When has the government said it wanted to set up a LAC to cater to polytechnic graduates? The last I heard, MOE said it was deliberating between three options: a LAC, a 'bridge' between polytechnic and university, and a fourth general-purpose university (i.e. another NUS/NTU).

Wayne, your post seems to be predicated on a 'LAC for Singaporeans' assumption, might there also be some weightage in how a liberal arts college might fit in within a strategy to make Singapore an 'education hub' (i.e. to bring in fee-paying foreign students)? Though it seems that this strategy has been on the backburner since the debacles wrt Warwick and UNSW.

twasher,

A very important point you have raised. Let me clarify furthur.

1) You are right that the government is exploring options for a fourth university - but exactly what the options still require more clarification from the government. It is still a little confusing to me the exact plans and options as seen by the following CNA article:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/specialreport/news/294891_43/1/.html

Part of the confusion I believe is as a result of the consultation phase that government is in now on the fourth university.

In the news reports I have researched for this article, many of these articles start off with the Prime Minister's call for at least 30% of each cohoot being able to attend university, and that hopefully many of them would be from local polys. The impression that I have is that no matter which form the fourth university (another question: would there be a fifth or sixth university?) appears eventually, it would have to (partly or mainly) serve the national goal of ensuring more polytechnics graduates to be able to obtain a local degree.

Please see the short blurb by REACH (or former feedback unit) on the fourth university as below:
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/REACHsDiscussionCorner/tabid/116/ptid/404/threadid/566/forumtype/posts/Default.aspx

That is why I raised the concerns of the sociological nature of the demand and supply of poly students and the fourth university (if in the form of LAC eventually) in my article.

Ringsei,

Thanks for your note. I wanted to ask you the question, what do you think about the LAC within the strategy of a "fee-paying" hub.

From my reading of this fourth university, I suggest that it is as somewhat fundenmentally (I would be happy to stand corrected) different from that of UNSW. While UNSW appears to be catered to market demands through the EDB's proposal of making Singapore a "education hub", I sense that the fourth university would play a significantly different role than that of UNSW. The Prime Minister himself said on the national day rally of the importance of higher percentages of Singaporeans in each cohoot being able to attend higher education through the setting up of a fourth university. If such a vision of education is articulated versus the vision of a materialistic education hub, perhaps the fourth university would be set up in a different way. Logically, the university's funding issue would be both tackled by state and private enteprises (I recall that Tony Tan called for through thinking of funding for a LAC) with holding power most likely be held by Singaporeans stakeholders rather than foreign ones. All this is still speculative, we might have to wait and see.

Wayne, it seems that you identify the institutional and personal sources for the push for the fourth university with the PM and Cabinet vs. UNSW-type 'education hub' with EDB.

I haven't got a good feel or confident reading myself; though I am guessing that whether the fourth university will be LAC (vs the other alternatives identified) may very well be tied to the fate of the education hub strategy. This is because I'm not entirely sure if there will be sufficient domestic demand to justify an LAC. More importantly the alternatives have a better fit with the skills/training discourse of the ruling party and there may be concerns that increasing the supply of LAC education may increase the supply of the politically engaged/interested.

Hi Wayne

Is it possible to direct us to the article which featured the student from Brown? My search for it doesn't seem to have any results. If you could give the paper's name, date or a URL would be great.

Hi Wayne

Thanks for throwing some light on the liberal arts college issue. From the way you describe it particularly about a local university option for polytechnic graduates, the government's idea of a LAC is perhaps different from the one you outlined. The government probably wants to cover all the perceived gaps and build a university focusing on humanities and social sciences, since SIM and SMU cover business-related disciplines and NUS/NTU are "general" universities, and give poly grads who do not want a SIM or SMU route a "arts" degree to cap their technical/vocational background - a best of both worlds sell. But you are right, the government has not been clear on what they want to do yet.

To all readers:

You might be interested to know that Singapore would not be the first university in Asia to open a liberal arts college/university. (I fully expect the mainstream press to pick up on this sooner or later)

If you want to know about liberal arts in an Asian context, Lingnan university in Hong Kong is actually one of the first (There might be others in Korea that I am not aware of or they might be not) liberal arts colleges in Asia. They too have an exchange program with Carleton College. You can read about the educational philosophy of Lingnan here:
http://www.ln.edu.hk/info/about/lingnan/liberal_arts.shtml

Incidentally, Lingnan has many characteristic similar to LACs in America, even as it changes some areas to suit the demands of a Hong kong population (such as the decision to offer limited postgraduate opportunities).

