News Stop: The Life Sciences Conundrum
October 9, 2006 by SGEntrepreneurs
Filed under News Stop
We refer to this interesting headline “The Life Sciences Conundrum” (reported by Loh Chee Kiong). Among the educators, this is a known problem that we are having a surplus of life science graduates who may have to end up doing other kinds of jobs other than washing test tubes. Here are some thoughts and possibly solutions to the problem. We want to dispense some advice for those who might be graduating soon with a life sciences degree.
In retrospect, I like the positive spin of this article (see below) that those who propagate the biotech drive are not to be blamed because they told everyone that they should do a PhD in order to get a job. Is it because they know that the multi-national companies are not willing to employ local undergraduates in marketing, sales and business development? Even the universities acknowledged that they cannot take such a high number. So, who is really responsible for the problem?
Inherently, I do not fault the authorities and the universities, but I would say that the students who signed up have to realize why they end up in this situation. Social engineering is common, and it has happened for engineers and IT industries for the past two decades. Somehow, no one seem to remember what happened to these people. Most of my peers who was caught in the engineering bubble fifteen years back are now selling insurance, stock-brokering and doing any other job but engineering. So, you will be hear the conventional excuse from the authorities that “we are here to facilitate but not here to find you a job”.
Actually, it is not that bleak. I know of life science graduates (since part of my portfolio is on biomedical and biotech commercialization) who manage to get the high end jobs for the pharma companies. However, they are far and few between. Let me give some numbers and why they manage to get these jobs:
- Internships with companies: Most Singaporean students like to spend their summer vacation to do nothing, instead taking an internship in a life-science related companies (or even startups). My cousin is also a life science undergraduate and when I ask him what he is doing in the holidays. He ended up telling me that he’s going on holidays and his favourite comment, “I will find a job when the time comes.” I am pretty sure that he will not find a job by the end. In contrast, out of ten students, about 1 Singaporean and 9 foreign students will be applying for internships. To get these high paying jobs need networks and not going for holidays. There are a few who actually got a job in overseas pharma companies because they took their holidays to work as an intern in Germany or Switzerland. So, we cannot put the burden on the universities and polytechnics to arrange the internships, but the students need to do the homework.
- Life Sciences require not just book knowledge but also commercial knowledge: There are people who want to go into the life science markets, but they did not realize that commercialization is a necessity to be in the industry. Perhaps, they should start using their cross-faculty courses to take some business modules on technopreneurship
Nevertheless, I leave you to read this article and think about what you should really do.
The Life Sciences Conundrum
After the hype, grads now realise that there’s no place for them in the industry
Loh Chee Kong
cheekong@mediacorp.com.sgIN 2002, when Singapore universities had barely begun producing their own life sciences graduates, Mr Philip Yeo, chairman of the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star), famously rattled those undergraduates when he said that they would only be qualified to wash test tubes.
But four years on, armed with their Bachelor’s degree, some of these graduates are learning the truth of his words the hard way. Many from the first cohort have ended up in junior research positions or manufacturing and sales jobs in the industry — positions that do not require a life sciences degree. Others find themselves completely out of the field.
Said Edmund Lim, 27, who graduated two years ago, and now works as a property agent: “One of my classmates is working illegally in Australia, peddling psychotropic drugs to clubbers. Many of my classmates have gone into teaching. Others are in pharmaceutical or equipment sales.”
Another life sciences graduate, who declined to be named, found a job recently at a tuition centre, after failing to land research-related positions for over a year despite numerous job applications.
Already an established base for pharmaceutical manufacturing, Singapore has been trying, in the past five years, to move beyond manufacturing to more high-end research that is “value-added”.
According to the industry’s annual reviews compiled by A*Star and the Economic Development Board’s Biomedical Sciences Group (EDB BMSG), an average of a thousand new jobs were created annually for the past five years. Last year, there were 10,200 manufacturing jobs in the industry, almost doubling the 5,700 jobs created in the then-fledgling sector in 2001. By 2015, EDB targets the number of such jobs to hit 15,000.
But the booming figures mask a Catch-22 situation: The current shortage of PhD holders in the biomedical sciences cluster is hampering Singapore’s bid to attract multinational companies to move their high-end research projects here. Without a PhD, most of Singapore’s life sciences graduates are only qualified to work as research assistants.
