so the PAP is still stuck with the maxim "if it ain't broken
don't fix it".
Scholar system may become obsolete
Like China's imperial exam, Singapore's way of selecting top
scholars will outlive its usefulness in a changed world.
By Seah Chiang Nee.
Nov 27, 2005
SINGAPORE'S early successes were built largely on the back of a
scholarship system that - broadly speaking - followed imperial
China as a way to recruit the 'best and brightest" to serve the
country.
For 1,300 years of imperial examination history, China's emperors
had selected 100,000 state-level and more than a million provincial
scholars to administer the vast country.
Although the details differed, the objective of ancient China and
21st Century Singapore was similar - aimed at getting the best
scholars who do well in education to help run the country.
But it worked well under their respective circumstances.
For China, however, the method became outdated and was ended in
1911 because the world had changed.
The imperial exam tested only literature, poetry and essays, but
not science, math or any of today's modern studies that were needed
by a changed world.
The question now is whether Singapore's scholarship system of
selecting the best has also outlived its days in the 21st Century
that needs entrepreneurial and innovative skills.
The government spends millions to provide some 200 to 250
university scholarships each year to the best students here based
on examination results, out of 1,200 to 1,400 applications received
by the Public Service Commission.
Competition, just like in ancient China, is strong and the
successful are chosen for the crème de la crème schools. They are
sent to the best universities abroad and given high-paying official
positions.
The Chinese imperial system was a method to evaluate ability and
select officials in dynastic China on the basis of merit rather
than social position or political connections.
Similarly, Singapore leaders also advocate meritocracy. Lee Kuan
Yew was an admirer of Confucian teachings, which formed a big
subject in the imperial exam.
But both systems had unintended side effects. In China, the
majority of those who sat for the exam were from the wealthy
class.
In Singapore, a recent report said that 75% of scholarship winners
lived in private condos or landed property, the rest in cheaper
public housing estates. The rich continue to have an edge.
Lee, now Minister Mentor, admits that academic grades cannot
determine the best intelligence or capabilities but until a better
way is found, he said they remain the criteria.
But in the innovative world, can it continue to work when
circumstances are changing so rapidly? Today private enterprise and
human innovation, not knowledge of science and engineering, are the
new gods needed for survival here.
Some Singaporeans believe that Lee's scholars' class may also
become obsolete just as the imperial examination went out of
fashion.
In fact, the Lee government had exceeded imperial China in
recruitment.
Over the years, the large intake of scholars into the bureaucracy
and military leadership was so heavy that it has created a hole in
the economy. It has deprived the state of a rich source of
potential entrepreneurs.
The brightest students are filtered into a secure, well-paid
bureaucracy where they developed an ability to 'play safe' and
avoid taking risks so that they can keep their jobs, the opposite
of the new Singaporean we need.
Despite of - or because of - the scholar class, Singapore remains
sadly behind its trade rivals in entrepreneurial spirit and
capabilities.
It has led Lee to get the government to release up to half of its
state-supported civil service scholars to move into starting
enterprises, with questionable results.
For years scholars have been running state-owned enterprises, but
it is not the same as taking risks with their own money and
careers. Few are prepared to take personal risks to start their own
companies.
Good grades may not make good businessmen and often have nothing to
do with them.
Scholars may produce good bureaucrats and administrators but they
do not necessarily have sound judgment, market ideas or profits,
qualities needed in the new economy.
Dr Phua Kai Lit, a sociologist who received his PhD from Johns
Hopkins, wrote that Singapore had become a country "increasingly
ruled by economists, engineers, and other technocratic experts with
First Class Honours undergraduate degrees, Oxbridge and Ivy League
Master's degrees and PhDs."
"Whether this society truly fulfils (the Singaporean) dream and
meets his expectations is a question worthy of debate," he
said.
Another reason why it may not survive long is that it promotes an
elitist class, which despite the leaders' best efforts, is growing
more unpopular with the new generation.
Actually, offering high civil service jobs to scholars is not
uncommon in many countries - but not in politics. The unique
feature in Singapore lies in its use to select Cabinet ministers
and members of Parliament in the ruling party.
In other democratic countries winning elections is a deciding
factor, but the predominant strength of the People's Action Party
virtually rules out this criterion.
R.K. Vasil wrote in 1992, "The PAP has established a unique system
of recruitment of its top political leaders and Ministers.
"Talented individuals are 'spotted' and have to pass through a
barrage of observations, interviews, attachment to a veteran MP
and, allegedly, even psychological tests before being offered safe
parliamentary seats to contest (under the PAP banner) in General
Elections.
"After winning these safe seats, they may be offered responsibility
as junior ministers and if they pass this test, they would then be
offered higher level positions with greater responsibilities"
For the present, nothing much will change but, as the leaders
themselves say, nothing remains the same for long in this
fast-moving world.
