That Warwick decision
Some online viewpoints
Warwick Varsity drops plans for a Singapore campus on worries about academic freedom. What some Singaporeans think about it.
Oct 21, 2005

Freedom of Expression
YoungPap
Crystal
The Singapore government's policy is to stop foreign countries and institutions from interfering in its domestic affairs.
This has led to a consideration of academic freedom for foreign universities wishing to set up campuses in Singapore. Warwick University of London has just refused to set up a campus in Singapore as it has been advised that the Singapore government does not tolerate criticism of its own domestic government policies.
Maybe some people think that I'm a nut. Or the government thinks that I'm a rebel, but let me get something straight with the Singapore government.
A country can never aspire to be a hub for anything unless new ideas come out consistently from its citizens everyday. Unless Singapore merely aspires to be a take-off and launching pad for other countries. This, from what I have observed, seems to be the only height of what Singapore can, and is, currently doing under the current political control.
Let's face it. It is mostly GLCs and Temasek Holdings that is holding up Singapore at the moement. And this reason is the main factor why the money remains at the top ecleons and does not trickle down to the bottom.
The employment rate is improving, but the quality of jobs are of a lacklustre quality. Most of the jobs for most people are of a temporary or contract basis. And all this when people are needing to pay for their HDB flats. That is the very reason why many Singaporeans are taking a second job or many sidelines.
The Singapore government may think that I may no sense. But let me just make this point. The spark of creativity that the Singapore government so strongly craves usually gets that ignition from critical thinking. Critical thinking, in a nutshell, involves, analyzing a problem and offering better solutions. The everyday mechanism which facilitates this is politics. The political environment thus determines whether critical thinking takes place.
If the Singapore government is constantly asking why Singaporeans are "apathetic", the answer is simply this. Some are aware of the OB markers and are tired of talking. Some are too busy working and immersed in the everyday routine of their way of life and struggling to make ends meet. They work hard. Whether smart is up to the Singapore government to see for themselves. Some, to put it sadly, don't even think any longer. That's that.
Aspiration towards any hub of sorts involves ideas. I am aware that that the Ministry of Education is trying many ways to improve the situation. Yet, education is a restricted sphere. Very restricted. The ultimate height of critical thinking and the birth of great ideas comes from applying critical thinking to daily life. Not just in your education, but observing any and everything in daily life.
I would also like to implore the Singapore government on one issue. The main disagreement that I see, whenever the public raises a point, is the difference in "big picture" and "small picture", ie, the macro vs the micro perspective. This is a joke and should not happen. Any form of public policy, for it to be extremely feasible, is the reconciliation and coordination between these two extreme points. The day when the Singapore government only sees from the "big picture" shows that it no longer takes the citizens' viewpoint into consideration. If any country fails to resolve these two tangents, it shows a failure in public policy. I say this is a joke as the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy has just opened and are educating their intake of students on public policy.
Whatever it is, the points are: creativity stems from critical thinking in daily life and public policy entails recociliation between the macro and micro perspective.
Yours Truly,
Tein Chui Shan (Ms)

ah lian
bravo! Like I have been saying all these time, we want vibrant city. We know we need creative brains to bring us to the next level. But same time we do not create an environment to nuture nor attract such.
We have created over the 40 years "followers", and "yes man". We have in our GLC an entire lot of process followers. Senior staff who have no courage to exercise judgement or discretion. Everything needs clearance from the very top.
What happen when we go beyond the boundaries of our "perfect state"? the world is too chaotic for our businessman to comprehend.
We need mixture of brains. Street smart brains and scholastics ones as well. It looks like we are seriously not balance at the moment, and we may be far from having a self-correcting/improving mechanism if we continue to nip creativity in the bud. That includes the political arena. There will always be "irrational" voters (the finger always points outward, mind you). But the only way for more sound voters is through awareness. Healthy and open discussion is the best way of education.
Close that and we will have a country of "yes-man". 2 heads are better than 1. Continue to count on THE chosen 1 and we will be out of the world league before we know it.

soc.culture.singapore
brandon
About Warwick University leaving Singapore - I don't think Singapore is
fundamentally wrong about its goals regarding the University Hub.
Singapore wants a University hub where students quietly study for their
degrees without disturbance, finish off and then get a job.
Majority of Asian students want only this and Singapore can cater to such a Population, which would still be sizeable.
Those students with Western orientation to indulge in political activity are a minority and can chose to go to England or USA. Professors and teaching staff are also of this pattern.
We must also realise that Singapore Hub may never be a "Boston" of the
east. It is designed purely for business reasons to make money for
Singapore.
So Singapore Governmnt should stop using such phrases and give a
wrong intention that it is seeking something exactly similar to
Boston.

