I wanted to lift quotes, but was afraid I might misquote, so I've attached the entire article below. The writer talks about how the Institute of Technical Education has much better facilities than that of Junior Colleges. This issue is of concern because it insinuates that ITE students (and implicitly, less academically-inclined students) cannot appreciate good facilities; if the government doesn't give the better students in Singapore better facilities, the lesser off students shouldn't have it either. The writer is right on his facts, but a little knowledge is often a dangerous thing. This article is also of concern because the writer has adopted a very biased stance, with his viewpoint of an ex-JC student, and failed to consider opinions of the other side. This is also the reason why Humanities is important - it teaches one how to construct persuasive and therefore powerful arguments. What are my thoughts?
1. Renovation always strives for progress
Many years back, ITEs were in horrendous shape, because Singapore was more rightist (and meritocratic) back in those days. Junior Colleges were under renovation about a decade to two decades ago. The government cannot be renovating JCs all the time, and thus started to pay more attention to the forgotten sector of the society. Wasn't that what all we Singaporeans wanted, to "ensure no one gets left behind"? Even communism couldn't ensure no one gets left behind, let alone capitalism infused with Confucian teaching (work hard, work harder, study hard, respect the educated).
It depends on many factors too. Apparently Raffles Junior College and Hwa Chong Institution are beautiful in every way (common perception). Even Jurong Junior College (a mid-range neighbourhood junior college) has a synthetic field and fully air-conditioned classrooms. When VJC is finally renovated, it probably looks pretty spectacular as well. So yes. It's commonsense. You can't renovate JCs, nor ITEs, every year. It's their turn now.
2. It's Technical training, not academic training
Across the world, science and engineering schools are always better funded than humanities schools. They need labs, equipment, etc. Whatever you call it. That's partly the reason why most funding are necessary. It's actually understandable that JCs don't get so much funding, because they aren't that necessary. You don't need 10 computer labs, 10 commercial kitchens, operation theatrettes, etc.
Students who graduate from ITE actually find jobs, and while university students think that a crap degree doesn't bring us anywhere (it's a Singaporean mentality), there are sectors who need the support of ITE grads. This is the sector which has seen a huge influx of foreign labour, having more to offer and asking for less [pay]. Another thorny issue here. They need training as JC students do.
-----
A more significant point raised is that the facilities are vandalised. While I'm not so sure whether VJC/RJC/HCI ever got vandalised with enigmatic, philosophical quotes on tables or sticky notes around the school inspiring dissent or love, I know even NUS tables are vandalised. Vandalism is a crime that should be condemned everywhere, and the point that they vandalised and therefore they don't deserve the facilities doesn't seem valid. Students are students, be they from the top or bottom. While NUS students cringe at vandalism, ITE students also frown at vandalism. If vandalism equates to undeserving, schools should be built like mental hospitals (no offense, but these hospitals are vandalism-proof to a large extent).
I do wonder if there's a political statement to be made by the fact that ITE students are given pretty lavish facilities. The fact remains that ITE campuses are used to a greater extent, by the public too, when they attend courses to upgrade their skills, like Mr Tan whom I met, who went for N Levels English Course at the age of 55.
Let he who has no money to afford the best private tutors, enrichment courses, or the most nutritious foods, and yet made it to the top, cast the first stone. Money allows one to avoid getting into ITEs, to a large extent. Money allows you to get to where you really set your heart on very often. Let's be more gracious, yes, our educational facilities across the country is good. There isn't any leaking roof on a daily basis, or excessive flooding. Check this post by Yee Jen Jong, a socio-political blogger and educator.
---------
Disparity in tertiary education facilities
1. Renovation always strives for progress
Many years back, ITEs were in horrendous shape, because Singapore was more rightist (and meritocratic) back in those days. Junior Colleges were under renovation about a decade to two decades ago. The government cannot be renovating JCs all the time, and thus started to pay more attention to the forgotten sector of the society. Wasn't that what all we Singaporeans wanted, to "ensure no one gets left behind"? Even communism couldn't ensure no one gets left behind, let alone capitalism infused with Confucian teaching (work hard, work harder, study hard, respect the educated).