Ringsei,

Thanks for your comments. I take your point on the linkage between the education hub and the fourth university. But interestingly, Seah Chiang Nee shares my view on the issue. His latest article in "The Star" talks about higher education in Singapore:
http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?file=/2007/12/29/columnists/insightdownsouth/19867158&sec=Insight%20Down%20South

"The proposed fourth full-time university is not just about pushing up numbers.

It will allow people more choices of study to meet the demands of a 21st century high-end economy at subsidised costs.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong says its objective is to allow 30% of each cohort to get into publicly funded universities by 2015, compared to 23% currently.

Lee is, of course, referring only to local graduates, excluding an estimated 10,000 Singaporeans who study abroad.

The general public is exuberant about the prospect of another institution."

Ironically though, you might be right about the failure of any future university to elude the education hub underlying philosophy because liberal arts colleges are typically private and have high tuition fees. I wonder how Singapore is going to reconcile that and create a workable precedent. (In other words, how would a state-funded liberal arts operate (both financially and intellectually?)

wx:

Try going to any library and look up the English newspaper that is not archived online or through its own website/database. The article appeared around 4-5 weeks ago. I hope you get it.

TVD:

Thanks for your comments. You might be absolutely right on that point. Just to add that LACs are not only strong in the arts and the social sciences, but are extremely great in the sciences too. My roommate, a brilliant guy who is interested in marrying computer science and genetics (biology), was able to find professors from the two departments to create a special major for him and guide him along the way. It always fascinate me how and why Carleton professors from different departments would take so much time to meet up and discuss with my roommate over his research, which is extremely cutting edge and cross-disciplinary. He even gave me some inspiration for my articles and reminds me that social science arguments are not necessary watertight as we like them to be. This is because causes and effects argument generated in the less than perfect laboratory as existed in human beings living in the real world differ from controlled experiments generated by massive computer programming.

You might be interested in this quote from a May 5 2006 article on Carleton from the "Chronicle of Higher Education"

"Although Carleton's undergraduate enrollment is minuscule compared with that at universities like Minnesota in the Twin Cities, North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and Wisconsin at Madison, it produces more women who go on to earn doctorates in the physical sciences than do any of those institutions.

Carleton has even managed to send on more women for advanced degrees in the physical sciences than either Dartmouth College or Princeton University--both of which graduate double the number of women that Carleton does.

"We don't lose women along the BA-to-PhD pipeline," says Mary Savina '72, a professor of geology at Carleton. "Our women carry on. We show them what real work in the profession is like."

"PhD Prone"

Data from the federal Survey of Earned Doctorates show that 32 women who earned bachelor's degrees from Carleton went on to receive PhDs in the physical sciences between 1999 and 2003. That makes Carleton one of the top 20 producers in the country of women who earned doctorates in the physical sciences. (In the survey, physical sciences is a broad category that includes astronomy, chemistry, computer science, geology, mathematics, and physics.)

Higher-education officials have been particularly interested in encouraging women to pursue those fields because, compared with the life sciences, they are unpopular with female students. Even at Carleton, twice as many men as women go on to earn doctorates in the physical sciences. And nationwide, faculty members in those disciplines are overwhelmingly male."

See the full article as reprinted from the COHE here:
http://apps.carleton.edu/voice/2006summer/feature5.php

Greetings, Wayne and Happy New Year everyone :) Hao jiu bu jian...!

Just some points to raise about Wayne's article...

1) I feel that many of the 'benefits' of the LACs mentioned (e.g. interdisciplinarity, intellectual curiosity, critical thinking, better writing, better student-faculty interaction, confidence/maturity, etc) can be delivered through the existing universities.

2) The article kept stressing the *smallness* of the LACs, and then says that "a liberal arts college... prepares *Singaporeans* well for graduate and professional programmes." Since LACs are so small, will they end up as elitist institutions catering to the rich families?

3) The article stressed how LACs are not driven by "vocational goals", and yet Wayne concluded that "A liberal arts college in Singapore can play a crucial role in creating a twentieth first century skilled Singapore *workforce* that possesses intellectual curiosity, confidence, maturity and inclusiveness." It seems that in the end the goal of LAC is still to create a skilled workforce (through a longer process).

4) Wayne asked, "Would a potential doctor in Singapore not benefit from liberal arts circular, where they could potentially learn the philosophy of ethics, the arts of oral presentation, the history of medicine and the politics of healthcare? Would a potential lawyer in Singapore not benefit from understanding the legal history of China, the philosophy of law and social movements in Southeast Asia?" I would say, "Yes, but must all education be formal education? Could these doctors, lawyers and other professionals not go to libraries/Amazon.com and pick up/buy some books and educate themselves about these issues related to their professions?" Professional bodies can also always conduct seminars for continuing education. I believe existing universities also already offer modules that teach students about the broader social context of their professions.