And both graduates and diploma holders vie for these positions that could pay less than $2,000 a month. In the industry’s manufacturing sector, life sciences graduates compete against their peers from other general sciences and engineering disciplines. They face even stiffer competition in the sales sector, where paper qualifications take on less significance.
A*Star’s Biomedical Research Council oversees and coordinates public sector biomedical research and development activities. On the surplus of life sciences graduates, its executive director Dr Beh Swan Gin told Today: “It is not a situation that can be easily communicated, as there are many factors involved. Simply put, a PhD is essential for progress as a researcher. And there are still not enough Singaporeans pursuing PhD studies.”
Adding that the local universities should not pander to the students’ demand for the subject, Dr Beh said: “The job market of today and tomorrow, is the market the universities should focus on. The manufacturing and commercial jobs have always been there, albeit there are more of these now. NUS (National University of Singapore) and NTU (Nanyang Technological University) should get better data on the demand for life science graduates at the Bachelor’s degree level.”
In 2001, NUS’ Science Faculty rolled out an integrated life sciences curriculum and NTU started its School of Biological Sciences (SBS) a year later. Meanwhile, the polytechnics also introduced more life sciences courses. Thousands of students jumped on the bandwagon, with demand outstripping the supply of places in these courses.
Professor Tan Eng Chye, NUS’ Dean of Science — who believes that it could take another five years for the industry to establish itself — acknowledged that his school’s intake of life sciences undergraduates was “a bit too high”.
“When we started offering a major in life sciences in 2001, 550 students took up the programme. For the subsequent intakes, the number stabilised at about 450. But we would be more comfortable with about a hundred less,” said Prof Tan, who added that many students were “unrealistic” about their job prospects.
Said Prof Tan: “A lot of students were probably all hyped up to look for R&D jobs. And when they can’t get such jobs, they could be disappointed. If they want to do research, they should further their studies.”
Nonetheless, some headhunters, like Kelly Services’ Lita Nithiyanandan, predict that it is “only a matter of time” before these “highly valued” graduates find willing employers. Said Ms Nithiyanandan: “As most of these multinational life sciences companies have recently set up or moved their R&D centres to Singapore, they require senior and experienced research professionals at this stage to streamline operations and get compounds approved fast for clinical trials. Once these centres are more established they will definitely need fresh graduates for researching new compounds.”
She added: “Overall, Singapore’s biomedical scene is evolving as a mature hub for Asia Pacific. This would create opportunities across the board for skill sets through the value chain from fresh graduates to mid-level research and analysts to high-end PhD professionals.”
No related posts.
Loading ...
Han on Mon, 9th Oct 2006 11:44 am
It all boils down to what I have always said: follow your heart and your interests, not the edicts of the bureaucracy.
ccpin on Tue, 10th Oct 2006 12:29 am
Perhaps it’s better to think of most degrees as general degrees (except maybe medicine & law). There is no guarantee of a relevant good job, but it doesn’t bound one to a particular occupation as well. What matters at the end of the degree are grades, and evidence of leadership and enterprising moves.
Bjorn on Tue, 10th Oct 2006 12:11 pm
is it really true 1 out of 10 applying for internships is Singaporean? I am really out of touch then.
I am not really well versed in affairs of the life science industry, but during my 1 yr experience working in a life science startup in Silicon Valley, even masters student find it a privilege working in research labs slogging their asses off under domineering PIs. Maybe thats why I dun study life sciences, ahha..
And Spore’s local grads have no right to complain they cant find jobs if they didn’t actively seek out internships, scout out research projects during college or advance their education. Without initiative or real passion, they are just lab TECHNICIANS, I thought we need SCIENTISTS who push the frontiers of science by innovating and thinking? tangentially?
Looks like some have become the real guinea pigs in this experiment..
BL on Tue, 10th Oct 2006 12:18 pm
Bjorn,
That’s about right. I got that number based on the number of references and requests for recommendation for an internship. Ninety percent of the requests are from the Malaysians, Indians and mainland Chinese, and when I look around, very rarely Singaporeans. My cousin is one of those examples which I am talking about that will end up as “test-tube washers”.
Bjorn on Tue, 10th Oct 2006 12:23 pm
thats a true meritocracy then, Singapore has to reward those with proactivity instead of determining quotas to flatten the playing field unfairly in favor of the laid back locals.
