Singapore
Failed to make the cut at a private school here? You can still get a certificate - a fake one. This is what advertisements on local online Chinese language forums are offering..
The certificates are counterfeits of those issued by private education institutions (PEI) in Singapore.
When contacted, the PEIs named in these ads said they condemned the actions of the sellers.
Two PEI have filed police reports.
_________________________________________
The online advertisements offering fake certificates from private education institutions (PEIs) in Singapore scream with promises.
Promises such as the quality of the fake certs and how they can help buyers secure jobs here and abroad.
Touting their services as "reliable", "fast" and "safe", the sellers claimed to offer counterfeit certificates from up to 10 PEIs here.
The institutions included the Management Development Institute of Singapore (MDIS), Curtin Singapore, Kaplan Singapore, Informatics and the Singapore Institute of Management (SIM).
The advertisements are aimed at Chinese nationals who failed to get their desired grades here and fear being unable to apply for jobs when they return to China.
Some of the advertisements said in Chinese: "Believe in us, believe in yourself! We can help you solve your problems."
When The New Paper contacted eight of the PEIs, five said it was the first time they had heard of online counterfeiters targeting their institutions.
Two of them have since filed police reports on this matter, with MDIS confirming it was one of the two.
Its spokesman told TNP that the school's management takes "a serious view" of the matter.
"We will not hesitate to institute legal action against the person(s) involved," he said.
A police spokesman confirmed the report and that investigations are ongoing.
TNP was alerted to the advertisements that have been circulating since last November on at least four local Chinese forums here by a concerned member of the public.
Recruiting agents
Some of the advertisements even promised the ability to create not only certificates but also postgraduate degrees from universities in the UK, Canada and other countries.
Other advertisements said the sellers are recruiting agents and urged people to contact them via QQ, an instant messaging software popular in China.
It is not known who the sellers are. But based on three of the profiles TNP found on QQ, they include men and women who claim to be based in Singapore.
One male seller, who lists his age as 37 on his QQ profile, claims to have graduated from Nanyang Technological University (NTU).
The most updated post by a seller was last Saturday. In it, he said he had a 24-hour hotline and was "professional".
TNP tried to contact the sellers, but our calls and messages went unanswered.
Channel NewsAsia's report last Friday said some of the certificates were going for as much as $10,000.
That report also said that while the sellers were able to produce certificates for any course, the most popular courses were business management and tourism.
This is not the first time fake education certificates have surfaced in Singapore.
Two years ago, TNP broke the story of fake degrees from National University of Singapore (NUS), Singapore Management University (SMU) and NTU being sold here.
At that time, the counterfeiters were found to be based in Singapore and China, and the fake degrees were available for from a few hundred dollars to $4,000.
Several of the PEIs contacted over the last two days were surprised by the sellers' audacity and said they had been unaware until TNP informed them.
The spokesman for Informatics said the sellers were "unethical".
A spokesman for Kaplan Singapore said: "We are surprised by the boldness of these illegal sales tactics.
"(Despite the) strict regulations in Singapore, there are still people willing to take the risk of such illegal dealings."
Many of the PEIs contacted by TNP said there are ways to tell an authentic certificate from their institutions from a fake one.
But some were nevertheless concerned about the impact of bogus certs on the private education industry here as well as Singapore's reputation as a provider of quality education.
Reputation
Mr Er Kwong Wah, executive director of the East Asia Institute of Management (EASB), said: "We do not relish such activities, as fake certificates using any PEI's name will be detrimental to the good standing of the private education industry."
Many of the PEIs whose certificates were advertised on the online forums said they have reported this matter to the Council for Private Education (CPE), a statutory board which regulates the private education sector.
CPE's spokesman said it viewed the matter "seriously".
"The selling of fake degrees is a matter of cheating and forgery and a crime under the Penal Code," the spokesman added.
"The CPE has advised the PEIs affected to make police reports. The CPE will also extend its assistance to the police in their investigations."
