<p>i don't get the logic (though of course you may be right)
american students, all of them, graduate with 'high school "diplomas"'.</p>
<p>goloisien: they're different branches, admittedly with different levels of prestige, on a parallel track. traditionally, neither of them was supposed to lead to varsity-level education.</p>
<p>
<p>goloisien: they're different branches, admittedly with different levels of prestige, on a parallel track. traditionally, neither of them was supposed to lead to varsity-level education.
</p>
<p>yea, funny sometimes. i agree that both ITE and poly are on a parallel track, just with different level of prestige.</p>
<p>so why then is a JC grad not considered a first time college student? =/</p>
<p>if you take into account...a GCE "O" level cert is roughly equivalent to an american high school diploma, then surely everything after that is considered as college? no? since its all post-secondary education.</p>
<p>
[quote]
if you take into account...a GCE "O" level cert is roughly equivalent to an american high school diploma,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The O-levels tend to be issued at age 16, and they kind of correspond to the end of sophomore year at an American high school (after which the less well-performing students are free by law to drop out). It could correspond to the "non-AP" part of a high school transcript if you want to think it that way.</p>
<p>Hey, current students of America. The term is drawing to a close, the summer holidays are about to begin and many of you guys are flying back to the little red dot. May I ask a favor?
I am in dire need of someone who can piggyback a bicycle from the States back here. Nothing much, just from the college to the airport in a 56" by 30" by 10" 12kg box. I'll be there at Changi. Needless to say, I'll handle all the charges. Its for a dream.</p>
<p>hmm so can a poly student get admitted to top US unis???</p>
<p>Highly unlikely.</p>
<p>well, nothing is impossible...get a high GPA (3.95++) plus an excellent CCA record...</p>
<p>I don't get it, screwitlah? It's just as likely as anyone coming from a podunk HS in the US.</p>
<p>It's the individual, not the school.</p>
<p>a specialised and vocational polytechnic diploma is VERY different from a HS diploma. considering that education in most US colleges are liberal arts-based, they're not likely to consider poly candidates as suitable for or compatible with the type of education in US. Colleges do look for academic achievement in both science and humanities - most poly diplomas are inadequate in the latter area.</p>
<p>Of course, if the candidate has great SAT scores the WR and CR portions it might not be as problematic - but since most polytechnic diplomas do not place much emphasis on language, poly candidates are greatly disadvantaged even for the SATs. It's a different story for tech or tech-inclined schools, of course. Think about the ngee ann poly guy who got into stanford. he was very specialised in IT though, and had great international achievements in his field if i'm not wrong. and he's a once-in-a-blue-moon exception, even though he's among the best poly students ever produced.</p>
<p>it's highly unlikely precisely because it's the individual and not the school. Most poly students are too specialised in a vocational area. Only a very rare few stand a chance, either because they break out of the poly syllabus (extremely hard considering the objective of poly is to specialise and "vocationalise") or they do extremely well, and beyond mere academics, within their specialised areas of study. like the IT guy.</p>
<p>What are your sources? Please cite them, haha...</p>
<p>Anyway, I'm in the "anything-is-possible" camp. I would think that this kind of question spills over to the "well-rounded vs specialised" student debate. Both works, as long as you are exceptional. In my opinion, regarding academics, the colleges wouldn't really discriminate against you as long as you have a good GPA and great SAT scores. If you have entered poly because of a mature and visioned decision, and have succeeded in your chosen field, that might even be a plus, since junior college students will rarely have as much field-related opportunities as you.</p>
<p>I don't think there's a need for me to provide more sources or citations than anyone else in this discussion. I say it is highly unlikely in my personal opinion against everyone else's personal opinions. But I never said it was impossible - in fact, I've provided an example to the contrary!</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you have entered poly because of a mature and visioned decision, and have succeeded in your chosen field, that might even be a plus,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>when it comes to the top US colleges, that's not a plus; that's a requirement :)</p>
<p>I just felt that your post was worded too harshly--if its a opinion, one should mention it in the post. Don't throw a wet blanket on the poor guy. ^^</p>
<p>i'll play the bad cop :) but if it helps, it never ever hurts to try. speaking from experience!!</p>
<p>And I'm the guy with the heart of gold. <em>shower of stars</em> =D</p>
<p>
[quote]
a specialised and vocational polytechnic diploma is VERY different from a HS diploma. considering that education in most US colleges are liberal arts-based, they're not likely to consider poly candidates as suitable for or compatible with the type of education in US. Colleges do look for academic achievement in both science and humanities - most poly diplomas are inadequate in the latter area.</p>