*****
So, I'm not convinced that LACs add that much to existing offerings. Maybe it simply allows Singapore to claim that 'eh we have LAC, 'dun play play' ok...', in which case it has a useful function because of its name (LAC) -- but that function is purely a 'decorative' one. :)

Heavenly Sword:

On point 2): LACs, in the US model, *are* for the elite in terms of academic results. Which is another reason why it would not make sense to have an LAC cater to poly grads. Not to put too fine a point on it, but a poly education does not prepare one for the rigours of a liberal arts education, where reading and [argumentative] writing skills are essential.
However, I don't really see that an LAC has to be elitist in terms of income. Financial aid or government can help less well-off families send their children to an LAC. Of course, we all know in Singapore that those with good pre-tertiary education results tend to come from higher income families already, but that's not a problem specific to the LAC. There's nothing about the idea of an LAC itself that has to promote income inequality.

I also have some objections to point 4). Firstly, I suspect that the vast majority of [potential] doctors would put the kind of readings you mention way, way down on their priority list. Medical school is no walk in the woods and doctors don't exactly have a lot of spare time, not to mention their family commitments and so on. I think the same would go for many other professionals. Secondly, given our current narrow, vocational-oriented education system, many students have little exposure to subjects outside of their chosen disciplines. Therefore latent interest they might have in them is often left unexploited. I can vouch that many Singaporeans who tasted the 'best' of Singapore's pre-tertiary education nevertheless discovered (to their surprise) how much they'd missed after going through a liberal arts education. Science students in particular are likely to have a very narrow (and often dim) view of the humanities until they actually do real, interesting work in the humanities (please don't talk to me about JC humanities/social sciences requirements --- most science stream students opt to take H2 economics, which is simply not at all a reasonable portrayal of what the humanities and social sciences are like; the same goes for O-levels). And doubtless humanities students would gain a good deal from learning some science.

Of course the existing universities have broad-based curricular as well. But the key to the LAC is a rigorous broad-based curriculum AND small discussion-oriented classes. Those of us who have gone through a liberal arts education might of course be biased on this issue, but it's really in small classes with plenty of dialogue that you can best teach students how to think instead of what to think. Classes in NUS/NTU tend to involve a lot of spoon-feeding through prepared presentations instead of active, dynamic discussion. The latter forces students to respond during class instead of sitting in the lecture hall like sponges. For large classes a discussion format is not feasible, but a small LAC allows for such luxuries.

They forgot to mention that LAC students are "special" and get a better education because they protest against wars, organize sit-ins to fight for "living wages" for university janitors, and so on and so forth.

The chances of any LAC being effective in Singapore is the same as the chances of Warwick setting up a campus in Singapore.

Heavenly Sword,

It's nice to hear from you again! Happy New Year. To respond to your points:

1) How do you think the existing system can also deliver the benefits of "LAC" system? Through the even more elitist NUS scholar program? =)

2) "Since LACs are so small, will they end up as elitist institutions catering to the rich families?" This is a valid question. I think twasher has mentioned very good points in response (elitism in grades versus income) and I would not reiterate those. Particularly, I even disagree with Twasher on academic criteria as a form of elitism. To some extent, the admission criteria of a LAC or US universities in general can be specific (good all-rounders, star athletes) or quirky (great interpersonal qualities (gung ho max), number one C.S. player). I know a particular friend who did not do so well in A-level results that got into Carleton because of his very obvious leadership and interpersonal qualities (not necessarily in the numbers of CCAs he did but he had the leadership and people aura). I also know that many students with perfect A-levels or GPAs in their high schools did not get into Carleton.

In general, universities tend to attract students from families with disproportionately higher income than an average families. Ironically at the same time, more competitive universities and LACs tend to be slightly better off in terms of financial status than less competitive ones in the United States. Their alumni, who are successful in life, are able to donate back to the college so as to fund the next generation of college students from diverse places. Very likely, these colleges are "need-blind", which means they admit without regards of your ability to pay. Thus, they are much able to attract a diverse group of students in terms of geography, gender, income and race from a larger pool of resources.

For example in my college, I agree that many students do come from families with above average income. However, who knew someone who lived in HDB, spoke Chinese at home, and studied in predominately Chinese government-aided schools (Anglican high, Temasek J.C) could make it to Carleton without the help of a generous scholarship from Carleton? There are many scholarships and financial aid given out by Carleton to the international studies from Nepal, Burma, Singapore, Ghana and France to come to the college.