BL on Tue, 10th Oct 2006 6:47 pm
Related Links to this article from other bloggers:
TakChek: Life Sciences: Hub or Hype
Molly Meek: Nightmare Hub
chrischoo on Tue, 10th Oct 2006 9:01 pm
I saw this coming for a long time now, at least for the past 2 years. It was obvious that while the government had big plans for the biotech industry, things just weren’t working out. I think the blame should lie mainly with promoters of the industry, who thought that simply by pumping boatloads and cash that they could build a thriving biotech hub from scratch in short span of time.
Students who fail to actively seek internships are also at fault, like you say. But ramping up the biotech intake in Singapore universities so rapidly was definitely a mistake that could have been avoided.
One might say that if there were no biotech graduates, there would be no biotech industry. True, but if there is no biotech industry, what do the biotech graduates do? Now that things have blown up in everbody’s face, the students and fresh grads end up the hardest-hit.
I certainly hope the same mistake isn’t repeated in freshly-identified sectors such as new media and animation. The government is right to build new industries aggressively, but it should also have some patience in doing so.
Rome wasn’t built in a day.
haveahacks on Tue, 10th Oct 2006 10:31 pm
Your explanation (lack of drive on the part of S’porean students) is part of the answer. But there is also a more fundamental problem. Loh Chee Kong slants the article to imply that the problem is lack of PhDs, implicitly suggesting that those who get PhDs would get jobs. But that’s not true, either. Even if Singapore substantially increases the number of PhDs it produces, many of them will still be unemployable in Singapore.
The basic problem is that in new, uncharted fields like life sciences, no one knows what’s going to be hot in 12 years time (4 years for Bachelor’s, 6 for PhD, 2 more years post-doc). The term “life sciences” is very broad and not very meaningful when it comes to finding employment.
Employers want someone who can work immediately in their particular (narrow) area of interest. No use hiring a PhD who worked in a different specialization and would have to be retrained before becoming productive. And PhDs are extremely specialized.
The reality is that to find work, researchers have to be wiling to relocate. Even if there is no employer in Cambridge who wants someone in their particular area of research, maybe there’s someone in California who does, or in Stockholm. Conversely, if a company is looking for someone who is good in a particular sub-specialty, it cannot expect to find someone in its own backyard; it has to look globally.
What that means is that Singapore-trained researchers may have to find employment elsewhere; and Singapore-based companies will hire foreign talent. That’s not a “failure” of the system, that’s just how it is.
I suppose one could argue that if that is the case, the Singapore taxpayer should not be throwing $billions at life sciences, when the biggest individual beneficiaries will be foreigners. Maybe, but that’s an argument for another day.
At the end of the day, the only sure money to be made is by the suppliers. Individual researchers may or may not luck out in finding fame or fortune in their particlar field of research, but the test-tube suppliers still make money regardless of which researcher lucks out. It’s a bit like the Levi Strauss approach. During the California gold rush, a small number of people became fabulously wealthy while the overwhelming majority lost everything. But Levi’s sold jeans to all of them and became moderately wealthy. That, in the end, is the best that Singapore can hope for.
BL on Wed, 11th Oct 2006 2:49 am
Haveahacks and Chris,
Thank you for your feedback on the issues. I have written a more detailed exposition on the issue in this followup post in my personal blog entitled To Engineer is Human. In that piece, I also made the argument that the inflation of life science PhDs is going to create a problem in the future.
Haveahacks: Unlike other industries, the suppliers in life sciences are usually big multi-national companies, for example, Applied BioSystems, Sigma and Roche. They tend to dominate the logistics market, which make it hard for the locals to benefit from doing the supply chain. That’s the implicit problem why the life science graduates are having difficulties in finding jobs.
Actually, the sales market for life sciences is pretty open. Most of my colleagues (administrative people) who quit biopolis have recently moved to the medical supplies market, where the eventual path is to get into a high position in pharma or medical devices company. Of course, sales is a highly competitive job, but at least, it is about the same as selling insurance and stock brokering.
Kelvin Tan on Wed, 11th Oct 2006 9:10 pm
This outcome was so obvious when Tony Tan and Philip Yeo first announced that Singapore is going to throw money into life sciences.