<p>Of course, if the candidate has great SAT scores the WR and CR portions it might not be as problematic - but since most polytechnic diplomas do not place much emphasis on language, poly candidates are greatly disadvantaged even for the SATs. It's a different story for tech or tech-inclined schools, of course. Think about the ngee ann poly guy who got into stanford. he was very specialised in IT though, and had great international achievements in his field if i'm not wrong. and he's a once-in-a-blue-moon exception, even though he's among the best poly students ever produced.</p>
<p>it's highly unlikely precisely because it's the individual and not the school. Most poly students are too specialised in a vocational area. Only a very rare few stand a chance, either because they break out of the poly syllabus (extremely hard considering the objective of poly is to specialise and "vocationalise") or they do extremely well, and beyond mere academics, within their specialised areas of study. like the IT guy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Rubbish.</p>
<p>Firstly, let us define "top" -- if we're going by USNWR rankings, top 20, 30, 50? Or perhaps in terms of getting quality education that will be well-regarded by employers, or somewhere where the individual will be "stretched" and experience maximum intellectual growth.</p>
<p>In any case, you seem to be speaking too much from your experience and not to generalised cases as a whole. Colleges are looking for individuals and great students. The coursework doesn't matter -- as long as it's challenging. In fact, the liberal arts colleges will care less and the tech schools will care more about seeing that you have highly-specialised science courses on there. Course concentrations mainly matter in terms of credit and so forth. </p>
<p>Remember, colleges don't discriminate admissions on major either (unless you're applying to special programmes) so if your poly coursework is challenging, then why not?</p>
<p>Any international student getting into Stanford is once in a blue moon, my friend. It probably wouldn't have mattered whether he was in JC or in a polytechnic. </p>
<p>
[quote]
but since most polytechnic diplomas do not place much emphasis on language, poly candidates are greatly disadvantaged even for the SATs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Rubbish. </p>
<p>SATs test language aptitude and grammar -- there's nothing advanced about language in the SATs. All that matters is that you must be a good writer and a good communicator -- that you can think and argue well. If you're going into journalism or media studies for example, that will come conveniently. </p>
<p>There are so many cultural biases reflected in that post and it seems that <em>you</em> inherently appreciate the IT fields more; but in actuality but what matters is a show of passion and diligence. I would even go so far to say (if students don't neglect to be well-rounded in their non-academic life) that highly-specialised coursework is a plus.</p>
<p>you are wrong on so many levels, but i will let you think what you want for the moment since i'm going to work. your post is equally full of rubbish, opinions, generalizations and biases :)</p>
<p>anyway, just a few quick remarks:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Firstly, let us define "top" -- if we're going by USNWR rankings, top 20, 30, 50? Or perhaps in terms of getting quality education that will be well-regarded by employers, or somewhere where the individual will be "stretched" and experience maximum intellectual growth.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>what do most people in Singapore think when they say "top"? poly peeps included. you decide.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Colleges are looking for individuals and great students. The coursework doesn't matter -- as long as it's challenging. In fact, the liberal arts colleges will care less and the tech schools will care more about seeing that you have highly-specialised science courses on there. Course concentrations mainly matter in terms of credit and so forth.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>the coursework matters. why don't you take a poly diploma and see if you could get into UVA again? do you EVEN know what a poly diploma is about? you're way too naive.</p>
<p>
[quote]
SATs test language aptitude and grammar -- there's nothing advanced about language in the SATs. All that matters is that you must be a good writer and a good communicator -- that you can think and argue well. If you're going into journalism or media studies for example, that will come conveniently.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>please tone down your arrogance - "nothing advanced" about language in SAT? it's challenging for many of us Singaporeans. it's especially so when there's no language requirement in the 3-year poly syllabus for most poly students. language ability comes with constant practice - something not required in the poly coursework of many diplomas. i have seen many poly diploma transcripts before. chances are you haven't.</p>
<p>and duh, i said -most- diplomas. there are diplomas which specialise in communications / business and law etc. but they are in the minority.</p>
<p>Huh? You need coursework to complete the SAT? All you need is a prep book.</p>
<p>
[quote]
what do most people in Singapore think when they say "top"? poly peeps included. you decide.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know. Are we talking about prestige whoring here, or are we talking about actual excellent education?</p>
<p>
[quote]
and duh, i said -most- diplomas. there are diplomas which specialise in communications / business and law etc. but they are in the minority.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It so happens that the most well-qualified poly students I know are taking such programmes.</p>
<p>Again, is it so much as the poly diploma that kills you, or the aptitude of the individual? </p>