If you are looking for universities in terms of extreme lack of elitism, the only example I can think of is Chinese Universities in the 1970s during the Cultural revolution. The criteria for admission for universities then (even Beida) is political background, which means if you are of a peasant or workers' background, you can be student. Instead of attending much classes, your job is learn from the field (aka planting rice and making bricks and iron materials). Jan Wong has written an interesting book about her experience as a Canadian-Chinese university student at Beida during this period.

3) I believe that LACs, like other universities, should prepare students for the working world (not the only goal but an important goal nonetheless). In fact, I argue that LACs prepare students better than larger research universities for students in terms of providing access for ALL students to learn higher order thinking skills such as "disciplinary inquiry, analysis of evidence, arts of communication and arguments, and problem-solving strategies?" (Carleton College Academic Catalog, 2007-2008).

4) I agree with you that professionals such as , lawyers and other professionals could go to libraries/Amazon.com and pick up/buy some books and educate themselves about these issues related to their professions. But I think a college setting would enable pre-professionals a facilitator and educator (professor) and fellow inquirers (students). More importantly, the facilitator and educator can show the way (methodology) to approach difficult subjects such as the philosophy of ethics?

As mentioned in previous comments, I think a lot of it boils down to academic and related freedoms in the planned institution and the honest aims of the government in having such an institution. Any educational institution whose aim is to improve the competitiveness of the workforce in the economy today is going to need quite a lot of the necessary freedoms to operate successfully, and an LAC, which by nature is higher up the ladder in its resource and freedom requirements, would not work out if the government does not grant them.

But if it does, then one might argue that the existing institutions can then also provide the kind of education that LACs claim to offer, but this is only to some extent and not without significant structural changes to the educational system. Big universities here take in students through the faculties within which students declare their major and take most of their classes. Students are limited in their choice of faculties depending on what they studied in JC or poly and extra-faculty exploration is heavily restricted by the structure of the uni, such as through graduation requirements. LACs, instead, have a general admission system where students are free to choose any major after some time spent trying out classes in various departments. There is some attempt to try out a more liberal multidisciplinary structure in NUS through its University Scholars Programme (USP), but although the classes in there are smaller, the selection of classes is quite limited and students are still largely restricted by their faculties' policies from exploring other areas of interest.

But setting up an LAC would also require changes. LACs are traditionally feeder schools for graduate and professional schools, but most professional degrees in Singapore are earned at the undergraduate level. LAC grads would have to go overseas to further their education, and in sense LACs might be susceptible to the elitist charge, because not everyone can afford study overseas. Competition with local unis also has to be assessed for viability. You probably don't want any of the local unis having too much of a monopoly on talent.

But of course if it does turn out that the planned institution is to cater to poly students, then an LAC would be close to impossible because polys don't prepare students for a liberal arts curriculum. Plus, poly students currently get a lot of subsidies which I imagine would affect how much the government would further subsidize their education, and taking LAC fees into consideration, it would seem that costs might be too much of a restricting factor to make the plan a viable one. So I guess it still depends on what the government wants out of this new institution, and what it's willing to offer to make it work.

Wow, very 'shang nao jing' (headache-inducing) leh... :]

I'm also not sure how it can be done, but my intuition tells me it can be done, within existing universities. :) Maybe not in the sense of having 'LAC-culture within NUS/NTU' but in the more general sense of 'delivering more interdisciplinary and critical education via NUS/NTU'. I'll leave the details to other smarter brains... (By the way I don't think USP is elitist; Wayne is conflating 'elitist' with 'meritocratic'.)

Tackling the 'financial aid' issue does not solve the problem totally. If you are someone from a working-class family, and you want to be a doctor/lawyer, would you want to take a LONGER route (with all the LAC-related benefits) or a shorter one (supposedly without ANY of the LAC-related benefits)? LACs lengthen the training unnecessarily (sorry to put it in such a harsh way). And it's also not as if the current medical, legal, or other professional educational programmes are so lousy in terms of producing socially-sensitive professionals, right? :) And if we want to produce creative and smart people (e.g. XYZ-prize winners), will these people want to come to *SINGAPORE's* LAC(s) in the first place. They'll all be flocking to the US LACs... And it's also a bit of an 'overkill' to spend so much money just to gamble on the production of a few (potential) prize-winners; it's much more strategic, I think, to have a 4th university catering to the poly students...

Sorry for my very intuitive arguments. I don't mind being convinced by strong arguments in favour of LACs; it's just that I have yet to see some really strong arguments that takes into account Singapore's pressing economic (rather than symbolic) needs....

