In response to a question about government spending on scholarships and tuition grants for foreign students, Minister of Education Mr Ong Ye Kung said, “The core objective of our education system is to serve the needs of Singaporeans and no Singaporean is ever displaced from an institute of Higher Learning (IHL) because of international students.”
However, using the National University of Singapore (NUS) as an example, we can see that from its website that it clearly states limited vacancies in the institute due to facilities and student-to-faculty ratio for each academic year.
The website says:
“All undergraduate courses in NUS have limited vacancies. This ensures that we have sufficient facilities to support our students and maintain an optimal student-to-faculty ratio for effective teaching.”

The NUS website also provides a breakdown of the number of male and female undergraduate and postgraduate students in each academic year by course, but does not specify a breakdown of the international-local student ratio.
But if we take a look at the data on the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) website, QS notes that 7,645 out of 30,049 students in NUS are international students. Now, NUS has not disputed the figures stated by QS, since the university spokesperson was quoted in June saying that the QS ranking shows that the effort the institute has made in research and education is being highlighted.
Even so, when we look at the total number of students in NUS for the 2018/2019 academic year, it is a little higher than the QS figure, at about 39,923 students. Specifically, NUS say they have 30,093 undergraduates and 10793 post graduate students. Now, based on the slight difference in the total number of students noted by QS and NUS, we can estimate that NUS’s actual number of international students might be a little higher than QS’s figure.
All this to say, there are a limited number of spots in NUS with about 25% (calculated using figures from QS) going to international students. This ratio is similar to the ratio of international students to local students recorded by QS in Nanyang Technological University and Singapore Management University.
Given that we know there are a fixed number of spots in universities like NUS due to limited facilities, we can safely say that with each international student being enrolled as a student, a local student is deprived of his or her chance to obtain a degree from the local universities.
In the same Parliamentary session, Mr Ong also noted that the international students hoping to attend universities in Singapore are subject to a higher standard of admissions. He said, “In fact the process is that you apply to attend the university, you must meet a standard which is a higher one than for locals.”
But when we look at the NUS qualification standards for local and international students, we see that isn’t always the case.
For a fair comparison, we’ll take a look at the admission requirements for an international student with A Level qualification compared to that of a Singapore student with Singapore-Cambridge GCE A Level. We’re comparing these as A Levels are a recognised international qualification.
For international students applying to NUS, they need ‘a good pass in at least 3 A Level subjects’. Apart from that, they do not need SAT Subject Tests, English qualifications such as IELTS, or university entrance examinations.
On the other hand, local students need good results in three A Level subjects, Knowledge Inquiry (KI) or General Paper (GP), an A Level project work and meet the mother tongue language (MTLL) requirement (a minimum grade of O for the MTLL paper).

So as you can see, a Singapore student has to jump through more hoops to qualify for a spot in NUS compared to an international student. Not only are they competing for limited spots with Singaporeans, they have to do more to prove themselves to the universities.
Therefore, how can the minister say that Singaporean students are not deprived of a space in local universities by international students who receive scholarships or tuition grants?

Subscribe
Notify of
1 Comment
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Minister for Communications and Information declares "Singapore States Times" and Alex Tan's Facebook page as Declared Online Locations under POFMA

On Wednesday evening (6 May), Mr S. Iswaran, the Minister for Communications…

Workers’ Party’s MP Sylvia Lim questions the need for NTUC’s involvement in administration of Gov’t SIRS scheme

In Parliament on Thursday (4 June), Workers’ Party chairman Sylvia Lim raised…

34年前报导对现任总检察长含严重指控 李显扬:令人不安

前日,一则1986年的《海峡时报》的剪报在坊间流传:报导中提及,一名女律师,涉嫌非法搬走所属律师馆的一些法律文件,并在附近停车场被截获。而和他在一起的,是一名男律师。 这名男律师和上述女性律师,原本是同事。他在事发一两周前离开该律师馆。他们俩有意于明年初加入另一所具知名度的律师馆。而被搬走的法律文件包括一些案件前例,对于律师是很宝贵的资料,可用在法庭的论辩。 报导内容也形容,男律师在新加坡大学法学院念法律时,曾考获第一名,而律师也被认为很有才干。 何以这则剪报一时间引起注目?据本社向一些资深律师了解,原来报导中提及的女律师,是Christina Ong,至于文中提及的男律师则正是现任总检察长黄鲁胜,也曾是总理李显龙的私人律师。 尽管报导提及警方调查此案,惟较后总检察署决定不追究此事。事件也申诉到律师公会,惟后事如何惟公开。 至于律师公会在前日(9日)针对上述报导,则表示“有关报导提及的申诉,是没有根据的而被驳回。” 总理弟弟李显扬在读到这则34年前的报导,认为有关报导对现任总检察长有严重的指控。 “报导也提及时任总理李光耀,批评当时律师公会未严格管束会员纪律,并警惕有必要维护法律专业的清誉。” 然而,尽管律师公会昨日已表示有关投诉因为毫无根据,为此被撤销。但李显扬也指出,考量到现有的情况,仍令人感到不安。 The front…

Counterproductive to ban public screening of “To Singapore, With Love”

By Ghui So it has happened again. The government has yet again attempted…