Getting into college

PINOY KASI


Getting into college
By Michael Tan
Inquirer

Last updated 02:42am (Mla time) 02/02/2007

MANILA, Philippines -- The agony and the ecstasy that accompany the annual release of University of the Philippines' College Admissions Test (UPCAT) results are not unique to the Philippines. Several Asian countries have even more competitive college entrance systems, mainly because the best universities are operated by the state, and only a small number of students can enter these institutions.

Review classes are even more grueling than the ones we have here. From the stories I hear, they’re almost like the review classes we have for the bar exams, the young students sequestered for weeks to make sure they study.

Beneath these entrance examinations is a whole philosophy of education, including the way a nation looks at a college education. In the Philippines, for example, a college education has become a kind of passport, a way to leave and work overseas, maybe not even returning. In neighboring countries, a college education is seen as a channel for social mobility and a better life for individuals, but there is also a national vision of college as a way to develop the best of the young so they can contribute to the country’s development. The entrance examinations are there to help in the selection process, recognizing the limited resources available for universities.

Filipino education officials should be looking at the experiences of other countries, with their views about tertiary education, to see what we might be able to learn from them. It’s also important that we understand the other systems because our neighbors are also our competitors.

Streaming

Many countries use a “streaming” process that we might want to consider. Streaming recognizes that people will have different capabilities and interests. In China, as early as junior middle school (students between 12 and 15 years of age), educators are already looking into who might go on to college and who go into shorter vocational types of training. Streaming determines if a student will go on to college to finish a bachelor’s degree in accounting or to a business school with a three-year associate degree course in book-keeping. Another example would be someone going on to college for electrical engineering while his or her classmate becomes an electrician.

Unlike in the Philippines, where one ends up in shorter vocational courses mainly for lack of funds, the streaming system is based on exams and aptitude tests. If you’re rich and don’t have the aptitude for college, you’ll still end up in the vocational-type schools. (What wealthy Asian families do is simply ship off their less bright children to the United States, where there are many universities only too willing to take them.)

Streaming considers the labor needs of a country. Note how in the Philippines everyone wants to do nursing or computer science because it’s the current fad, without due consideration of whether the labor market can absorb all the graduates.

Certainly, there has been criticism raised against streaming. Streaming can discriminate against “late bloomers,” young people who may actually be quite bright but whose talents may not have emerged yet. This is where American universities may have something to contribute, with schools like Harvard fine-tuning entrance examinations to go beyond the grades and exam results.

Despite some weaknesses, streaming systems can actually be more equitable, giving the poor equal opportunities with the rich for getting into, say, medical school. The entrance exams are there to detect the ones with potential for education in a state school, supported by taxpayers’ money. Of course, the foundations for equity are a bit more complicated, starting with equal access to good schools as early as in the primary level, but countries that practice streaming also tend to have a more level playing field, with good quality public education at all levels.

Equal access

Streaming affects entrance exams as well. In Vietnam, for example, there are four different types of entrance exams. Those who want to go into engineering, computer science and the physical sciences take exams in mathematics, chemistry and physics. Those who want to go into the natural sciences, health or medical fields or business have to hurdle exams in mathematics, chemistry and biology. Those who want to go into the social sciences or humanities take exams in literature, history and geography. Interestingly, those who want to go into fine arts and music belong to this group and, in addition, they must audition to demonstrate they have potentials as future artists. Finally, there’s the group that wants to go into the foreign service; they have to take exams in literature, math and a foreign language.

It does seem futile to require a future musician to take an entrance exam that includes biology, chemistry and physics. Note that we never require music or art tests for someone who wants to do computer science or medicine. On the other hand, I do worry that entrance exams of this type still reinforce the false dichotomies of the “rational” versus the “intuitive,” when in fact, we need more people who can do lateral thinking, future doctors who can appreciate the arts as well as future music composers who see the interface of mathematics and music.

Bluetooth cheating

No doubt, college entrance examinations have perhaps become too much of a pressure, especially in East Asian countries such as South Korea, Japan and China where failure can be a disgrace, sometimes even leading to suicide.

The pressure has given rise to corruption in Vietnam, where last year several students were arrested for using wired wigs and shirts, embedded with Bluetooth so the students could be coached, via cell phone. A less high-tech variation was the use of “lifebuoys,” tiny pieces of paper with the answers on it sold by sidewalk vendors who also sell cigarettes and tea.

In China, there’s a new twist. The move toward a market system has meant that the entrance exams, while promoting equal access, fall apart when parents cannot afford the fees. After the communists took over in 1949, university education was free for those who could pass the entrance exams. Since the mid-1980s, following market liberalization, the universities began to charge tuition and today, these fees can range from 4,000 to 6,000 yuan (about P24,000 to P36,000) a year, which is a lot of money for poorer families, especially those in rural areas.

The Chinese government is now reviewing its policies and will impose a cap on tuition fees, while offering financial assistance to poorer students. Last year, public attention on the problems of the new market-driven education system focused on the case of a student in the province of Shanxi who had been at the top of his class and who had passed the entrance examination but couldn’t afford to pay the tuition. Despair led to suicide, not of the student but of his father, who was so overwhelmed by the shame of not being able to send his son to college.