Government rarely have more information than the market to do a better job in picking the sectors Singapore should specialize in.
They should learn to just give scholarships but let Singaporeans choose what they are passionate about. But I guess that concept is alien to most Singaporeans
V4 on Thu, 12th Oct 2006 4:05 pm
Perhaps yes, LS grads need to take the initiative to search for internships, and many of them do, in the local labs. Even if you find one overseas, that does not mean you will be able to work there - you still need a PhD to advance in the end. Singapore just does not have enough private Cos. dealing with the Life Sciences yet. Another thing, these ‘technicans’ who are fresh grads are doing equivalent work to engineers, but they are being paid less because a science degree is considered ‘general’ and not ‘professional’ which an engineering degree is. When you consider the fact that all students in Engineering get almsot guaranteed placements in companies for internships, I would say its a bti unfair to be faulting life sciences students from ‘not taking the initiative’ when the ‘future engineers’ have a compulsory work attachment period, for which, is easy for them to land a placement. As for the high intake for life science graduates, I also find it ironic that certain engineers who could not even enter the course are earning much more than A graders (without PhD) by virtue of the fact that their degree is considered ‘professional’. Industry counts. At least for the start. After that, it may be up to the individual, but a headstart is still a headstart.
coal on Thu, 12th Oct 2006 5:31 pm
So it is our fault not to get internship. So it’s our fault we are laid back. I didnt do an intership. But I got a position in biopolis still. I get friends who envy me. And for a short period of time, I was satisfied with myself for making a headstart. Maybe in a few more years I will get a “Dr” title. Spend my days doing the very research i have so much passion in. Wishful thinking. And my passion have died off since. It’s time to wake up. I am only a biologist. A life sc grad without honours. I will not get a chance to upgrade. NUS will say, “you have no honours. Why didn’t you do your honours?” Even the programmes the institutes have which are meant to encourage biologists to get their PhDs, look at the many who failed. The answer is clear. Only those who have honours, very very good grades, are worth the money and effort to groom them to be future researchers. Passion is one thing. Earning to survive is of equal importance. I have decided to choose the latter. I have been in the polis for more than 2 years, for passion. If they stil want to believe that there are just not enough Singaporeans taking up PhD, I feel sorry for them. Face the truth. We are not given a fair chance, based on our experiences, based on uor abilities, based on our contributions. We are only recognised by grades. I am leaving. They will lose yet another passionate person.
Bjorn on Fri, 13th Oct 2006 1:59 am
spore needs those at the confluence of passion + talent. I am not sure we have the right system to find that yet but we should not be designing a system that is overly inclusive by accomodating the idealist and the mugger.
Yes, some of the LS grads now might have the raw passion and our education system might be unfairly judging them, but if they cant even do honors, the harsh reality has to be faced sometimes.
Bjorn on Fri, 13th Oct 2006 2:07 am
… (msg truncated) that your calling ain’t in research if you have unsatisfactory grades in school. You can always do sales or marketing, there’s other functions a in a life science or biomed company that can fulfill ur passion
V4 on Fri, 13th Oct 2006 11:16 am
Bjorn, do you seriously think that all the Postdocs/scientists in the Biopolis had excellent grades? You may be right to assert tt the SG system cannot pander to the needs of all singaporeans, but I feel that it is not possible to assume that one’s calling ‘ain’t in research’ just because he/she did not do well academically. If you are a LS graduate, you will understand that the course in NUS did not provide much labwork on its own, unless u did UROPS. Also, for this industry, how well you do for coursework - which is the bulk of what makes up your CAP is not a direct indication of your ability to be a good researcher. If you have also spoken with some of the famous scientists and some researchers, or at least read some of their biographies you will realise that not all were academically able. One thing that is common to all of them, however is the fact that they had PASSION. In fact, in Europe/Australia it’s possible to get into honours with a good research project, and a supportive mentor. But not here. If that’s the way the system is, so be it. Just don’t put others with passion down. It’s what sets them apart from someone who assumes that ‘a harsh reality’ is all there is for someone with mediocre grades.