ardeedee
But an educated elite must be those who can discern truth from forced fed diets and this discernment runs through all spheres of life that they will encounter.
If the intention is to produce robots with little discernment on values of life then they run foul of theist Warwick Univ.
Why must an educate person be educated in a manner that prevents him from exercising his full maturity as a person?
How does this ensure that he contributes to the society in full measure?

tsel...
Warwick is correct to highlight the interference by the authorities in
the education system in Singapore, best exemplified by the case of
Professor Lingle.
Education should aim at the enrichment and freedom of the mind, to prepare the individual for independent thought, unconstrained by external influence, institutional or otherwise.
Anything less would end up in supression and ultimate destruction of
all creative potential.
An educated person should be free to choose his future, whether to live the life of a penniless painter or be the first man on Mars.
An educated person will not tolerate being moulded into engineers, IT professionals, or administrators at the whim and fancy of the powers in charge, in accordance to the political flavor of the day.

lobert.
No money say so lah! what academic freedom !

kilometric
If cost is an issue, Warwick can easily set up a campus in Malaysia and 1/2 the cost compared to Singapore.
With so much incentives given by the Malaysian government, setting a
university campus in Malaysia is no big problem, and it can be done in
Johore, KL, Malacca or even further north.
If human rights, openness and political interference is an issue, then it is better not to do it in Singapore, because Singapore is a totalitarian state and although the government don't jail you, they can sue or shame a university reputation.
Discussing politics of Singapore in university campus is a big NO NO in
Singapore, especially if the university is a foreign one.
Warwick should do it in Malaysia, I'm sure Malaysian government will be very happy.

ardeedee
Obviously you have not been to the University belts of the large
Universities of the world such as the Sorbonne, Yale and Harvard, Oxford, etc where the youths of the day hold court with one another and debate in deep earnestness and passion the events and happenings of the world as they see it and as they deem it would affect the future.
From here rise the future leaders of the world - in politics, in government, in arts and drama, in math and sciences, in biology and biometrics, in technology and techniques and in any form of human endeavour - the human brain is always the better for having it expanded and allowed to develop in an open and unsanitised environment.
The government of Singapore has made it clear that they find the locals lacking in talent especially in creativity and as such they need to open Singapore to such foreign talents but why?
Because they suppress the locals growth and make them live in sanitised fish bowls and the foreign talents have the full scope and breadth to express themselves in foreign universities and in open campuses and when they come here they are fully matured and developed individuals with sustained and proven talents in many fields.
It is like a fish bowl - the fishes you rear in such fish bowls remain small and cannot compete against another set of fishes that you inject into the same bowl - the new fishes from the natural ponds survive at the expense of the old ones why because they are more hardy having faced the wild and the natural environment and have healthier constitution.
What we have is a defensive mechanism of the ruling party that they know best and must affect control of the masses but this is akin to being simply selfish and motivated by greed to hang onto power.
The question whose future is the ruling party looking to? Singapore?

LongJaffar, sangkanchil (Malaysia)
Although this may mean a setback for Singapore, their objective is
clear, i.e. to make Singapore an Education Hub. They have done this
quietly without much fanfare.
I can't say the same for Malaysia, who trumpets everything that they
PLAN to do even if it is still in the discussion stage. Then they go
about it without a clue or policy. The issuance of licences to operate
educational institutions is pathetic, and it all occurred during the
tenure of Datuk Seri Najib (bin Razak) as the education minister. Just like everything else, we gave so many licences (I'm sure there was a 'fee' somewhere) that many operators have even resorted to cheating in order to survive. Standards have gone down, and enrolment has followed suit.
As long as we tolerate corruption, we will never be a world class
player in any field.
Our education policy is not based on need, but on dirty politics. When Sabah went back to BN (ruling Barisan Nasional alliance), suddenly Sabah has a university. Similarly for Terengganu. Kelantan, which needs a university badly, does not get one.
It would reduce the expenses of Kelantanese parents if their children
do not need to stay away from home to get a university education, but this does not seem to worry the government. Kelantan also has a large pool of extremely poor but bright students but that too does not
strike the policy makers as a factor to consider.
If one were to analyse the reasons why bumiputra students fare so
badly, then the culprit must surely be our education policy itself.

sgforums
Mr Soh
the issue is not top uni.
the issue is if sg wants to become a edu hub, it needs to attract unis around the world to set up shop here.....if Warwick does not want.....what of MIT, Oxford etc?