<p>For example, does it really kill your chances to attend Harvard if you go to an inner city high school in the US where the graduation rate is 27%? In fact, it would probably help your admissions, but the obstacles you must conquer to even get to admissions ("life in da hood" or whatever) are the biggest reason well why Ivy League students who come from inner city high schools are "once in a blue moon".</p>
<p>So really, let's control for individual qualifications here.</p>
<p>
[quote]
language ability comes with constant practice - something not required in the poly coursework of many diplomas.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Practice that can be easily acquired in secondary school.</p>
<p>What you see in poly coursework is not that dissimilar from the coursework of "magnet science high schools" or "magnet business-oriented high schools" and so forth.</p>
<p>Actually, poly is much more application-based and project-work compared to the highly exmination-focused nature of JC education.</p>
<p>This post doesn't contribute anything constructive XD</p>
<p>Yes, coursework-centred education (as opposed to examination-centred) is generally a plus (which is why the IBP was championed over the A-levels).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Huh? You need coursework to complete the SAT? All you need is a prep book.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>it is unlikely for the typical poly student to get high SAT scores BECAUSE he or she doesn't get much practice or grounding in language in school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't know. Are we talking about prestige whoring here, or are we talking about actual excellent education?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>you still don't get it? obviously prestige whoring. we've always been talking about top schools here. many schools, including non-top schools, offer excellent education. do not equate them.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It so happens that the most well-qualified poly students I know are taking such programmes.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>none of us has an acceptable sample size. but such students would obviously get the most practice in language - many more essays and writing assignments than a diploma student in electronics.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Practice that can be easily acquired in secondary school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i got an A1 for my higher chinese in sec 4. i was exempted from taking chinese at a levels. i have not attended a single chinese class and have not attempted a single assignment for chinese language class in 3 years. i still read chinese daily, but i'm super out of practice in terms of vocabulary and essay writing. do you think i could still get an A1 right now?</p>
<p>when the syllabi of most 3-year poly diplomas don't even have a language requirement, what would 3 years of lack of practice do to your SATs? there'll be some people who are diligent enough to keep their language skills sharp even though it's not required of them, but that's because there are exceptions to every norm. the school shapes the candidate that'll take the SATs and apply for admission. that's part of why i said it's highly unlikely.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What you see in poly coursework is not that dissimilar from the coursework of "magnet science high schools" or "magnet business-oriented high schools" and so forth.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i've been to chance threads around here. those high schools have language requirements. in poly, unless your diploma or specialisation calls for good language skills, there is no language requirement -at all-. </p>
<p>even if some of the specialised high schools don't have language requirements, there's a difference in mindsets and objectives that would motivate the students differently. high school students in such schools actually plan to enter college, and they know colleges want to see a grounding in the humanities and language too. what most poly students have in mind is to enter the workforce after graduation and get jobs that are related to their diploma specialisations. most of such jobs don't require good language skills. that mindset wouldn't motivate most of them to maintain their language skills or suitability as a candidate for college admission. the resulting academic atmosphere doesn't help either. one of many snippets of conventional wisdom around here says that many poly students chose poly because they hated or dreaded GP in JC. it's an unfortunate fact, but none of the many poly friends - with diplomas in EEE, computing, etc - i have in NS could possibly write a winning college admissions essay without external help.</p>
<p>even for poly students who WANT to eventually graduate from university, most of them aim for related faculties and courses in NUS/NTU. admission requires only a good GPA for their diplomas - no essays or writing requirements. anyone aiming for top US colleges and a liberal arts education there is heavily outnumbered. only the most determined few can resist the overwhelming atmosphere and peer pressure to practice good language skills. try stepping into any of the 5 polytechnics here and speaking good RJC-student English. you'll feel like an outcast faster than you could say "Would you care for a spot of tea?" (exaggeration)</p>
<p>i don't know why you think your comparison is in any way valid, or that you know better even though you live in a self-containted cocoon of academic assumptions that you regularly dish out in your posts. you don't know the ground. cultural bias in my posts? no, I think it's just actually knowing what I'm talking about.</p>