coal on Fri, 13th Oct 2006 3:25 pm
Bjorn, I agree with v4. I think he/she have a better idea of the industry. Yes. Not all of the researchers have excellent scores to show to all. But they have more than excellent research going on. I hear and see them with my very own eyes. The courses in NUS is very theoratical, not practical. I have honours holders telling me the only thing they benefit is the attachment in the labs and working on their thesis, learning from the postdocs and technicians. They would rather do without the courses. I personally taught honours year students when they first enter the lab. So I really cannot agree with you that if one do not qualify for honours, they should be treated with harsh realities. If what you said is true, then I should not be spending my time teaching honours year students. They should be equipped with the skills to start off themselves. Getting good grades for exams and doing practical work is totally different. You do not need talent to learn a skill. Or course, with the talent, probably you learn faster. But that do not mean you do better. You need passion to do it better. Passion to perservere. Passion to continue trying. Knowledge can be build up over time.
Bjorn on Fri, 13th Oct 2006 3:45 pm
HI V4 and Coal, I am not a LS graduate, so thanks for enlightening me. I am a true believer that you need passion to do anything, but passion alone is useless if you do not take action to develop skillsets that will make you cross into the talent sphere.
My takeaway from both of you is that there’s something wrong with the curriculum design in local universities then since many local students are syllabus-oriented and less likely to take on extra-curricular research projects and hands-on experience.
And I have a personal message for coal. Your comment inspired my previous response. I do not know you so please mitigate your response accordingly with respect to the impersonal nature of computer-mediated communications on a blog thread.
I felt a strong sense of despondency in your comment and the draining of passion after experiencing life in the polis for 2 years. Like yourself, i am experiencing a decision dilemma between earning to survive and living my passion. Its seems there’s an implied systemic biasedness against non-honors grads that is a dampener on the dreams and ambitions of passionate life science researchers like yourself.
My message is if you feel so strongly, do continue to support and spread the message through civic means to change the system. Tis message is not meant to be strong but I cannot help but feel mad everytime I read blogs and forums that rail at the system while I sit in front of my computer wondering why the hell these people who feel so strongly are doing nothing but meekly following the system like drones when they are away from their computers.
Do something, dun just complain in silence at the system.
Bjorn on Fri, 13th Oct 2006 4:09 pm
I am not going to score brownie points on this comment thread but to substantiate my last point on people who succumb to our local system and give in instead of constuctively changing it, we will never have people like Mervyn Tan (renowned violinist who skipped NS) and Willie Tann (top earning gambler and ex-schoolmate of Goh Chok Tong).
Our local system has a problem. We shouldn’t have “blame-govt-first” mentality when shit happens but try to change it.
Related links:
http://commentarysingapore.blogspot.com/2006/05/musical-talent-crushed.html
http://www.todayonline.com/pdf_main.asp?pubdate=20061007
coal on Fri, 13th Oct 2006 4:59 pm
Thank you for your advise, bjorn. I am not one who sits and do nothing. Why I even bother to comment here is also because I see this as a ground to spread the message, hopefully to the people who have the authority and means to change the current system. I do not know which field you specialise, but I can say I will not be able to completely understand your situation. What I am trying to do here is also to voice out the endless comments and views of my fellow coursemates, who are also in the same situation as me. And I am not bias against honours grads. I do have plenty in my life science social circle. They do not look down or feel non-honours grads are in any way worse or less competent. It is the system that is bias. And I am hoping my message and comments are getting to the people who takes care of the system.
wolf on Mon, 16th Oct 2006 12:15 pm
Since we’re still playing the blame game (*grin*), I’ll throw in another comment - Of those who have been lucky to get interns and junior positions in the industry, how many of them have been turned off by the lack of support and mentorship at their workplaces?
There seems to be this prevailing viewpoint in at least one research institute, that interns, FYPs and junior staff are regarded as no more than grunt labour. Their work often is just washing testtubes (in a metaphorical sense), and when asked, are unable to explain why they’re doing so. Yes, we can easily brush this off by saying they should be having more initiative and learning on their own, but we have to remember that these are kids fresh out of school - this can be the first time they’re exposed to a research environment, and we can’t expect them to suddenly grow into researchers. Mentorship and guidance are still things that only their supervisors can provide.
I don’t know if that’s what the education system churns out, but I see a lot of attachment kids who are obviously bright, but who just take orders from a supervisor without questioning. Is it an Asian face saving thing, maybe? That if you don’t know what’s going on, you don’t ask questions from your supervisors because that’s a sign of weakness, that you can’t find out something yourself just by reading? Sure, reading up works for classes and mundane tasks, but there are so many other aspects of research that no book can tell you about.