Another point I would like to add on to HS's argument:

Right now, the government haven't even put substaniate their arguments with any studies. One of the questions raised by HS was that why would they even think that the potential XYZ-prize winners would want to come to Singapore, instead of the States. It wasn't so long ago that even our prized "whale" went back to Scotland as well, despite a positive spin put on the news.

Secondly, I haven't heard from the government of any clear vision of what the liberal arts graduates are going to do, after they had obtained their degrees. Or is the construction of the LAC just a way to create "buzz" around Singapore as an education hub. If that's the case, it will be too expensive to do so. I seriously can't foresee any success coming from the LAC as well. If they can't even create an art "buzz" in Singapore, how can they ensure any sort of future for these liberal arts graduates.

Unlike HS, I believe Singapore really has potential to be a private banking hub, and feel that the government is better off pumping some money to buttress any sort of advantage in this field, like having more money to hire the top finance professors into our Singapore universities, rather than having a 4th university in Singapore that might potentially decrease the worth of a local degree (which is currently, quite low already).

Lastly, just a minor point: USP only appears to be elitist, but last I heard from a friend, they are not too discriminating in their acceptance of students as well. Apparently, appearance is everything, so Wayne might have believed the illusion which NUS painstakingly tries to create. Just like how they want us to think that it's a top-20 (to top-25, and now, it's just top-50) university.

HS,

First, I am arguing that USP is elitist because it operates on your similar premise that LAC is elitist. According to your line of elitism, it takes an advantage kid from young (tuition, good family background and time for CCA to be able to do well in the A-levels or other tests) to enter the USP program. And in a LAC, there are no special programs or classes for special kids, I think students and faculty members would revolt!

Ｉtake your point on the issue of length of study and it is a very valid question on whether one would wish to spend more time in LAC and then Medical school rather than a straight 5 years medical school. It depends on the individual whether he or she is convinced that a broad based undergraduate education would enable him or her to (1) decide on medical school as a lifelong career instead of a papa-mama/societal pressure choice and (2) to prepare for the increasingly complex issues of medical history, ethics and policies that shaped modern science and medicine today. In a calculative manner, I think the jury has yet to convene on whether an expected income from a doctor who had a liberal arts education is higher than that who do not over a lifetime. I highly suspect yes but I do not know for sure.

Neutral Bystander,

It is interesting to brought up the point of job allocation. I am not quite sure whether the government has the responsibility to provide employment directly to university students beside through the civil service (hope we have not become a command economy yet). As I have shown in the example of the United States (and increasingly evidences are showing in Mexico, and Hong Kong) that liberal arts colleges graduates do find themselves employed comfortably. Many have excelled in their work and societal work.

See http://www.ln.edu.hk/lingnan_event/press_releases/press_releases_contents.shtml?050413.htm
for job situations for liberal arts graduates in Hong Kong Lingnan college.

Two interesting recent article by SCMP on Lingnan college:

South China Morning Post

August 15, 2007 Wednesday

Minority rapport

BYLINE: Lingnan University's popular president will be sadly missed as he retires after 12 years in the post, writes Nora Tong

In a cramped flat in Wan Chai that was home to several low-income families in the early 1950s, a young socialist was in the making as Edward Chen Kwan-yiu listened intently to tales of the Korean war vividly depicted by his co-tenant, a patriotic columnist at a leftist newspaper.

"He taught me about 'resisting the US and supporting North Korea'. I can still remember distinctly the pictures he showed me and the stories he told me about how bad Americans were," said the president of Lingnan University who will step down at the end of this month after 12 years in the position.

The 62-year-old has become known for standing up for the minority.

Growing up in a single-parent family and having witnessed widespread poverty - at one point he lived in a squatter area - Professor Chen decided at an early age that equity was a goal worth fighting for.

A former executive councillor and chairman of the Consumer Council, Professor Chen now leads a Law Reform Commission subcommittee that seeks to improve the public's access to justice.

In education too he seeks to defend the small.

Lingnan draws students from the grass roots and advocates participation in social services and whole-person development. It promotes liberal arts education, and is characterised by its small size, residential nature and close relationships between teachers and students.

The former chair professor at the University of Hong Kong began to seriously consider an offer to lead Lingnan on a trip to Singapore in the mid-1990s. Back then Lingnan was a tertiary college. It was designated a university in 1999.

"I was thinking of Mr Lee Kuan Yew [the former Singapore prime minister]. I wondered if I could become Lingnan's Lee Kuan Yew - [to lead by] strong governance and a clear mission and vision. He has built his country. I wanted to develop my institution," he said.

