I sent this email to Mr Tharman today.
__________________________________
Dear Mr Tharman,
(-gives my name, school and such-)
Recently the education landscape in Singapore had undergone many
much needed changes, and freeing up of the rigid post-secondary
government institutions' admissions policies. I had previously
feedbacked to MOE on this.
I am overjoyed that the situation had changed for the better.
Literally thousands of students who, like me, failed to meet entry
requirements would have another chance instead of blindly rejected
by the purely-by-grades policy.
This year, I got rejected from Singapore Polytechnic's Architecture
course all because my 'O' Level Mathematics grade missed entry
requirements by 1 single grade. The other of my grades, I would
consider quite satisfactory. But, if a candidate fails to meet
entry requirements in English, he/she might be allowed in.
I had appealed 3 times, each level higher than the previous one,
but was still rejected. I did not appeal to go in the course at
first attempt, but appealing to get just a simple interview to
prove myself to SP. After first rejection, I appealed through my
MP, Kebun Bahru's Mr Inderjit Singh. Finally, I appealed to the
highest authority I think could logically help me. MOE. But still,
the rigidness of the admissions system hit me with another
blow.
I called SP to enquire. The operator for Architecture got the
person in charge for Admissions on the line. And she told me
something that shocked me. She said "we only interview those who
meet entry requirements". That's killing all chances of those who
do not meet entry requirements. I was not even given a
chance!
I have no other choice but to go (-name of school-) and retake my
math, and wasting a year.
I do not know if the new entry system allows for this, but I would
like to suggest to you, and MOE, to allow all students rights for
course admissions interviews. Give them a chance to show their
talent, hidden behind the facade of grades. Give them a chance to
prove themselves, to impress the interviewers that they have the
talent, aptitude, interest and skill. It's unfair to reject a
student all because of their grades. Like judging a book by it's
cover. What's most important is the contents. In this case, the
talent or aptitude.
Many people I know are not able to get into the course they wanted
because of their grades. I would like to suggest every course
holding open interviews for those who were intially rejected, but
have talent, aptitude or strong keen interest in the course. That
should be the case, and the real purpose, instead of only
interviewing those who meet entry requirements.
Epitome Thomas Edison and Albert Einstein. When they were young,
they were considered 'stupid' and rejected from schools. But later,
they become world famous and respected in their respective fields,
not shown intially in youth, and not shown in academic grades.
Also, there are cases of those intellectually less fortunate, or
those with mental disablities showing skills in areas like
mathematics or talents in their own fields.
In the decades of rigid purely grades based admissions, makes me
ponder how many potential Edisons or Einsteins had the system
smothered. How many dreams had been shattered. How many futures
ruined. Does academic grades mean everything?
I hope the MOE would take this into serious consideration. Give all
students the right for course admissions interviews. I hope to hear
some positive news soon.
Thank you for your time.
____________________