Some PEIs have either started or completed their own internal investigations.
Mr Er said EASB's internal inquiry concluded that "none of our staff was involved in providing such certificates, and that our internal processes in the preparation and production of certificates were not compromised".
He added that EASB's principal has also spoken to all the students to impress upon them that the use of fake certificates is criminal for both buyers and sellers.
Kaplan Singapore's spokesman agreed, adding: "We are concerned for students, especially those who fall for such traps as an easy way out, which ultimately may hurt their career and future."
Real certs have security features
The Chinese embassy faxed to the East Asia Institute of Management (EASB) three certificates for its authentication last year.
EASB's executive director, Mr Er Kwong Wah, said the school checked the names of the students against its records and confirmed that no such certificates were issued.
"We accordingly informed the Chinese embassy that we had not issued these three certificates and we could not authenticate the documents," he said.
He explained that each EASB certificate has a security number and only the school can verify the authenticity of the documents.
"Our certificate is of non-standard size and carries a special watermark that is difficult to copy."
Other PEIs here that The New Paper spoke to said their certificates also have distinct characteristics.
Kaplan Singapore certificates come sealed with a hologram, which marks the authenticity of its certificates.
Kaplan's university partners also have in place their own measures which authenticate their certificates in the form of watermarks and other markings.
Kaplan also keeps records of its students, together with their programme details and codes.
This is also done by PSB Academy, whose spokesman said: "Our certificates are issued with serial numbers tagged to each graduand's name and the programme which they had graduated from.
"The list of graduands are reviewed and approved by the examination board before the certificates are issued."
The spokesman added that PSB's certificates in partnership with the Cambridge International Examinations (CIE) come with the CIE strip that is "authentic and not easily duplicated".
Check it
In any case, employers can always check on the validity of a PSB certificate with the school, he said.
The same goes with Curtin Singapore.
Said its pro vice-chancellor, Professor John Neilson: "The authenticity of a Curtin award certificate can be confirmed by contacting the Curtin University Graduations Office or by checking against the school's Online Award Verification Service."
In light of the latest incidents of fake certificates being peddled online, MDIS' spokesman said: "We want to assure all MDIS students that all certificates issued from MDIS are genuine."
******************************************
(youtube)
(youtube)
 |
| Scammers peddling fake Singapore diplomas and certificates |
SG.CHINESE.NET moderator sticky thread on fake degree
近期，中国政府，新加坡政府对本地和海外销售假文凭的事件十分重视，本站以及本地其他网站，人为销售假文凭/自动发布假文凭信息也是屡禁不止。
从即日起，我站将对此类事件和发布信息者采取更严厉的手段处理，如有发现发布者，将报警提交警方，并提供发布者的ID,IP地址等信息。
同时忠告普通会员以及所有的新加坡留学生，所谓“内部办理”“保真”“可申请SP，PR”等等，皆属虚假宣传，本地不可能买得到真文凭。
学海无涯，苦作舟。为了自己的将来，努力读书才是正道，没有捷径可言。
Stolen fees and fake certificates: Lily Kong of Singapore and Dicky Wong of Hong Kong sue each other
Straits Times, May 16, 2009 (source)
TWO private schools in Singapore are suing their Hong Kong-based marketing agent for holding on to money collected from students and schools in China.
Yesterday, Madam Lily Kong (江莉莉), the schools' principal and owner, told the High Court that she wanted the agent to stop issuing fake certificates and receipts in the name of her schools.
She claimed that he had stolen the identity of her institutions and spoilt their good name.
The two schools are Orchard School of Arts and Commerce and Singapore Commercial School, both of which also run hostels.
They are suing Mr Dicky Wong (黄世仰)and his two companies. One of them is International Education Advisory Centre (IEAC) in Hong Kong, which recruits students for schools worldwide; the other is Singkong Group, a local company that operates a hostel in Martaban Road.