Professor Chen is proud of having laid a solid foundation for Lingnan, including diversifying the range of courses. The proportion of students enrolling in business programmes has dropped from about 70 per cent in the '90s to the present 30 per cent. New humanities subjects, such as cultural studies and philosophy, have been introduced while the social sciences have been strengthened.

The president has also been successful in boosting Lingnan's research capabilities.

"When I arrived I noticed staff members were very dedicated and conscientious. But their research capability did not reach the expectation of a first-class university in Hong Kong, not to mention internationally," he said. "Only 30 per cent of teachers had a doctoral degree. A PhD [should be] the minimum threshold."

Neither did Lingnan do well in the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), an evaluation of research abilities carried out by the University Grants Committee (UGC), the results of which are factored into the government's funding formula.

"Dedication is not enough. Teaching and research are interrelated. The standing of a university can only be raised through research," Professor Chen said.

As a result of a series of strategies, including recruiting senior academics, providing mentoring for junior scholars with potential, and removing the less talented, Lingnan has made a leap forward in research.

It ranked fourth among eight public tertiary institutes in the latest round of RAE, and almost all teaching staff have now earned a PhD.

Professor Chen said while he did not want to tie the hands of his successor, he had made certain decisions to reinforce liberal arts education under the new senior secondary structure that will see university education extended from three to four years. The change will be implemented in universities in 2012.

He has taken steps to limit the size of Lingnan by promising the UGC not to increase the number of students by more than a third. A land grant and money have also been secured for the construction of more dormitories so that 85 per cent of students will live on campus. Changes in the curriculum mean all students will take common subjects that will count towards more than a third of the number of credits they have to meet.

Well-liked among pupils and parents, the charismatic president is swamped by his students whenever he strolls around the campus. He is famous for meeting students over breakfast, and his office and residential lodge are lined with pictures taken with students and gifts from them.

His popularity can be traced to his days at HKU, where he taught for more than two decades from 1967. Just recently his students from the '70s - Secretary of Commerce and Economic Development Frederick Ma Si-hang and former financial secretary Antony Leung Kam-chung - have set up a fund to establish a lecture series in his name.

Professor Chen said it was very satisfying to have brought liberal arts education to Hong Kong.

"My students are prepared for challenges in the real world having received an education with a focus on all-round development," he said.

While he was initially attracted to liberal arts education because of its intrinsic values, he was not sure how applicable it was, he said. But it turned out students who had been through a liberal arts education were in hot demand in the new economy, which desired well-rounded talents.

"We must be multi-skilled. The most successful fund manager was a translation major," he said.

Professor Chen said his students boasted a high employment rate despite the public's discrimination against Lingnan - the university has been ranked among the bottom tier in an annual league table that studies public perceptions of Hong Kong universities.

"Employers know what they want. For them, be it a black cat or a white cat, a cat that can catch mice is a good cat," he said.

He said his biggest regret was not being able to change school principals' and teachers' prejudiced view of Lingnan. "They are the most stubborn. This is very disappointing and regrettable," he said.

But rather than higher education, he said Hong Kong's most serious educational problem lay in the preschool sector. "It's grossly unfair to blame universities for poor English standards among university students. How could this be the fault of universities? We are putting too few resources in [preschools]. Why do we have to teach the 26 alphabets again in orientation camps? Because preschools [have failed to lay a good foundation in language]."

He said a hierarchy existed in the teaching profession in Hong Kong where kindergarten teachers were held in a lower regard. "There should be equal status," he said.

Professor Chen also took up the issue of the government's much-talked-about plan to turn Hong Kong into a regional education hub. He said while the focus had been on attracting foreign students to Hong Kong, the city needed to invest more to encourage overseas universities to establish campuses or offer joint courses with local institutions.

"Nowadays it seems an education hub simply means admitting more non-local students. That is what we should do anyway. It's not about being a hub. It's about internationalising our student body to provide a better international perspective to our students."

He said students and even staff had asked him why they had to learn good English while foreigners in Hong Kong did not have to acquire Chinese skills. His answer: because English is the international language for now and economic success depends on Hong Kong's role as an intermediary. "It's not about being a slave to foreigners or patriotism."

Recalling battles in his life, from fighting poverty and protesting a fee increase imposed by the Star Ferry in the 1960s to campaigning for more resources for Lingnan, Professor Chen said he had made many enemies as the head of the Consumer Council. "Maybe this is a reason why I've had difficulties in raising money for the school," he said. "But I have no regrets."

In the next few months Professor Chen will travel to other parts of the world, giving lectures and attending meetings of some of the many international bodies of which he is a member.

While he has no definite plans for his future, the socialist-at-heart will surely find a new cause to fight for.

