NTU PRC scholar: 50% of my schoolmates break bonds & return to china for good!

[Lancelot]

NTU PRC scholar: 50% of my schoolmates break bonds & return to china for good!

http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=70818#1

Is the figure overstated ?

[lanina1]

NTU PRC scholar: 50% of my schoolmates break bonds & return to china for good!

http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=70818#1

Is the figure overstated ?

I would say less than 10%

[em2nre5u]

if the PRC scholars stay and find jobs here, Singaporeans will say more foreign talent compete for jobs ?
If they went back to china without serving bond, singaporeans will say waste scholarship money ?
So best is dont even award the scholarship ?

[Stephentoh]

To my knowledge and interactions with my PRC scholars mates, they did hightlight that MOE has been actively seeking scholars in china but they do not get the top 1-5 percentile students as they lose out to other univeristy when offering scholarships. Moreover, once the scholars are sought after, they have to study 4 years in local Uni and serve a 6 year Bond with any govt/Stat board in return. The scholars (usually less well off) will be obiliged to continue their bond if they cannot afford to break the bond, however, there are many other cases around, for instance if other private instituions offer a higher return that can cover for the bond prenalty, they might chose to break bond. Hence IMO 50% might be really over stated. Also, the PRC in local UNi are serously smart and intelligent! They can compete academically, but will lose out in terms of voicing out their opinon and presenting themselves , that is reality

[CityFarmer]

I am seriously monitoring a trend here, where a controversial thread started, by a "statement" from another forum. I am not against due to competition (anyway, VB is FOC), but as a mean used to extend the topic into our forum.

It should be acceptable, by starting a thread, base on an official news report, or from reputable sources, but not from another forum.

Please take note. I will discuss the topic among moderators, pending further moderation. At the meantime, life as usual.

Regards
Moderator

[kazukirai]

Hi all,

I'm also of the view that VB is primarily a Investing forum (that's the original mission of the forum) and all non-investing related topics should be kept off the forum.

In sum, what I'm saying is that VB is an investing/personal finance/money matters forum. If you wish to talk about other matters, please take it elsewhere. There are other forums where you'll find views and opinions on such matters.

[yeokiwi]

The treatment can be the same as advertisements. If the topic is deemed to be political with not much linkage with investment, it can be relegated to another sub board discussion that will not hog the recent topics.

The lovers and haters can then continue their squabbles until the cows come home.

[thefarside]

The treatment can be the same as advertisements. If the topic is deemed to be political with not much linkage with investment, it can be relegated to another sub board discussion that will not hog the recent topics.

The lovers and haters can then continue their squabbles until the cows come home.

Second that! Moderators please consider. Recent topics should be Companies or stock discussions only.

[CityFarmer]

The treatment can be the same as advertisements. If the topic is deemed to be political with not much linkage with investment, it can be relegated to another sub board discussion that will not hog the recent topics.

The lovers and haters can then continue their squabbles until the cows come home.

Second that! Moderators please consider. Recent topics should be Companies or stock discussions only.

I am assuring all that moderators are working hard to do the DD, not on investment, but to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of our forum.

We don't want to do a quick job, and revert later which might confuse buddies here.

Thanks for all the comments. We are listening.

Regards
Moderator

[specuvestor]

if the PRC scholars stay and find jobs here, Singaporeans will say more foreign talent compete for jobs ?
If they went back to china without serving bond, singaporeans will say waste scholarship money ?
So best is dont even award the scholarship ?

Just to clarify a common misconception on why we bother to offer scholarship and bond them for 6 years here.

It is about networking, and hopefully we get one of the top decision making guys as part of our network.

Imagine if one of the China politburo member came from the PRC scholars. Or a CEO of an MNC. That is the main idea of why we offer scholarships using our taxpayers' money for overseas students. Taken in isolation it is a cost... but looking at the bigger strategic picture it does make sense