The Public Service Commission (PSC) has received criticism over the courses its scholarship recipients study and whether these courses are relevant to Singapore’s development. In this particular case, the PSC is defending a scholarship recipient’s choice to pursue Buddhist studies at Oxford University.

Some members of the public have argued that such courses must be “relevant to Singapore’s economy and development” and have questioned how Buddhist studies would be relevant to Singapore compared to science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) studies.

The PSC defended its choice by declaring that they want recipients in the humanities, arts and social sciences as having a diversity of strengths makes the public service more resilient. Further, they argued that having a deep understanding of religions practised in Singapore is relevant to developing sound policies.

Read the full article on The Straits Times: PSC defends scholarship recipient’s choice of Buddhist studies at Oxford

Analysis:

How should the Public Service Commission select their recipients and what determines whether studies in a non-traditional field would contribute a unique perspective to the public service? Ultimately, the PSC has responded that they aim to develop talent across different disciplines and to have candidates from broader networks. While diversity is important, it would also be important for a public institution to have candidates who are consonant with public service values.

Why are there public sentiments that frown upon non-traditional fields in the arts and humanities over STEM, and how has our educational system contributed to these mindsets? The value of education is subjective: it could be determined by the career prospects of the student post-graduation, the disciplines gained during studies and the broadening of the mind. The value of our education will invariably be linked with our definition of success, and whether it brings us closer to our goals. What, then, is the definition of success? Should education only be to learn things that will be ‘useful’ in life?

Questions for further personal evaluation: 

  1. What is the value of having PSC scholarship recipients being well-versed in the humanities, arts and social sciences?
  2. Do you agree with the view that courses paid with scholarships funded by the public must be relevant to Singapore’s economy and development? Why or why not? If so, how do we determine such relevance?

Useful vocabulary: 

  1. ‘resilient’: tending to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change
  2. ‘consonant’: being in agreement or harmony