Are supervisors aware of this? That they need to put in extra effort to draw out their wards, encourage and motivate them? Or are supervisors just seeing these guys as mere numbers, to be added to your KPI total so that their project and performance appraisals looks good? That’s an unfortunate trend that I see in the research scene here - many people are treated as statistics. Number of Singaporean PhDs, number of staff spun out to industry, number of students “trained”, etc. Where’s the need for passion when all that “the administration” cares about are just numbers?
BL on Mon, 16th Oct 2006 1:00 pm
Coal,
I can tell you that I am in the process of getting a module on commercialization of life sciences approved in the Science Faculty, NUS so that we can link the industry with the students. I have actually solicited help from the biotech community and they have agreed to work with me for guest-lecturing in the course.
coal on Wed, 18th Oct 2006 11:57 am
Hi BL,
I am glad to hear that. Appreciates your efforts. If there is any help you may need, I will be glad to help.
coal on Wed, 18th Oct 2006 12:19 pm
Hi wolf,
Be positive. I do not say there are none of these kind of scientists around, but rest assure that what I see have been very positive so far. Researchers have been patient and supportive to their students overall. Sometimes, we also need to consider the students’ attitudes. Afterall, it takes 2 hands to clap. As a mentor myself to some students myself, I feel that we should be fair. Give recognition and support to the right people, right students. I am not too sure by what you mean when you say “wash test tubes”. But I can tell you even my mentor does her own washings. Lab duties are done by all. Does not mean that researchers will do the experiments and the students do the clearing up. Not true. One batch our jc students complained to me before, that they are here to do experiments, not to clear rubbish. A totally wrong attitude. The rubbish generated in the lab are not ordinary garbage, they a hazardous waste, bioharzards. We have cleaning aunties here but they never touch our waste. They are not to, since the researchers are the trained people to know how to dispose of these waste correctly. I must emphasize that waste disposal is an important work. It is the last and final step to an experiment. Proper disposal will ensure we are not polluting our envt and waters. (I do see students pouring toxins down the pipes. Where do you think these toxins will go to? Yes, to the sewage systems, to the canals, to the seas, to the oceans.. I do not need to elaborate further)
wolf on Wed, 18th Oct 2006 5:51 pm
Heya coal,
Well, you’re in a lucky position then. In the past 2+ years that I have been working, I’ve had to rescue a few students from their supervisors. Maybe it’s a supervisor attitude thing, or a cultural thing, or simply just a language thing - seriously, even with higher chinese and all, how many singaporean kids can communicate scientific jargon and concepts in a second language?
The culture at some places is also pretty much “do whatever the master says”. And unfortunately in way too many cases, many bad and even dangerous work practices are blindly propagated along in this fashion (how bad? Let’s try chemical handling - including HF for wafer cleaning - without goggles or proper gloves). And the students are often asked to do this without an understanding of what they are doing, or of the dangers involved. Sure, it’s test-tube washing, and an important process since the cleanliness of your gear and samples will affect the result of your subsequent nanofabrication steps. But the significance, importance and related hazards should be emphasized to the students.
Again it’s numbers - it doesn’t matter whether your student learns anything, he’s just another figure to boost your performance appraisal at the end of the year.
There’s really a big gap here between how a scientific culture operates, and how “the administration” thinks a scientific culture operates. Yes, it’s slowly changing for the better, and I am proud of being part of that process, but it’s awfully slow and frustrating at times!
e pur si muove on Fri, 20th Oct 2006 11:15 pm
Change of leadership at A*STAR…
From the corporate site of A*STAR:
Mr. Philip Yeo (59 years old) will be stepping down as Chairman of the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) A*STAR at the end of March 2007. On 1st April 2007, he will assume Chairmanship of the Standa…
coal on Sun, 22nd Oct 2006 4:59 pm
Hi wolf,
Yes..Maybe I am lucky in some sense. Though things may be slow, at least there is progress. But i believe it takes 2 hands to clap. Students initiative to learn and mentors’ passion to impart knowledge. Probably, luck plays a small role as well. To meet the right people, to learn from the right people.
