Are precious local talents being shut out from NUS and NTU? Many students who failed to enter the two Singapore universities have excelled academically overseas. Why are local campuses shutting the door on these precious local talents? SANDRA DAVIE discusses the issue. FORMER Institute of Technical Education (ITE) student Tan Teck Chuan returned from Cardiff University in Wales with a first-class honours degree three years ago. If not for sheer determination and family support, he would have ended up as a technician. But today, the 30-year-old is an engineer in Mindef's Defence Material Organisation with a promising future. As he scored only four O-level credits, he entered MacPherson ITE in 1987 and obtained his certificate in mechanical and electrical drafting and design two years later. After completing his national service, he joined Ngee Ann Polytechnic where he began his winning streak, sweeping more than 10 book prizes, a scholarship and the first Tay Eng Soon gold medal for outstanding work as a diploma student in building services. Then came decision time. He could wait for another eight months and try for a place at the National University of Singapore or the Nanyang Technological University. If he clinched a place, it would mean studying for another four years as he would not be allowed to skip the first year because his polytechnic course was not considered relevant. His other option: Go to Cardiff University and aim for an honours degree in two years. NUS and NTU do not reveal how they calculate the entry points for polytechnic graduates, but Mr Tan knew that besides his polytechnic grades, his O-level results and work experience would be taken into account. On that basis, he did not rate his chances highly. On the other hand, he had a firm offer from Cardiff, one of the top five universities in mechanical engineering in Britain. The choice was clear, but the two-year stint in Wales did not come cheap though -- $60,000 to be exact. His three sisters, storeman brother and carpenter brother-in-law pooled their money to help him. His widowed mother, who works in a factory, insisted that he take some of her savings. His father died when he was 14. Two years later, Mr Tan returned home with first-class honours in mechanical engineering, the best student award and a best team award for his project. Although he appreciated the value of the overseas exposure, Mr Tan told Insight he wished that Singapore had given him and others like him the opportunity to pursue tertiary education here -- at less cost to himself and his family. "People ask me why was I not satisfied with a poly diploma. But let's face it, in Singapore, what counts is a degree. "And by the end of my poly course, I knew I had the ability to do a degree in two or three years, so I don't see why I don't deserve that shot at a university degree -- right here at home." FLOCKING OVERSEAS MR TAN is not alone in the importance he places on university education. Neither is he a rare case of a Singaporean made good. British and Australian universities report many success stories like him. Despite the increased intake at the two local universities, the set-up of the Open University and the mushrooming of distance learning degree programmes, Singaporeans continue to flock overseas for a university education. Last year, some 10,000 Singaporeans enrolled at NUS and NTU. Another 1,400 -- 80 per cent of whom are polytechnic diploma holders -- joined the Open University. No one knows for sure how many registered for distance learning degree programmes but commercial schools running these programmes estimate the figure to be between 10,000 and 20,000. On top of that, some 5,000 Singaporeans left to study for undergraduate degrees in Britain, the United States and Australia. And the student diaspora is growing year by year despite the hefty price tag. A Citibank survey found that on the average, a university year costs $37,600 in the US, $34,700 in Britain and $26,000 in Australia. Overseas education counsellors say most Singaporeans go abroad because they cannot get into the local universities and the bulk of them -- about 60 per cent -- are polytechnic diploma holders. Some 65 per cent of those who went to British universities last year were polytechnic graduates. The comparative figures for Australia and the US were 80 per cent and 15 per cent respectively. Another 20 to 30 per cent are A-level holders who do not meet NUS and NTU admission criteria. The rest head overseas on scholarships. Why are British universities popular with polytechnic graduates? Because they are "flexible" in their admission criteria and offer advance placements, said Mr David Tupper who heads the Study in Britain Unit at the British Council. Stressing that flexible does not mean lower standards, he said that British universities are willing to look at other indicators of an applicant's potential besides his O-level and polytechnic results. The track record has shown that polytechnic graduates have proved more than capable of completing their degrees in a shorter time. Officials of Leeds, Glasgow, Leicester and Loughborough Universities note that Singaporeans are model students who pass with first class or second-upper honours. The University of Glasgow alone had 20 first class and 40 second-upper class honours among the graduating batch of Singaporeans last year. So the irresistible question must be -- are NUS and NTU missing out on all these precious local talents? As many of these polytechnic graduates ask aptly, why are they not being given the chance of a university education -- right here at home? When contacted, the spokesmen for the two universities here said that those who take the polytechnic route have chances equal to any A-level holder. Although they did not reveal the exact weightage, they said that they take in polytechnic graduates based on their O-level and polytechnic grades and work experience. This July, NUS admitted about 200 students with polytechnic diplomas and NTU admitted 600. Maintaining that there is no quota for polytechnic graduates, NTU president Cham Tao Soon said the university makes yearly projections on the number of polytechnic graduates likely to qualify. "It is a misconception that we don't give them enough places. Last year, we were prepared to take up to 800 poly graduates. In the end, we admitted only 600. We cannot lower our standards just to admit more of them." He said that O-level results are taken into account