Don’t judge quality of education on superficial factors

I disagree that the course requirements of our national universities are higher than those of private part-time degrees. (“Unrealistic to think universities are all equal”; Nov 25)

In the United Kingdom, Australia and Malaysia, agencies such as the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, and the Malaysian Qualifications Agency set guidelines for certain learning outcomes to be met before students are allowed to graduate.

All degree programmes, whether delivered on campus or through partner institutes in Singapore, are subject to similar rigour and criteria set by such agencies.

Professional degrees such as psychology and engineering are also subject to accreditation by their respective professional bodies.

In contrast, our national universities have the power to determine the graduating criteria for their students independently. That accelerated degree programmes are available is due to the recognition of our polytechnics’ high academic standards. This should not be the basis of discriminating against a higher institute.

Education standards are not measured solely on the amount of time spent in school. Many part-time students in local private institutes complete their degree without any term breaks or overseas exchange programmes.

Industrial attachments for part-time students are also irrelevant, as many of them are already working full-time while reading their degree.

One’s alma mater, mode of study and course entry requirement should not be the determinants of one’s capabilities. Employers should instead assess candidates holistically and remunerate them fairly and realistically.