16 April 2004

REMARKS BY MR THARMAN SHANMUGARATNAM, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION AT PRESS CONFERENCE AT END OF VISIT TO U.S. UNIVERSITIES HELD ON 16 APRIL 2004, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR

1. The Ministry of Education (MOE) and the universities will study how they can become autonomous, publicly-funded universities.  The principal focus of the study will be on how the universities can be autonomous in financial management and policies on student admissions, tuition fees and financial aid.

  
2. However, the key lesson from our visits to the 3 US universities is that autonomy has to encompass a total culture within a university.  It is not just a matter of autonomy in specific processes.  Each of these universities illustrates that for autonomy to succeed, a university requires a culture of ownership and commitment at all levels: the Board of Trustees, the university leadership and key administrative staff, and an active, involved faculty.   This is a common principle across the different models we have seen in the 3 universities we have visited.

Key Areas of Review

Governance Structures

3. To move towards autonomous universities in Singapore, the Councils and management of our universities have to be given greater responsibility.  As we move away from a government-directed system, universities will require stronger internal capacities, especially in financial planning, capital management, and in administering their own systems of student admissions, financial assistance and tuition fees.  We will also need a clear framework to ensure that autonomous universities remain accountable to the Government and the public good.

4. SMU’s experience with autonomy to date gives us confidence in moving in this direction for all 3 universities.  Doing so for NUS and NTU, which are much larger universities, will be a more complex endeavour, which we cannot rush.  Each of our 3 universities will require time to build up stronger internal capabilities and the culture of autonomy that I was just speaking about to ensure that autonomy works well.

5. I must say that we have been impressed with the commitment and support given by the trustees of the 3 American universities that we have visited.  The trustees spend great time and effort on the universities, and are fully committed to serving on the boards to guide the universities forward.  Good governance in these universities involves 4 elements: firstly, clear lines of responsibilities between the trustees, university leadership and faculty.  Secondly, it allows for both top-down and bottom-up initiatives.  Good governance in the 3 universities that we visited allowed for clear priorities to be set at the top and resources allocated to these priorities, and a free play of ideas and initiatives on the ground, amongst individual faculty, that is essential to what makes these universities great.  Third, good governance involves a culture of mutual trust and collegiality among all these players, a point which was frequently highlighted to us.  Fourthly, it must involve constant outreach to alumni, industry partners and the broader society, to ensure support for the university’s goals. 

Financial Autonomy

6. In Singapore, the Government will remain the primary source of funding for our local universities. However, we will study how our universities can be given greater financial autonomy to ensure the most effective use of limited resources.  This will include greater flexibility in how the universities use government grants.  It also includes the ability of the universities to determine their own tuition fees including the ability to differentiate tuition fees for different courses, as well as developing other funding sources as they seek to enhance the quality of the educational experience that they provide our students and raise their international standing.   

7. All the US universities we visited, including the 2 State universities, relied on funding from tuition fees and private sources such as endowment and gifts for the bulk of their resources, so that they could provide a high quality university education.  This has, for example, allowed them to hire top faculty and provide more opportunities for undergraduates to do research and study abroad.  They have put together a comprehensive financial aid programme for needy students.  In addition, the US universities issue bonds to finance their major capital projects.  These are financial models that are worth careful study.        

University Admissions

8. In the area of undergraduate admissions, MOE has taken a major step this year to allow NUS and NTU the flexibility to admit 10% of their intake based on their own independent admissions criteria.  SMU already has full autonomy in student admissions.  We will explore how NUS and NTU can be granted further autonomy over time to admit students. 

9. Competition for students has played a key role in spurring the US universities to greater heights.  In order to attract the best students, the 3 universities we visited made efforts to reach out to targeted groups of students, coupled with a rigorous admissions process to identify those with the requisite qualities to thrive in the universities.  MIT’s admissions practices, which have been developed and refined over several years, are a good example.  Besides looking at scholastic performance, MIT places great importance on assessing students on 3 characteristics: initiative, willingness to take risks and emotional resilience or ability to overcome adversity.    
 

Financial Aid

10. Another useful lesson we learned from the visits is that once offered a place, each student is evaluated individually to determine his level of financial need and a comprehensive financial aid package is put together for him where necessary.  It is not a mechanical process, a mechanical application of rules.  However, at MIT for example, there is a clear philosophy that every family and student should contribute something to the cost of an undergraduate education.  Besides grants and loans, all students receiving financial assistance are also offered opportunities for work-study to pay for part of their costs.  Indeed most of the needy students do so.

Steering Committee on University Autonomy, Governance & Funding (UAGF)

11. MOE is appointing a Steering Committee chaired by its 2nd Permanent Secretary, LG (NS) Lim Chuan Poh and including the Presidents of the 3 universities, to undertake this review of university autonomy, governance and funding.  (Please see Annex for the composition and terms of reference of the UAGF Steering Committee). 

12. The Steering Committee will recommend an appropriate model for autonomous, publicly-funded universities in Singapore.  The Steering Committee will take into account the detailed findings from this visit.  It will also study the best practices in autonomy, governance and funding of other systems.  The review will be completed by the end of the year.  However, we cannot create autonomous universities in a year or two.  MOE and the universities will study the issues carefully.  The universities will have to work out their detailed plans and build up capacities to make autonomy work successfully.

Conclusion

13. In conclusion, autonomous, publicly-funded universities will be to the benefit of Singaporeans.  They will ensure that the universities provide Singaporeans with an excellent university education and help Singapore go forward as an innovation-driven society.  Autonomy will ensure that the universities remain flexible and forward-looking in a more challenging and globally competitive university landscape.  It will produce a more competitive spirit, in certain respects a more entrepreneurial spirit, in the universities. 

14. As Minister for Education, I must emphasise, as DPM has done, that university autonomy will not compromise on access to a university education for Singaporeans regardless of their financial circumstances.  Our universities will ensure that the admissions process remains needs-blind, and that financial assistance is provided so that access remains open to Singaporeans from all walks of life.
 

Annex

COMPOSITION OF UAGF STEERING COMMITTEE 

Chairman
LG(NS) Lim Chuan Poh  
Second Permanent Secretary (Education)

Members

Prof Shih Choon Fong
President, NUS

Dr Su Guaning
President, NTU

Prof Ronald E Frank
President, SMU
(to be replaced by President-designate, Prof Howard Hunter when appropriate)

Prof Tan Chorh Chuan
Provost, NUS

Prof Lim Mong King
Deputy President, NTU

Prof Tan Chin Tiong
Provost, SMU

Prof Edison Liu
Executive Director, Genome Institute of Singapore

Dr Jennifer Lee
CEO, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital

Mr Ravi Menon
Deputy Secretary (Policy), MOF

Mr Chan Yeng Kit
Deputy Secretary (Policy), MOE

Mr Lim Chee Hwee
Director, Higher Education, MOE

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR
UNIVERSITY AUTONOMY, GOVERNANCE AND FUNDING (UAGF) REVIEW

1. To recommend an appropriate model of autonomy for Singapore’s publicly-funded universities that will enable them to respond to the opportunities and challenges of a more competitive university landscape and to achieve global excellence. 

2. To review the governance structures and framework of accountability of the universities that should accompany and support university autonomy.   

3. To recommend a framework of university funding that will sustain the universities and enable them to achieve teaching and research excellence, while ensuring access to a university education by all deserving students.  

END