Anea on Mon, 30th Oct 2006 11:31 pm
I am a foreigner who studied in the NUS. My english was so bad when i came. I gave up the medical education in my country which is free for me and it was one of the top medicine school. I woould not having any difficulties to be recruited even i had worst grades. And if i can persue the specialty i would be rich. However for the passion of the research i came here. I did not know they were having 500+ students for life sciences in NUS alone. My grades are not excellent now… it is honours with second lower…Well why did i get a low grade isnt it? There are lots of reasons of course. But i should tell you people who get much greater grades are not better than those who get less. When i did study to my lessons (the ones i find interesting) i got top grades (i am not kidding i was in first 10 people) then there are lots of stupid classes which i refused to study because they teach nothing to you. Instead, i read my juornals on my own interests and at the end of course i did no good in those classes. Okey there maybe an arrogant behavior here but many of my professors regarded me well knowing person. Another thins, in NUS you can not see your final paper.What the most stupid thing on earth!!! Then what is the point i am taking classes. Prof’s do wrong, they do grade wrong and it happened to me for many many times which we corrected in the midterms. Than what about finals? so you think there is a very fair judgement going in. This part is very annoying so i stop here because i dont think i can continue without swaring (God forgive what i do wrong). In addition, I find no flexibility in here, everything is just about grades… They do not look your ideas or anyhing (they look if you have the grades). This was also told by one of the high end scientist in Biopolis (i can not remembr now) whom Singapore brought from overseas. I graduated this year and i am looking for a job, i could not find any yet… Many do not except because i do not have PR and Singapore citizenship, PhD or experience. I want to do PhD with self-finance (as i can not get any scholarship) but if no one recruits me i can not do that either. Now it is over one month now and my family can not support me to stay here anylonger. Goverment is asking me to stay 3 years as a bond. And do you know what! i am going to leave if i can not find a job within another month because i have no other choice. Is it a bad thing? yes maybe, but what do you call what the government did to us? ruining our lives. And they are recruiting more foreigner students. I had no slightest idea it would be like this. Now even locals can not find job. But i think one local should thank me because i occupied his/here place in university so that he/she would not be jobless but me :) well you see the irony isnt it? Well ther is much to tell but what will change anyway? (not a question demanding answer)
P.S. I did UROPS and FYP and one summer internship overseas
claris_tan on Tue, 31st Oct 2006 9:34 pm
Anea,
that’s pretty sad that a foreign talent like you will land in such a state.
Yes, I strongly believe the system here is wrong. Having local and foreigner to compete against each other in a dog-eat-dog world and the so called free-market, and that grading is ultimate criteria for high flyer promotion doesn’t sound like Singapore is going to attract and groom great talent. It is more discouraging than encouraging. Instead of collaborating, we are competing.
It is perhaps with such kind of system that permeates the working environment that ppl cannot find true passion in their work, let alone find greatness.
Hope gov will review its policy and stop implying that academic=intelligent. I find many talented ppl here of many fields that is downplayed because of poor academic result, but i can say their work achievement generally suppress those of so called “academic achiever”.
claris_tan on Tue, 31st Oct 2006 9:41 pm
True passion lead to greatness.
Until we see education and academic as a mean rather than as a end, we probably not going anywhere.
wolf on Wed, 1st Nov 2006 4:52 pm
Anea,
The 2nd lower requirement is very frustrating for us at the research institues too whenever we want to hire people; we find a lot of good candidates who we have to fight for because admin/HR will throw them out without even looking just because of grades.
My advice is not to submit your resume directly (ie via the official online channel) to the institute/company where you intend to apply, but contact the principal investigators and project leaders if you can and talk to them directly. Ask to see their lab and express an interest in their work (if you ask for a job directly, they may just tell you to submit your resume to HR). Sometimes they have positions (mainly GAP/research officers) available - and sometimes not advertised either - and if you can convince them of your passion and skills, you can push your resume and job application through them. The chances of landing a position are often higher this way compared to submitting your applications cold.
Sigh on Mon, 6th Nov 2006 11:13 pm
Anea
Like anyone who obtained a second lower, it is diffcult to pursue a PhD here even by self-finance. The universities must first approve your application, and both NUS and NTU request for a second upper. I reckon they have too many applicantions and has to adhere to a quota. I agree with wolf, the best way is to approach the PI of the lab, email may not be the best mean, try calling the PI. Try sale position, you will meet more PIs this way and also will allow for more time to understand their research. A good service establishes a good relationship between the PI and you. Maybe after 1-2 years, if your passion is burning, approach the PI.
