, this figure for the Poly students is only about 15-20%. "In all, 34,500 O-level school leavers were posted this year to post-secondary institutions. Of the JCs, polys and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), the five polys had the largest share - just over 20,000 students, while the JCs received 11,000 students and the ITE 2,800.... Every year, 70 per cent of JC students get into one of the three local universities, compared with only 15 per cent of polytechnic students who manage it."
Taking a look at the picture on a whole, this means that out of a cohort of 30k, about 6000 (0.7 x 0.3 x 30k) would make it to university through JC and 3000 (0.2 x 0.6 x 30k) would make it to the varsities through Poly. There have been calls made to increase the number of Poly entrance to 50% of the Poly cohort, which means pushing the numbers of Poly graduates in university to double the current figure.
First of all, I believe there is a need to look into the difference between a JC and a Poly. I believe the JC is indeed (as what the papers have been saying) a place where the basics of academic progress is driven into the students. It is a preparatory course for students who want to go into the frontline of research in the university. Well, at least this applies to the Science stream. Rigorous mathematics and derivations behind great theories are taught and emphasized in classes, research methodologies are introduced into exam components etc. After completing JC, the students look forward to a university education where their skills picked up in the 2 years of college are put to test. (Well, they do not have much choice anyway as an A level cert is worth almost NOTHING otherwise.)
As for Poly, I believe the focus is more of the practicality of the skills learnt at work and not really into the research frontier. Theoretical work is not in the main course package, therefore leading to the need for "advance maths classes" for the students to be on par with the JC peers. At the end of the 3 years, they graduate with a diploma which can be a ticket into the working world. I am all for students who heads to Poly with great O level grades. They really do know what they want to do and opts for a more specialised course. If they are able to pull through as the top students of the Poly and wishes to pursue further studies in universities, that's even better! I have known of really good Poly students excelling in university.
I am pretty skeptical about the request to increase the number of Poly students in local universities. I guess we have to look at a couple of issues. Firstly, having completed a skilled diploma, why do the students want to push onto university? Is it because its the Singaporean mentality of the need for paper-chase or is it for the pursuit of interest or just because it would fetch more pay eventually? Secondly, what is the capacity of our local universities? A level graduates with decent grades are reported to have been REJECTED by local universities due to high competition , leaving them with 2 choices: self sponsor an overseas education or be stuck with a piece of useless paper (not much of a choice aint it).
I believe it is definitely reasonable that the university maintains a high percentage of A level graduates gaining entry to the varsity due to the nature of the coursework that A level syllabus prepares the student for. Students that took the Poly path with outstanding O level grades, and eventually shining in the Poly should also be given a go at the local university, which accounts for the 20% of the Poly graduates gaining entry into the local universities.
Both parties definitely want a bigger share of the pie but it is important to strike a delicate balance in the figures. While reading the touching stories of parents of diploma holders wiping out their entire saving to sponsor a overseas education, we have to keep in mind that there are MANY such stories revolving around A level graduates as well. The main difference is that the diploma is a pretty useful piece of paper while the A level certificate is a useless piece of crap in this case (it's meant for university entrance, but you have been rejected!).