The blind leading the blind on schoalrships

I thought I'd done my final post on the Alvivi saga, but since there have been some pretty stupid statements made by Singaporean government officials, I couldn't resist responding to those. I refer you to this article for the source of those quotes - I am disappointed that the writer of that article didn't question the validity of those statements, that's just lazy journalism, come on, you can do better than that!

Government Parliamentary Committee chairman for Education Lim Biow Chuan said, "Why do we give ASEAN scholarships at the secondary and pre-university levels when you don't know how these students will turn out? Alvin Tan may be smart, but in my opinion, he does not have the character of what we expect of a scholar. A person's character would have 'come out' by pre-university, so we should make the (school) principal's character assessment of the student as one of the criteria for the granting of the scholarship," added Mr Lim (MP for Mountbatten).

What are we looking for in a scholar?

There are so many things wrong with Mr Lim's statement - let's start with him questioning the challenges of picking a winner amongst the students. He questioned, "Why do we give ASEAN scholarships at the secondary and pre-university levels when you don't know how these students will turn out?" The simple answer Mr Lim, is no, you don't know how these students will turn out. You try your best to make a calculated guess based on the evidence you have gathered on these students but even then, that is not a precise science. You can't wait till someone has proven himself before giving him a scholarship - it doesn't work retrospectively. So, what makes a scholar? 

I look at my peers from my VJC days - we have all done pretty well at our O levels in order to win a place at VJC to do our A levels. Today, 18 years after we have done our A levels - you have a range of achievements. There are some who have gone on to do amazing things and a few who have achieved precious little - and then there's a lot who are doing okay, just getting by, nothing remarkable. What is interesting is that there is no correlation whatsoever between our academic achievements in our JC days and what we have done with our lives in the working world. The factors which seems to have set those high-fliers apart are far more to do with their character: they are street-smart, have empathy, are good with people - qualities that will never be revealed in their A level results, but are the factors which were responsible for making them successful in the working world 

Some of my former classmates have done far better than others.

The people who are responsible for picking scholars have a difficult task because parents and teachers are so involved in the process - so the panel are not looking at the student per se, but rather, a carefully constructed product of everyone involved in the process, who know exactly what these panels are looking for. 

Let me give you an example, in my secondary school, I was involved with the Interact Club - a CCA which was all about going out and help the less privileged in our society, allowing the students to get involved in all kinds of worthwhile charity work. I'm sure some students did it out of a genuine desire to be charitable - but many of the students did it because their parents made them do it. A friend told me, "My mother said it would make me look good on my CV when I apply for a scholarship, they are always looking for stuff like that which shows that you have good character. I'm not good at sports, so I need something like this on my CV." Another friend said, "My dad wants me to get into NUS medicine like him, which is so hard to get into even if you have straight As - so I need to demonstrate the caring side of my character to show that I will be a good doctor, hence the Interact Club." 

Do you know what it takes to make your application stand out?

I have a friend who is a teacher in a JC in Singapore - during the school holidays, he would organize these amazing trips to places like Cambodia, Philippines and Indonesia, where a group of students would be taken to a rural community and help out with an NGO or charity. For the students, it is a chance to experience something totally different, to get a taste of a very different kind of working life and gain some valuable work experience. Sounds pretty good right? How can one fault a charity project like that? 

My teacher friend confessed, "In principle, it's a brilliant concept. In practice, the kids don't want to be there! When they turn up in some remote village in Cambodia with no mobile phone signal, they want to turn around and run back to Singapore. It's the parents who want them to go there - think about it. Just 2 weeks in Cambodia or Philippines and these kids come back with this ridiculous sense of entitlement, like I'm Mother-freaking-Theresa and I've just made the world a better place, I've made such a grand sacrifice, now gimme a scholarship. For them, it's just a tick in a box - that's the only charity work they would ever do in their entire life and somehow, because they took part in this project, they claim to be some great saint. It's ridiculous how the project is used by these Singaporean students trying to apply for scholarships - this is evident when we actually get there." 

"I've dug a well in this village, that proves I'm of good character, so gimme a scholarship."

"A lot of these kids are more of a liability when we get there because they are such pampered spoilt brats who are totally unable to cope, never mind work, in somewhere like rural Cambodia! They think it's a holiday - it's not! But the parents know that it looks good on the CV and for scholarship applications, it does demonstrate a different side of their character - so these trips are always oversubscribed and I'm under pressure to take as many as possible each time I organize such a trip. Don't get me wrong, some of the students who go are brilliant and are such great young ambassadors for Singapore - but others are just... disgraceful. They don't give a damn about the people they are supposedly helping, they just want to do as little as possible and still have this on their CV. Sure I get very angry with them - but I would never say anything bad about them if they need a teacher's reference for a scholarship application. I can't - the principal would murder me, if the parents haven't done so already." 

So when these teenagers apply for a scholarship, trust me Mr Lim, their parents and teachers would have made sure that there is plenty of 'evidence' of their good character - it's not rocket science, it's a formula that they follow and no more than a box-ticking exercise at the end of the day. Furthermore, in my previous article, I have already discussed how one is on one's best behaviour during job and scholarship interviews: we dress up nicely, we give polite answers and we would always hide our flaws. You would never shoot yourself in the foot in an interview by admitting anything that would seriously hurt your chances of getting the job or scholarship!