HL on Fri, 8th Dec 2006 9:02 am
Hi,
This is an interesting read regarding life-sciences graduates in Singapore.
I do agree that you will need a PhD to continue independent research, on the other hand, there may just not be enough opportunities for PhD holders. Take myself for example, I have a Masters degree in Clinical Neuroscience, and about 6 years of research experience in Cognitive Neuroscience. Due to funding problems, I couldn’t do my PhD, and now with each passing year, the opportunity cost of doing a PhD for me increases.
When I decided to look for jobs other than research, most of the employers have found that I’m too research-oriented, or that my area of research expertise is not what they are looking for. I have taken some business management modules at the undergraduate level, but that does not count for them. Sigh. I would like to expand my current field of expertise to the corporate sector, but the opportunities are too limited for me. At present, I’m still searching for a job in the biomedical sciences sector, but no success so far. This process is frustrating and depressing.
In my opinion, for Singapore to be a biomedical sciences research hub, it has to have a diverse range of neuroscience resarch, from molecular to systems level. Typically, a clinical disease is affected at each stage of neuroscience. I think to focus on a particular stage of neuroscience research will hinder our development to being a biomedical sciences research hub.
Calvin Neo on Fri, 12th Jan 2007 9:09 am
I read the thread thus far and can’t help but feel there many LS students are facing serious difficulties. As a recent engineering graduate from NUS, I experience similar problems.
My advice is short and clear - What are you going to do about it?
I am sorry to say that if a PhD is the best bet you have, then risk is needed to pursue it. If money is the immediate concern, they take up a job first to meet your short term expenses. If Singapore is not good, look overseas. If you are bonded, break it or accept it…
I apologize for having to put solutions across in such harsh manner. But to all my dear friends, we made certain decisions and came thus far. Even if we were (unitentionally) led to where we are, the lesson is to recognize that we still move on but now hopefully became smarter.
Anderson on Sun, 4th May 2008 12:32 am
Speaking from personal experience, many undergraduates choose to believe in the rosy picture of being able to work in the life science industry, even as they are about to graduate. Many of my peers refused to see that the industry does not provide satisfaction for a degree holder. The job scope is routine, mundane, and ones output is just a minute part of the whole research project. As a lab technician, which many without a PhD will doing, one is at best expendables. One needs to ask if it is worth it to waste their time doing things that may not contribute much to the scientific community, not being able to put one`s talent to good use, and getting paid peanuts. I was told that even if you work all your life in a govt. research agency, your pay will not exceed $4000. Do you want to work in an environment insulated from the outside world, ignorant of “The Shock Doctrine”, or global affairs.
Indeed, life science is not an easy subject to excel in, and it take quite a bit of effort. Worst still, the course apparently does not appeal to banks and many non-life science industries. In applying for internship, I did not receive a single response from the banks(GS,ML,Citi,SCB,HSBC,DBS), 4 consulting firms, nor the 7 ad agencies which i applied, even with a decent CCA record. One really has to ask if it`s worth pursuing such as course.
Benjamin Linus on Sun, 4th May 2008 12:40 am
I recommend that for someone unsure of what they want to do in the future, pursue a degree that will be of value. Life science, is not appealing to many corporate employers, business and accountancy are. So why waste so much time trying to fight for a second upper where one can with relatively ease obtain the same standing in the 2 courses? Btw Business minor don`t seem to appeal to employees either.
So unless you don`t mind doing routine work and not being able to chart major progress in your life, or you are definitely sure of doing PhD, consider other options.
L on Mon, 5th May 2008 12:26 am
In terms of career options and prospects, it is always better to pursue a professional degree rather than arts or science degrees which are usually considered general. Research jobs are only for the top students of the cohort and don’t forget university award degrees based on bell curve. At the end of your four years, you could be ending up wasting your time pursuing a degree that cannot land you a decent paying job.
Beyond the Cul De Sac on Mon, 6th Apr 2009 2:36 pm
[...] yourself. And if that still doesn’t explain why I’m so conflicted, I’m sure the words of the Dean will do the job. Fancy reading about how the department of life sciences “will be [...]