|
I REFER to the article by Miss Andre Oei on Youthink on Monday, 'Bonded or broken? / A taste of drought', and her comments on the scholarship and the bond. There is a notable trend that more scholars prefer to work overseas after their graduation because of higher salary and, if given a chance to break the bond, it is quite unlikely that they will come back to serve in Singapore as long as they cannot find a higher paid job in Singapore.
I think one important point missing in the article is the moral obligation of a scholarship. As the amount for the scholarship is in the region of $300,000 for a four-year university course overseas, it is understandably not a small sum either for the statutory boards or the private companies. There is a Chinese idiom that says that one has to remember the source of the water when you drink it. Similarly, one has to return the very big favour given by the respective institutions.
As Miss Oei has pointed out correctly, more Singaporeans are able to pay their own way overseas as there is growing affluence in Singapore. However, every year after the A level results are released, there are still hundreds of students applying for various scholarships. Besides the fact that the scholarship reduces the parents' financial burden to a great extent, the other reason is the prestige status it brings. In addition, most of the scholars who have working experience with the organisations that they are bonded to found it easy to apply for other jobs after the bonded period.
If a student is only interested in her own job prospects and is not prepared to serve the bond to show his gratitude to the organisations providing the scholarship, then it is only fair that the opportunity be given to the next one who is willing to serve the bond after getting such a big amount of financing from the institutions. After all, the various institutions have the shareholders to answer to as shareholders also want to have returns from their investments.
Koh Yee Boon (Mdm)
|