South China Morning Post
June 16, 2007 Saturday

University president launches lecture series, to praise from famous students

BYLINE: Nora Tong

Lingnan University president Edward Chen Kwan-yiu received an absolution of sorts from one of his former students yesterday as he launched a lecture series at the University of Hong Kong.

Just because three of his former students were in charge of the economy in some of its darkest hours did not mean he was to blame, former financial secretary Antony Leung Kam-chung reassured the professor.

"The economy recovered once I left. The problem didn't lie with my teacher or with the other two," a self-deprecating Mr Leung said, referring to Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Frederick Ma Si-hang and Secretary for Economic Development and Labour Stephen Ip Shu-kwan.

The former finance chief and Mr Ma were among former students who showed up to pay their respects to Professor Chen as he delivered the inaugural lecture in the Edward K.Y. Chen Distinguished Lecture Series, speaking on economic development theories.

Mr Leung further absolved his teacher of blame for his own performance when he apologised for skipping lectures.

But the professor, who retires as head of Lingnan at the end of August, wasn't letting his former acolytes take all the rap. He said part of the problem might have been that he spent his time teaching his students how to deal with inflation when the prevailing problem of the day was deflation.

"Now that they have all dealt with deflation, they can teach their master about the subject," he said.

The annual lecture series, initiated by former students of Professor Chen at HKU, where he taught for more than two decades from 1967, demonstrates the Chinese tradition of respect for teachers and mentors.

"I learned a lot from his lecture today," Mr Ma said. "I hope young people will carry on the tradition of respecting teachers."

Professor Chen said he was happy to have taught students who were so respectful of their teachers. "You may not earn a lot of money from teaching, but it's very rewarding and satisfying to see your students grow and succeed."

He said young people nowadays stretched the meaning of freedom, which was evident from their behaviour in class, such as napping and chatting on mobile phones.

"We need to be considerate ... we should think about the freedom of other people. Freedom isn't without a limit," he said.

I will confess that I couldn't be bothered to read through the bulk of the discussion here. However, I would like to clarify that USP selection criteria depends very heavily on an interview, conducted by the faculty of the program. These interviewers have, in front of them, nothing except for the name of the interviewee-no school, grades, or CCA information. This, in my opinion, is quite an enlightened approach to selecting students.

Is it elitist? Perhaps. But on the other hand, one should seriously consider the mentality of the average NUS student, who happily takes easy subjects that add nothing to his/her education (e.g. economics majors taking economics breadth/GEM modules, when such modules are meant to expand the average student's exposure to different fields).

The most common comment on USP I have heard? "What? No money? More intensive modules? For what?"

"However, I would like to clarify that USP selection criteria depends very heavily on an interview, conducted by the faculty of the program."

Actually aren't interviews more subjective than that of other criteria (especially when it is done alone as you suggest)? Not everyone performs well in an interview - does it mean other deserving candidates would be rejected based on one day of response to a panel of interviewees? If you can't speak well on one day, does it mean your opinions matter less? What if the interviewers are having a bad day in school?

"Perhaps. But on the other hand, one should seriously consider the mentality of the average NUS student, who happily takes easy subjects that add nothing to his/her education (e.g. economics majors taking economics breadth/GEM modules, when such modules are meant to expand the average student's exposure to different fields)."

Isn't that quite an elitist view? =) Discounting the agency of ordinary students?

wayne >> the govt does a responsibility for at least having a vision for what the grads of the liberal arts college, since they are the approving authority. it's a valid point which you had made: the govt is not responsible for the employment of these students, but the govt has a responsibility to keep unemployment as low as possible?

the virus >> there's no money, but there's a lot of concession in policy and a lot of like different opportunities being specifically catered to USP students.

on another point of economics major taking economics breath: there's nothing wrong with that i supposed approach. the broad based learning approach is a vision of the school, but it doesn't mean it's right. why can't the students pursue a specialisation path instead on their own accord.

Wayne:

"Actually aren't interviews more subjective than that of other criteria (especially when it is done alone as you suggest)?" and " What if the interviewers are having a bad day in school?"

This only indicates that the system is random, not elitist. I should clarify that it is a panel of interviewers, not a single interviewer. If those on the panel, collectively, experience a bad day, I suppose it is just too bad for that bunch of students. Tough luck, no?

"Not everyone performs well in an interview - does it mean other deserving candidates would be rejected based on one day of response to a panel of interviewees?"

Deserving, based on what measures? We're not talking about speaking well, as such. The interview isn't an oratorical assessment. Clarity of thought is sought.

"If you can't speak well on one day, does it mean your opinions matter less?"

