Five reasons to rethink MOE-AU scholarship
We refer to the letter “MOE-AU scholarship for students with clear passion for academic career” (March 7).
While the aim of the Ministry of Education-Autonomous University scholarship — to give young Singaporeans an opportunity to pursue an academic career — is laudable, there are shortcomings that merit deeper consideration.
First, pre-university students are not well-acquainted with academic careers and the university environment.
Although “only those with a clear passion for an academic career” will be considered, it is difficult to determine which students have the required passion and commitment, due to their immaturity at that point in life.
Students’ interests change during their undergraduate studies. Even if they show passion early on in an academic career, this may not persist.
Second, many undergraduates are exposed only to the teaching aspect of professorship. The more important aspect of being a junior academic is to conduct top-notch research. This training is usually not systematically available in pre-university institutions or undergraduate curricula.
Only during PhD studies does one realise whether one would want to continue performing high-level research for the rest of one’s career. Awarding the scholarship to pre-university students would thus be premature.
Third, even if a student is awarded the scholarship, it is not certain whether he or she would garner sufficient credentials during PhD training to be hired as an assistant professor in our universities.
Tenure-track positions are in short supply, partly because of a PhD oversupply. In 2011, the Nature journal reported that only 15 per cent of United States doctorates in the biological sciences in 2006 secured tenured positions six years after graduating.
The determining factors are varied: From motivation and abilities, to the PhD training and luck. Hence, our universities would be imprudent to reserve coveted places for these MOE-AU scholars, lest they turn out less than ideal for an academic career.
Fourth, in many scientific domains, it has become necessary to undergo postdoctoral training, which can last from two to even 10 years, to land a faculty position.
During this training, one’s research horizons are widened and one gets a glimpse into the process of attracting research funding and running a research group. Is this important phase factored into the scholarship?
If not, the scholarship recipient would not be perceived as sufficiently well-trained to embark on assistant professorship and do the many, varied tasks required.
Lastly, we surmise that the ministry, in setting up this scholarship, is attempting to train a core group of promising Singaporean academics to work as faculty members in our universities.
In that case, it is perhaps more prudent, given the above reasons, to attract back Singaporean academics from top institutions worldwide than to bind students to be academics 10 to 15 years before it makes sense to do so.
The ministry should rethink this scheme. An academic career is different from other careers. It requires long, arduous training phases.
Showing commitment, passion and good grades during one’s pre-university studies is not a clear determinant of one’s eventual suitability for a tenure-track position.