It depends on many factors too. Apparently Raffles Junior College and Hwa Chong Institution are beautiful in every way (common perception). Even Jurong Junior College (a mid-range neighbourhood junior college) has a synthetic field and fully air-conditioned classrooms. When VJC is finally renovated, it probably looks pretty spectacular as well. So yes. It's commonsense. You can't renovate JCs, nor ITEs, every year. It's their turn now.
2. It's Technical training, not academic training
Across the world, science and engineering schools are always better funded than humanities schools. They need labs, equipment, etc. Whatever you call it. That's partly the reason why most funding are necessary. It's actually understandable that JCs don't get so much funding, because they aren't that necessary. You don't need 10 computer labs, 10 commercial kitchens, operation theatrettes, etc.
Students who graduate from ITE actually find jobs, and while university students think that a crap degree doesn't bring us anywhere (it's a Singaporean mentality), there are sectors who need the support of ITE grads. This is the sector which has seen a huge influx of foreign labour, having more to offer and asking for less [pay]. Another thorny issue here. They need training as JC students do.
-----
A more significant point raised is that the facilities are vandalised. While I'm not so sure whether VJC/RJC/HCI ever got vandalised with enigmatic, philosophical quotes on tables or sticky notes around the school inspiring dissent or love, I know even NUS tables are vandalised. Vandalism is a crime that should be condemned everywhere, and the point that they vandalised and therefore they don't deserve the facilities doesn't seem valid. Students are students, be they from the top or bottom. While NUS students cringe at vandalism, ITE students also frown at vandalism. If vandalism equates to undeserving, schools should be built like mental hospitals (no offense, but these hospitals are vandalism-proof to a large extent).
I do wonder if there's a political statement to be made by the fact that ITE students are given pretty lavish facilities. The fact remains that ITE campuses are used to a greater extent, by the public too, when they attend courses to upgrade their skills, like Mr Tan whom I met, who went for N Levels English Course at the age of 55.
Let he who has no money to afford the best private tutors, enrichment courses, or the most nutritious foods, and yet made it to the top, cast the first stone. Money allows one to avoid getting into ITEs, to a large extent. Money allows you to get to where you really set your heart on very often. Let's be more gracious, yes, our educational facilities across the country is good. There isn't any leaking roof on a daily basis, or excessive flooding. Check this post by Yee Jen Jong, a socio-political blogger and educator.
---------
Disparity in tertiary education facilities
04:45 AM Dec 26, 2011
Singapore has often been accorded the honour of having one of the best education systems. Our students rank high in their scores, from mathematics to other subjects. There are, though, significant disparities in the quality of learning environments.
When my grandmother visited Singapore this year, one of her most striking comments was when she saw a sparkling, shiny Institute of Technical Education (ITE) "skyscraper" campus.
Her first impression was that, in such a quality school environment, the students would be the best and brightest in Singapore. It took me a while to convince her otherwise and her look of dismay was apparent.
Indeed, a question should be raised: In a system where people are rewarded according to merit, why are our best and brightest not getting the best learning environments?
I once attended a seminar at ITE College East. The interior was like a plush hotel: Sleek floors, plush lecture theatre chairs, high-quality tables - quality exceeding that found in our polytechnics and junior colleges (JC).
From the exterior, with an Olympic-sized swimming pool and a stadium stand, it looked like it was made for the Youth Olympics.
What saddened me, though, was the graffiti on the tables and chairs. Apparently, the students do not cherish what they have. Should any JC or polytechnic student have access to such quality facilities, I have no doubt they would appreciate it better.
There is a need to equalise government spending on school facilities. Campuses such as Anderson JC's and Victoria JC's pale in comparison to ITE College East's.
Our brightest students, who will become Singapore's future leaders, should get the best facilities in order to excel and grow. We should reward according to merit.