because there is no one standardised examination for the polytechnics and the O levels are a common denominator. TRANSPARENCY NEEDED BUT students who had been rejected by the local universities are not convinced. They say that the institutions should be more transparent on how exactly entry points are calculated and be more flexible with their admission criteria. Under the new admission criteria that will apply from the year 2003, polytechnic graduates will be admitted based on their O-level and polytechnic grades and reasoning test scores which will make up 25 per cent of the admission score. Said Mr Christopher Leow, 25, who took a similar route as Mr Tan Teck Chuan, and came back with a first-class honours degree in mechanical engineering from Loughborough University: "It is going half the way but not all the way. It is good to include SAT scores -- which test reasoning. "But O levels still count and some poly grads don't have good O levels to show. But they may have other qualities -- like problem-solving skills or emotional intelligence. But NUS and NTU don't care to look for these." Late developers take issue with the Singapore system for being an unforgiving one penalising those who need more time to get into gear. Mr Leow, who is teaching at ITE Bedok, adds: "You can swipe all the prizes in the polytechnic but your O levels still count. When I got a place at Loughborough, I applied for a PSC teaching scholarship because I wanted to come back and teach at ITE. But they didn't even call me up for an interview." Both Mr Leow and Mr Tan Teck Chuan, however, admit that Singapore may be loosening up. They note the reassuring statements from government leaders in recent years that everyone will be nurtured to the best that he is capable of and that the diversity of talents will be harnessed properly. So, how can this lofty rhetoric be translated into practical action? Those interviewed said first, it is important to broaden the definition of "merit" -- to go beyond just the ability to score in examinations. And it is not just schools and universities that should make a conscious effort to look for the other abilities in a person but also scholarship boards and employers, especially the Government. Second, the system must be changed to provide more routes to the top. This means providing more opportunities at every level, right up to university level and beyond. Some argue for expanding the intake of local students at NTU and NUS. They do not buy the argument that the two universities have reached full capacity. After all, they note that the two universities have expanded their facilities and staff numbers overnight to double their intake of postgraduate students. Others call for a faster expansion of the Singapore Management University which will take in its first batch of 300 students next year. They suggest making it a more comprehensive university offering courses that are in demand, such as engineering. Another suggestion -- upgrade one or two of the four polytechnics into universities, as in Britain, or let them run university-accredited courses for their graduates. POTENTIAL OVER-SUPPLY BUT if these ideas are implemented, would it not lead to too many graduates chasing after too few jobs? For years, the Government had slapped down calls to boost the number of university places, citing lower academic standards and a potential over-supply of graduates as two risks. It said that the two universities and four polytechnics here provided enough places for about 60 per cent of each year's cohort of students and noted that this was one of the highest rates in the world. The advocates for more higher education opportunities, however, are quick to point out that the Government itself had got the figures wrong and had admitted so two years ago. Deputy Prime Minister Dr Tony Tan revealed in Parliament that projections by the Ministry of Trade and Industry indicated that Singapore needed 17,000 graduates a year to service its economy. With an intake of about 10,000 or 11,000 to NUS and NTU, there would still be a shortfall. He ruled out expanding the intake at NUS and NTU, saying that it could lower their standards and cause them to become unmanageable "mega-universities". The better options were to increase the number of tertiary-level institutions and recruit students from overseas. But those who feel that they have been shut out of the local campuses said that it has been almost two years since, and only a few hundred more university places have been opened up through the setting up of SMU. They argued that this situation was unfair to them as it means they have to go overseas to study at a high cost to their family. Furthermore, they said, why should they be denied the same kind of subsidies that students at NUS and NTU enjoy? Subsidies for NUS and NTU students range from 65 to 78 per cent. In lieu of subsidies, they suggested that the Government look into reimbursing students part of their tuition fees upon successful completion of their course. Some conditions can be attached to ensure that they return to serve the country. This argument is a variation of the education voucher proposal which some economists advocate. Put simply, it is that every citizen should qualify for a state subsidy on tertiary education, no matter which university he chooses (or there could be some conditions to ensure that they only qualify if they enrol in fairly reputable universities). Thus a student who decides to study in a foreign university will not lose out financially from one who does it at NUS. Another oft-repeated suggestion: extend the CPF Education Scheme to those who go overseas. Basically a loan scheme, it was started to help low-income Singaporeans who have difficulty supporting their children through local tertiary institutions. The student has to start repayment one year after graduation. "If the Government can allow you to use your CPF for investments like shares, then why not overseas education? Isn't that the best kind of investment you can make," asks Mr L. Raja, 50, an insurance agent who has had to take on a second job to send his polytechnic-graduate son overseas. His is a voice that will grow louder as the demand for tertiary education among a better-educated and more affluent population continues to grow and grow. As Mr Raja put it: "Singapore's sole asset is its people, so why aren't we giving every Singaporean the opportunity to realise his full potential -- right here at home?"