One needs to understand the difference between an orator, and someone who can articulate thoughts. You can stammer, trip on your own tongue, and pronounce real badly. These do not take anything away from your thoughts and ideas. And finally, you don't talk bad one day, and talk well another.

"Isn't that quite an elitist view? =) Discounting the agency of ordinary students?"

The agency of the "ordinary students" (a loaded term, no doubt) is not discounted. What IS discounted, though, is the mentality. Once again, mentality is not equal to mental capacity, despite appearances to the contrary.

Hi neutral bystander:

"the virus >> there's no money, but there's a lot of concession in policy and a lot of like different opportunities being specifically catered to USP students."

I agree. This is the only perk (or set of perks, if you will) for the USP students. And these activities are done on top of the heavier workload (the basic USP module is a level 2000 module, which indicates a somewhat greater amount of workload).

"on another point of economics major taking economics breath: there's nothing wrong with that i supposed approach. the broad based learning approach is a vision of the school, but it doesn't mean it's right. why can't the students pursue a specialisation path instead on their own accord."

Not very sure if I got your meaning right. I will mention, though, that economics breadth modules are typically those fundamental, introductory modules, which if taken by an economics major, would add (close to) nothing to their knowledge.

Just to throw in a different element into the ring here: we had a liberal arts college until the 1970s, outback in the western frontier, called Nantah before it was incorporated and instrumentalized as part of the mass educational production process. As long as economic function predominates, which is also part of your argument, Wayne, and more perniciously in other commentators here, I wonder whether a liberal arts college will succeed. Also, and linked to this point, as long as it is not a college independent from the state, I am quite sure it will fail. And it will definitely fail when we try to model one of the Western liberal arts college.

My argument: let an independent liberal arts college blossom with blessings from but no ties to the government. It should not be explicitly modeled after Western colleges, but should spring forth from the same-but-different modernism that inspires both Western and non-Western liberal arts colleges. Different in the sense that modernism captures a broad humanist spirit that maybe interpreted through local cultural lenses. So a Singaporean liberal arts college would have to somehow express an Asian (East, South and Southeast) modernist ethos -- not of the Asian values paternalistic garden variety, but of the liberal kind familiar to many Chinese, Malay, Indian, Arab, Turkish etc. reformers expounding modern education in the early twentieth century, absorbing the spirit of the humanistic liberal West but expressing it in many tongues.

Precondition: get out of the functionistic-economistic rut and parochial thinking of the Singapore economy. In fact think of the economics as a liberal arts subject, and we find ourselves reading Adam Smith and other classics and understanding globalization better. We can't possibly think a liberal arts college right with parochial functionalism.

Dansong,

You point out clearly the contradictions between state power, and the formation of a liberal arts college in Singapore - I was very confident that both would come together and work harmoniously, but now rethinking some of that in light of everyone's comments.

It appears that what you are advocating for such a college in Singapore appears to come from the historical notion of ti-yong （体用）formula expressed by Chinese modernists and intellectuals at the turn of the twentieth century - the notion of appropriating Western technology while retaining the Eastern essence. Ironically though, such cultural and philosophical expressions were ultimately underpinned by strong state power. Since state power was constantly in flux (I argue till contemporary China), the vicissitudes of the fate of universities in China were changed with social circumstances. Yet, I am fascinated with the strong core of independence that Chinese professors and students (or is it more broadly a reflection of the humanist spirit you talked about) adopt across time and space since the founding of the first university as Peking University. If professor Huang Jianli was right with his research on 1930s Chinese students being depoliticized and subsequently apolitical by the KMT regime, can we make a similar argument of Chinese students today? What is the economic underpinnings of Singaporean students' voices today? That is why I am constantly fascinated with the Lingnan university (the liberal arts college) experiment in Hong Kong. How long can the university last in face of increasing state intervention in the Hong Kong higher education by the Hong kong government in recent years, (or are such interventions a proxy move by a higher body in the north)?

How independent and "real" can our universities be? Yet, are we romanticizing authenticity when the
"parochial functionalism" is what students want? Do or do not Nantah students have to deal with the reality of job search when the state and private sector employment policies privilege the English educated? Does the everyday experience of Nantah graduates in the 1970s meet nicely a sociological model of authenticity and liberal arts? Will a new liberal college in Singapore break some stereotypes and education constructs and a "doom to failure"? Will there be conflicting roles and visions between a liberal arts educator (professor), a liberal arts advocate, a liberal arts student, a liberal arts administrator (the President) in Singapore?

who needs a college?

college will be obsolete in 10-years.

1. Real lecture... 500 can see lecture.

2. Digital lecture. Digital classes.

1-3 Billion people can see Lecture

colleges will be obsolete in 10-years.