Scaling Ivy Towers

Aug 17, 2007
President's Scholar follows in dad's footsteps
By Ho Ai Li

IN 1974, then Raffles Institution student Ko Kheng Hwa received the President's Scholarship from the late Dr Benjamin Sheares.

Now managing director of the Economic Development Board, Mr Ko will return to the Istana tonight with his wife, Madam Hoong Suet Kun, to see daughter Stephanie, 18, receive the same award from President SR Nathan.

The Public Service Commission, which awards the scholarship, said Stephanie - from Hwa Chong Institution - is the first recipient to have a President's Scholar as a parent.

There are four President's Scholars this year. The others are Sergius Wat, 19; Kaan Hung Leng, 18; and Liu Chen, 21, all from Raffles Junior College (RJC).

Stephanie, who will study medicine at Cambridge University in Britain, said: 'It's the satisfaction you get as a doctor, dedicating your life to helping people.'

As former vice-president of the Hwa Chong Students' Council, Stephanie helped organise many events. She also represented the Singapore Chinese Girls' School in basketball.

Fellow President's Scholar Hung Leng also has a 'scholar dad'.

Her father, Mr Kaan Quan Hang, a senior engineer, studied in Australia on a Colombo Plan Scholarship. Her two siblings also went overseas on government scholarships.

Unlike them, Hung Leng is staying here and studying medicine at the National University of Singapore to keep her father and housewife mother, Madam Tan Bee Geok, company, she said.

Hung Leng, from Raffles Girls' Secondary (RGS), excelled in fencing and playing the piano.

Her former RGS and RJC schoolmate Liu Chen is also well-versed in sports and the arts. A national taekwondo brown belt champion, she also plays the piano and double bass.

She moved here from Shandong, China, in 1997 with her father, Mr Liu Luo Sheng, a business consultant, and mother, Madam Xu Bao Li, a private tutor.

'I had heard that it's hard for an ex-foreigner to get a government scholarship. I'm glad I proved them wrong,' said Liu Chen, an only child who became a Singapore citizen two years ago. She will study economics at the University of Chicago.

The thorn among the roses is Sergius Wat, whose father, Mr Wat Tat Chuen, is a general manger in a construction firm. His mother, Madam Ang Poh Choo, is a housewife. His older brother is a Singapore Armed Forces scholar.

Sergius, concurrently a Singapore Police Force scholar, said he wanted 'to help people in a very real way.'

Helping people comes naturally to Sergius, a scout and recent winner of the HSBC Youth Excellence award for his charity work. He will study government at Harvard University.

hoaili@sph.com.sg
___________________________________________________________________

I can't help but have a feeling of unease when reading such an article. It's got nothing to do with the abilities and talents of Ms. Ko; I'm sure that her academic and extra-curricular achievements more than justify her receiving the scholarship. It's just that does Ms. Ko, with a dad who's a managing director, need a scholarship to attend a top university?

Of course, such merit-based scholarships aren't meant to help students afford expensive overseas education; their primary aim is to seek out top talents at a young age so they will join and hopefully stay in the civil service. But giving money to the already rich, however deserved, just doesn't sit well with me. It perpetuates a cycle where the rich and richer (in every sense of the word).

With her privileged background, Ms. Ko must have had all the best resources available for her to blaze her academic trail. It starts with a good pre-primary education. Then, enrollment into a 'branded' primary school would have been set up through legacy, buying of expensive property within 1km of chosen school, the capacity of parents to volunteer/contribute to the school in every possible way, etc. With said enrollment, one is immediately statistically likely to get into a top-ranked secondary school, where opportunities are abound. Similarly, one is then statistically favoured to get into a top JC. Along the way, maids, enrichment programes, interaction with fellow smart students, etc. all play their parts. The breathing of rarified air continues through to Ivy towers.

With wealthy and highly-educated parents with scholarly credentials, Ms. Ko would have been told that she had the capability to achieve anything she set her mind on from a young age. The sky's the limit. Achieving As and attending prestigious foreign universities aren't lofty, impossible dreams; they're practical targets locked in probably at a very young age already (Once again, kudos to Ms. Ko for her achievements. Not everyone with the tools use them wisely of course). So, is it not that the system was already in her favour from the get-go? That elitism breeds elitism?

Of course, every so often, ST will highlight some some child of hawkers/taxi-drivers/other blue-collar occupations who defied the odds to receive such scholarships. But that's just it, no? The odds are very much stacked against such cases from happening.

In this day and age, can a typical 6-year bond for these these scholarships for overseas study really tie talents down? I'm sure that the monetary penalty for bond-breaking is pittance for most cases (Private firms are also likely to pay them out to poach talents.).

I venture that such scholarships should come with variations. For example, for students whose annual household income is above $200k, he/she (henceforth 'he' for convenience) should be expected to fund the entirety for his college fees. He would still receive the award and get its associated prestige. His contract with PSC/governmental bodies would be bond-free. For those with household incomes above 100k, they pay 80% of school frees; the rest is covered. The bond then is two years (They also have the option of paying full fees and going bond-free). And so on and so forth.

It's just an idea. Some will argue that the top talents, with the global market at their feet, will thus not be attracted to these scholarships if they're not all-inclusive packages. But I say: For these mega-wealthy talents. is free tuition really the draw? I'd think that the promise of a fast-tracked career in the civil service, withs its attractive 'SR9 and MR4 pegged to the top 15 earners of 6 key jobs in the market' salary and the chance to lead and serve the people of Singapore would be draw enough. It should be.

Top US universities like Harvard, Princeton or MIT all do not believe in merit-based awards too, because they believe in getting an economically diverse student body. If you're good enough to get in, you get in. If you're rich enough to pay, you pay. Does this turn rich top students off and do they then apply to lower-tiered schools who give merit awards as bait to attract them? Some might, but most don't. The Harvard brand is reason enough to pay. So should the PSC brand. (Private corporations are free to give out merit/whatever-based scholarships, of course.)

I guess it just irks me that state money is pumped into a scholarship system which is by and large advantageously set up for the already rich, while local unis do pathetically little in terms of making education affordable for needy students. All they offer are loans or payment through CPF. They do offer a very limited number of grants, but it comes with either vague ("needy" - defined as?) or ridiculous qualifiers (One bursary for NUS's qualifier is household monthly income of <$1000. I mean, seriously.). (The lack of school funding for financial aid for local unis is linked to low endowments, which is partly due to the weakness of alumni relations. But that's another topic altogether.)

Perhaps then, I don't know, the millions of dollars spent each year by govt bodies could be put to use to help needy students instead. Help break the circle; equalise the playing field. Pipe dream, but we never know till we try.