• those who didn't do well in their exams but have other talents will have a better chance of being accepted

long-term implications

• human resources can be better harnessed - fewer talented people will fall through the cracks

• society may move away from hyper-fixation on grades, since other talents can also lead to success - less pressure academically and wider acceptance of less traditional careers

long term: may undermine the system of meritocracy in singapore 🇸🇬

• SG is an expensive city — wealthier Sgeans inherently have an advantage in accessing resources or gaining opportunities that allow them to develop their ABA portfolio and discover dormant strengths/strengthen non-academic talents, vs lower-income individuals who are placed at an even greater disadvantage due to SG’s high costs placed on such talent development opportunities

ABA to some extent benefits those with a natural aptitude for a specific area. Not everyone will be able to refine their aptitude, some may have the means to display their aptitude, especially if they have the financial support. Others may not be able to refine it and as such, they can't get in even thoug h they would excel there.

Additionally, in a world where "leadership" is widely sought out for -> many schools attempt to give their students leadership opportunities by creating more- workload is significantly watered down, impact of one's actions are likeiwse watered down. most importantly-> almost everyone has a "leadership position" and it is difficult to tell those who contribute more apart as ABA mostly looks at titles and experiences in a quatifiable manner instead of a qualitative manner

ABA allows for people who have other strengths that are related to the course to be able to enter university despite not meeting the academic criteria

long run: fairer but also not fair because there will be monetization by those programs to get you into specific courses and schools

Key SG characteristic: Significant disparity in wealth distribution

The benefits of ABA would be felt evenly by students that were unable to invest time for their academics and extra-curricular activities due to other priorities. By allowing for personal experience to shape one’s portfolio, universities allow for students of diverse demographics to be accepted. The question of evenness may be more achieved compared to if ABA was eradicated completed as there are now different ways of assessing if a student is deserving of a spot in university.

low income students are disproportionately affected as they have fewer connections and opportunities to develop their abilities in a range of areas

Long term: Makes polytechnic a more viable academic path and less frowned upon with the opportunity of university being wider but would require a case-by-case assessment rather than comparing e.g. between a straight As JC student vs a Law module polytechnic student for a law degree

No, it would not be evenly felt.

Building a good portfolio can also be determined by SES, such as attaining opportunities for internships due to nepotism/greater ease of networking. Those who are without these privileges are unable to feel the full benefits of ABA if their well deserved spots are taken up despite being equally competent.

long term: decreased productivity as everyone aims to js barely get by

influences : the way students are selected for ABA is also dependent on the panel’s experiences and life experiences not only just what is on the portfolio. However, for the portfolio it is also affected by the opportunities they’re exposed to or are able to take on.

ABA should benefit students that don’t get the perfect grades but are very suited for the course. however, these people might also be outshined by those who intentional build their portfolio (with the privilege to do so), whilst still having good grades.

Hence, the effects might not be felt fairly throughout and it has many nuances and factors that will affect the outcome of the ABA applications

In practice, this also holds true and can be further explored.

The argument of all students having access to the internet also can be broken down when we consider the proficiency in which the internet is accessed is a skill to be gained. This skill can be better attained when surrounded with people of high proficiency, allowing us to tap into them and learn from them.

Those from lower SES, may find those around them aren’t as well versed as compared to their counterparts who may have connections to institutions which provide such knowledge and skills.

Furthermore, those of the higher SES may very well have parents who are better educated or hold degrees. This translates into better early development amongst children, and compounds as the student reaches his later years of education. All of which may not be the case for those of lower SES.

In the long run, this may increase pressure felt by applicants. As different pre-u institutes have different academic rigor, this may result in students taking on too much.

O5 - ABA may cause a larger disparity between students of higher SES and lower SES. Students of higher SES may have more opportunities to pursue non academic activities.

In the long run, this defeats the whole point of a holistic admissions system. Instead, the wrong mindset of gaming the system through intensively going for these extracurricular activities. Further intensified by Singaporeans competitive culture.

In Singapore’s highly competitive n kiasu society,

In the grades based system, there is the problem of students burning out by competing to extremes to get the best grades.

However if importance is placed on both grades and other commitments or experiences, now students would compete in Two areas, burning out twice as bad by trying to mug for good grades and taking on lots of commitments to look good on holistics.

U can argue that with 70 rp system, students have more time for extracurriculars , but still many students will not find this sufficient time to prevent burnout from competition.

• more students who have grades that fall short of admissions criteria but possess certain talents and skills (esp. people who specialise) have greater access to tertiary education

long-term

• possibly see a shift in terms of which industries are seeing a growth -> our workforce become more diverse

• might see less academically-rigorous economic output? theoretically? because universities themselves could also be shifting teaching styles towards supporting and furthering skill-based output rather than knowledge-based

However, in reality, there could be both short- and long-term implications. ABA admits applicants through a review of their non-academic achievements and experiences. The quantity of experiences and achievements that one can accumulate is influenced by many factors such as connections and socio-economic status. For example, if an applicant comes from a family that is considered to be wealthy, they could have specialised in a particular sport or art that require large amounts of funding. This means that applicants that do not have the means to do so are at a disadvantage.

Conversely, more economically disadvantaged applicants may have less ability to invest in non-academic activities due to limited financial capacity, time taken up by studying or helping with family finances.

• Neighbourhood sports (for lower/medium ses) vs high class sports (for high ses) eg basketball vs golf

• basketball more widely available and hence higher competition vs if its niche activities eg golf or like softball theres less competition

When considering both ABA and grade for uni admissions, people tend to want to excel in both. E.g. ‘just in case’ their grades unexpectedly turn out bad, at least they still have a wonderful portfolio for back up. This can be seen currently for DSA. With the limited time that JC / high school students already have, is it realistic to excel in both? If we have a population of young students who put so much importance on both aspects, what are the implications— stress, less time for themselves, become a slave to the system, mental health issues..??

If accept half ABA half grades, the grades Cut off point may rise to the point that if u dont get straight As, its basically impossible to get into a good course. Crazily competitive and meritocratic.

short term: more difficulties finding a basic criteria to judge students for holistic based admissions, due to lack of experience

long term: societal shift towards focusing on portfolio building from a younger and younger age in addition to grades

• Not enough time for people who have 'gung ho'-ed grades to pivot into having a good portfolio

• It's going to be a hard adjustment, given SG's high emphasis on grades

Long term implications

• Less emphasis on grades

• Helps to make the poly track more viable

• HUGE DISCLAIMER Highly specific consequence, may discourage JAE JC admissions because there are a lot more portfolio building opportunities in poly.