Salman
Alamak, Warwick is a nonsence university lah. Don't make me laugh man.
What academic freedom are they talking about? I know very well what they mean by academic freedom in western countries. The academics want to indoctrinate you with their liberal views instead of teaching you the subject. I've seen it all in the west and its hypocritical to the core. We Singaporeans don't need all that westerners crap.

NuLife
They are only taking the chance take advantage of Sg government
weakness and showoff abit of their liberty.
I grad from UK. I thpought Warwick is just an average uni there only!
Don't think they can attract top students also. haa.
But then again, their comments are good too.
At least one more criticism of sg government from foriegn voice.
This will help make them listen up sooner.
(except the gay part, think their lecturers must be gay...ha... just joking)
But still, the comments make them look abit foolish.
Demanding ridiculous things. Only a university, they think they can run their own legal system anyway they like here. haa.
Think they are only trying the chance to poke fun and disgrace Sg government only.

sgdiehard
I find the demand by Warwick rather amusing, " its students in Singapore be exempt from strict laws limiting freedom of assembly, speech and the press, and the removal of bans on homosexuality and certain religious practices on campus. "Exactly what kind of education do they intend to bring for the benefits of singapore? The word "Liberal" alone is too broad a term to justify anything here, given the diversities in races, religions and the Asian cultures, confined within a physically very small Singapore.
Unless they have anything special to offer, I certainly do not want a bunch of foreign idiots here in singapore thinking they are more superior than average singaporean (morally they are certainly not, IMO), and they will come as "FT", wont they? I won't loose my sleep because of warwick.

soc.culture.singapore
LifeManTalking
If Hongkong can accomodate freedom of expression for so many years, I
just don't understand why Singapore is so afraid to let its people
speak freely, especially the academicians.

Tweety
Aren't you free to speak freely here?

Bad boy
Singapore cannot allow the same level of freedom to students and academic as those in the UK.
Warwick decided against setting up a University here because of this lack of freedom.
This put the spot light on Singapore. Is Singapore a free and transparent society which attract the best brains or something else ?
Should Singapore improve as promised by PM Lee or should we stick to our guns, guided by the policy of "free speech is permissible as long as it does not threaten real political change or to alter the status quo" ?

iveco
Anyone who has been to a foreign university will certainly have noticed how politically-motivated and environmentally-aware the student unions are. Now that is what I call active citizenry. They dare to stand up and make the difference, even if that means going against the regime.

vito_corleone
Nus still say Warwick lousy, both are in the same league. 2nd tier trying to be world class..sigh...

sgdiehard
Warwick and NUS no comparison! Warwick ranks 203 to 300 in the world (together with 98 other universities ranking the same at 203 in the world). NUS rank 101 to 152 in the world.
Warwick ranks 20 to 30 among the universities in Britain; of course NUS ranks no.1 in Singapore.
Warwick ranks 80 to 123 among European universities, NUS rank 9-19 among the Asian Pacific universities.
Not all first tier, but NUS is in 2nd tier and Warwick in 3 tier! Still don't know why EDB wants Warwick to set up here.

iveco
Well, they can't get the 2nd tier and above British universities to come over here, so must get the 3rd tier ones.

lwflee
Warwick is very very good at law.

sgdiehard
Except for specialised fields of studies, university education is very much an experience of an independent life in a different society with different cultures.
That's why Singaporean needs to step out and live overseas for a while, no matter how great their academic achievement is. Of course, if their pocket permits.
More so they should not be running away from Singapore. They should start a Warwick law school in Singapore, train Singapore lawyers and tackle Yong P H on the common law, hold penal discussions with Singapore judges, show Singapore how law can maintain order and giving people maximum freedom at the same time.

LazerLordz
I abhor the idea that real political change is a no-no. If change is needed, then change will happen.
Anything else is hogwash. No one, local or foreign should ever have the right to tell us that we cannot change our status quo. As long as it's for the better of the Republic, it should be supported.

Salman
The top Brit unis won't set up shop here, only the 2nd and third rate unis will cos they need the money. Thats a fact.
You will never see twinning programme from the top unis. We want to great unis like Hopkins & MIT, not Warwick.
Oct 22, 2005