Let me give you an example, here's a classic question they use to try to catch you out. "What would you say is your biggest flaw and what have you done to address that problem?" You see, they're forcing you to talk about the things you'll rather avoid. The standard answer is this (and yes, please feel free to use this), "My biggest flaw is that I am a perfectionist - I am never totally satisfied with my work and sometimes, I can cause myself a lot of stress when I strive for perfection. In order to deal with this, I am learning to trust in my own judgement and accept that I may make mistakes sometimes - but that it is okay to make mistakes sometimes as long as I learn from my mistakes." Textbook answer! For more on job interviews, check out my article here. 

Such is the situation, the applicants for these scholarships are very well prepared and polished by their parents and teachers and are custom-made for this process. Mr Lim went on to say, "A person's character would have 'come out' by pre-university, so we should make the (school) principal's character assessment of the student as one of the criteria for the granting of the scholarship," 

LMFAO - WTF? Mr Lim, how naive are you? Or are you just plain stupid? Seriously, if these are the best talents in the PAP speaking (remember the SHT fiasco from last year?), then bad news Singapore - you're in trouble.  Like which school principal would write, "Don't waste you time with this guy, he's nothing but trouble." No way, the school principal has a vested interest in the process - every scholar is a statistic that the principal would display proudly for the world to see as evidence of just how successful that school is in churning out scholars. You may as well as the applicant's parents to provide a character reference. Think about it - would the principal sabotage his/her own student's prospects, only to see the scholarships awarded to applicants from a rival school? Duh. No, you take a chance and you hope that this scholar wouldn't go on to create an Alvivi style sex blog or become the next Annabel Chong (who incidentally was a scholar from HCJC back in the day, oh yeah). 

In any case, a principal is not directly involved with the student - I hardly spoke to my principal in my secondary school and JC; despite having been a double scholar already when I was in JC. Like, why would I? It was my teachers I spent my time interacting with and talking with - they were the ones who knew me well. Then again, I can't imagine a teacher possibility writing a bad reference for his/her student - that just wouldn't happen or would at least be extremely rare given they have a vested interest in the student gaining that scholarship. Perhaps the only true test of the applicant's character would be a peer review - at least we know that the applicant's classmates have no vested interest and can afford to be totally honest. There you go, there's your solution - a peer character review. 

Oh yes, nothing brings out the truth like a peer review!

So clearly, the government hasn't refined this process to the point where they can trust that it delivers the kind of results they want, yet every year, they are still giving out over S$30 million worth of scholarships to foreigners each year. Surely it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work it out that you need to deal with the problems of the process before you throw more and more money at it? Is there any wonder why the locals are so unhappy over this issue? 

I would like to move on to something which may come as a shock to some Singaporeans, but did it occur to you that there can be some people who can be extremely successful in what they do but have sex lives that you may find unsavoury? Take Bill Clinton for example - as president, Clinton presided over the longest period of peacetime economic expansion in American history. What he did with Monica Lewinsky and the scandal that ensued finished his political career - but quite frankly, I don't have a problem with his private life, lying under oath is quite a different issue. 

Clinton was a great president, IMHO.

This begs the question: what do you want in a scholar? Do you want someone who will ultimately become really good at his job (for example, running the economy, steering an economy out of recession), or are you simply going to reward people who will remain chaste, celibate virgins? Quite frankly, if there is a politician who can get us out of this current recession, I don't give a damn what his/her private sex life is like - just get the economy fixed. 

Where do you draw the line? After all, if I go to a professional for a service (eg. a dentist), the contract is for my money in exchange for a professional service - the dentist's private life is not part of the equation at all, I would only be interested if say the dentist has gotten into trouble over his/her dental work in the past - anything else is simply not relevant. Likewise, when I use an accountant, as long as s/he gets my accounts in order and all the figures add up - I am really not interested in what s/he gets up to in his private time or the details of his/her sex life. 

Call me pragmatic, but I choose to focus on what is most important.

Such is the distinction between one's private life and one's professional life. I shall leave you with a story and let you be the judge. My parents are retired teachers and they had a colleague who transferred to their school who was very quiet and kept to himself. After some months, he warmed to my father and revealed that the reason why he transferred schools was because he was under a lot of pressure to leave. He had just undergone a messy divorce where adultery was involved - somehow, news of the divorce leaked and became hot gossip. The parents caught wind of it and decided that he was a divorced man was a poor role model for their children - so they demanded that the school got rid of him. The teacher protested, "I never claimed to be a role model, I am just here to do my job and I am a very good teacher. What has my divorce got to do with anything?" Nonetheless, given how unpleasant the atmosphere became, he jumped before he was pushed. Do you think this teacher was treated fairly? 

Are we capable of making that distinction between one's professional space and one's private space? Why are people so intolerant and judgemental even in this day and age? Whilst I am an atheist, I do like this Christian saying, "So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." (John 8:7)  Jesus faced a mob that was eager to execute a woman caught in adultery. He put a stop to it with a simple challenge: anyone who has no sin in their life should step forward and throw the first stone. That sentence is often cited as a reminder to avoid judging others when there are faults in your own life that need to be addressed.