To begin with , it is devoid of doubt that the consistently extremely high ranking of NUS inside the world-wide university education arena is really a powerful testament of the weight of the institution.
The speedy advancement of the university can even be noticed from casual observation without the need of the in-depth analysis by THE. With regards to research, the NUS medical school has forged alliance with the Duke Medical School, 1 of the best in the United states of america. The joint program motivates partnership in research as well as student exchange.
In relation to student growth, the University Scholars Program and also the U-town residential program have included substantially diverseness into students' academic life, ushering in american education technique within a liberal arts environment.
Thus, it is far from surprising to notice the position of NUS climb quick, in conjunction with its standing within Singapore and also the globe, a brand that may be critical to attract the very best pupils and teachers, whose inflow results in a virtuous cycle of the school's improvement.
Nevertheless, you will discover prospective disadvantages around the preoccupation with ranking by university along with the general community as a whole. The current methodology in reviewing university is far from ideal and regularly susceptible to critique. Weight assigned to distinct areas, irrespective of how carefully considered, is essentially arbitrary.
A single major area of controversy lies with the balance involving research and teaching. A lecturer has to invest time in teaching undergraduates and carrying out research for publications. The former is taken as a major goal of creating a university even though the latter is often considered as a better criterion when evaluating the rating of a college.
If a lot of emphasis is on how many quality papers a university has published inside the first-tier global journals, for instance, this type of evaluation bias might be translated into demand for professors to publish.
Various universities, like Hong Kong University, have even set up a minimal quota on the number of papers to be published every thing. Even in the lack of an explicit quota, as in the instance of NUS, implicit stress of relating publication to tenure overview is sufficient to nail the idea of 'publish or perish' inside the heads of academicians.
Cost in putting more time in research is generally less time or attention allocated to undergraduate educating. This really is generally noticed in deficit of enthusiasm coming from academics as well as very poor availability of tutors who appear usually pre-occupied.
At the end of the day, what really does world stand to gain from if higher university standing primarily reflects better quality research that may be primarily inconsequential to students?
Moreover, some important components of higher education might be underrepresented in review of colleges and universities. Regardless of the excellent ranking of NUS, 1 problem remains unresolved by the university: academic liberty or autonomy. University as a concept connotes freedom of thinking and expression that are vehicle of intellectual advancement of society.
On the other hand, NUS and quite a few other Asian educational institutions embarrassingly usually do not get outstanding credit for that facet. Actually, NUS president, Professor Tan Chorh Chuan stated following the release of ranking that NUS continued progress is a outcome of constant help from the Singapore government. That is already a proof of the close tie between NUS along with the government. In actual fact, much of the college funds originates from the government.
The compromise in academic autonomy is best noticed within the political science division of NUS that has come under critique for its very clear deficit of critical voices. The division has been described as "docile", not willing to assert itself as an third party voice inside the political discourse.
In contrast, bulk of the respected colleges to another country are privately owned and they have significantly increased freedom of intellectual inquiry that consequently benefits the whole community.
In fact, the establishment of Yale-NUS Liberal Arts College some years ago caused substantially discontentment around the move in the Yale community that views the Singapore political environment as not really favorable forliberal arts learning.
It's suffice to say that in addition to improving university ranking, the institution also should have to meet its social expectation by determining a fine line between getting government backing and remaining politically neutral.
Maybe before it makes THE pleased , it ought to satisfy Singapore students, social observers and educators 1st, who're the genuine stakeholders of the education within the nation.
The speedy advancement of the university can even be noticed from casual observation without the need of the in-depth analysis by THE. With regards to research, the NUS medical school has forged alliance with the Duke Medical School, 1 of the best in the United states of america. The joint program motivates partnership in research as well as student exchange.
In relation to student growth, the University Scholars Program and also the U-town residential program have included substantially diverseness into students' academic life, ushering in american education technique within a liberal arts environment.
Thus, it is far from surprising to notice the position of NUS climb quick, in conjunction with its standing within Singapore and also the globe, a brand that may be critical to attract the very best pupils and teachers, whose inflow results in a virtuous cycle of the school's improvement.
Nevertheless, you will discover prospective disadvantages around the preoccupation with ranking by university along with the general community as a whole. The current methodology in reviewing university is far from ideal and regularly susceptible to critique. Weight assigned to distinct areas, irrespective of how carefully considered, is essentially arbitrary.
A single major area of controversy lies with the balance involving research and teaching. A lecturer has to invest time in teaching undergraduates and carrying out research for publications. The former is taken as a major goal of creating a university even though the latter is often considered as a better criterion when evaluating the rating of a college.
If a lot of emphasis is on how many quality papers a university has published inside the first-tier global journals, for instance, this type of evaluation bias might be translated into demand for professors to publish.
Various universities, like Hong Kong University, have even set up a minimal quota on the number of papers to be published every thing. Even in the lack of an explicit quota, as in the instance of NUS, implicit stress of relating publication to tenure overview is sufficient to nail the idea of 'publish or perish' inside the heads of academicians.
Cost in putting more time in research is generally less time or attention allocated to undergraduate educating. This really is generally noticed in deficit of enthusiasm coming from academics as well as very poor availability of tutors who appear usually pre-occupied.
At the end of the day, what really does world stand to gain from if higher university standing primarily reflects better quality research that may be primarily inconsequential to students?
Moreover, some important components of higher education might be underrepresented in review of colleges and universities. Regardless of the excellent ranking of NUS, 1 problem remains unresolved by the university: academic liberty or autonomy. University as a concept connotes freedom of thinking and expression that are vehicle of intellectual advancement of society.
On the other hand, NUS and quite a few other Asian educational institutions embarrassingly usually do not get outstanding credit for that facet. Actually, NUS president, Professor Tan Chorh Chuan stated following the release of ranking that NUS continued progress is a outcome of constant help from the Singapore government. That is already a proof of the close tie between NUS along with the government. In actual fact, much of the college funds originates from the government.
The compromise in academic autonomy is best noticed within the political science division of NUS that has come under critique for its very clear deficit of critical voices. The division has been described as "docile", not willing to assert itself as an third party voice inside the political discourse.
In contrast, bulk of the respected colleges to another country are privately owned and they have significantly increased freedom of intellectual inquiry that consequently benefits the whole community.
In fact, the establishment of Yale-NUS Liberal Arts College some years ago caused substantially discontentment around the move in the Yale community that views the Singapore political environment as not really favorable forliberal arts learning.
It's suffice to say that in addition to improving university ranking, the institution also should have to meet its social expectation by determining a fine line between getting government backing and remaining politically neutral.
Maybe before it makes THE pleased , it ought to satisfy Singapore students, social observers and educators 1st, who're the genuine stakeholders of the education within the nation.
About the Author:
The author is a graduate of the university in Singapore and has been writing about education landscape in Singapore in the last 5 years. Since his graduation, he has been offering private tuition to students , enabling them to achieve their goal of being a graduate in a prestigious university.
No comments:
Post a Comment