The plaintiffs, which are unrepresented by lawyers, are seeking some $7 million and various restraining orders. The defendants, represented by Mr Andrew Yeo, have counter-sued for $5 million for lost and potentially lost commission and fees.
In 2002, the two Singapore schools appointed IEAC to recruit students from Hong Kong and China. They also had agreements with schools in China to run collaborative courses that gave students the chance to spend a year in Singapore.
The two schools are now claiming that the agent secretly kept student fees from 2004 to 2007. They also claim that he started his own agreements with the Chinese schools and that he diverted their students to other schools and to his own hostel.
The schools allege that even after they ended their agreement, Mr Wong and his firm continued to recruit students using their material.
Both parties do not agree about their contracts.
The plaintiffs said they had an agreement, made in 2003, in which the agent was to arrange for students to pay their fees directly to the schools.
But the defendants said there was an October 2004 agreement stating that the schools in China would deposit fees with IEAC, which would wire the money to Singapore. That agreement also gives IEAC the right to sign cooperation agreements with the China schools.
Madam Kong denied having signed this deal and told the court Mr Wong had forged the document.
The defendants also said it was the Chinese schools that had decided against the two Singapore schools after students had problems in 2006.
*****************************************
Nov 2007 (source)
Orchard School cannot take in more foreign students until accounts are fixed
A PRIVATE school in Telok Kurau has had its CaseTrust status suspended after discrepancies were discovered in its student tuition fees account.
The Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) states on its website that the school's status was suspended about three weeks ago.
The suspension is a problem because the school relies heavily on foreign students and without CaseTrust accreditation, it cannot do so.
Case executive director Seah Seng Choon said yesterday: 'We are able to reveal only that Orchard School of Arts and Commerce has been suspended as it was in breach of CaseTrust criteria.'
However, The New Paper understands that the suspension was mainly due to a discrepancy in the school's accounts.
It is understood that the school had also failed to inform Case that it could no longer conduct one of its courses.
However, the Orchard School of Arts and Commerce has pinned the blame of the discrepancies on three of its agents.
The school's principal, Madam Lily Kong, is optimistic that the suspension will be 'lifted soon'.
PROBLEM WITH AGENTS
She explained that the discrepancies came about because their agents for overseas students did not pay the school fees owed to it.
When asked how much they owed altogether, she said: 'Close to $200,000.'
Of the three agents, one is giving the school a lot of problems, Madam Kong said, adding that that the school has engaged a lawyer to pursue legal action against the agent.
The school filed its lawsuit against the agent and some others about a month ago.
Meanwhile, she said, the school has been 'chasing after' the other two agents for payments, and there is less of a discrepancy now.
The school, which runs English courses, a diploma course in accommodation operations and a postgraduate diploma course in strategic business IT, said it has about 200 foreign students.
It does not have any local students at the moment, the principal said, as the last batch has finished their courses for this year. The school's next intake of local students will be in January.
Meanwhile, as long as its CaseTrust status remains suspended, the school cannot enrol new foreign students.
Madam Kong, who set up the Orchard school in 1987, said: 'Case knows that we are resolving the problems. We are trying to sort it out.'
Mr Seah said that since 2005, Case has handled 32 cases concerning the school. Most of them concerned feedback about the school.
In at least eight of the cases, Case had to intervene to help settle the dispute.
Madam Kong said many of the complaints about the unsatisfactory services provided were not genuine.
She claimed that students who were absent from class complained when the school refused to mark their attendance.
Since 1 Sep 2005, private schools have not been allowed to take in foreign students without CaseTrust status.
CaseTrust recognises private schools with good student welfare practices and high quality standards along with clear fee policies and well-defined student redress practices and systems.
******************************************************
Who is the scammer: Lily Kong or Dicky Wong or both?
Shenzhen vocational school sues Lily Kong and Singapore Commercial School
Shenzhen vocational school sues Lily Kong and Singapore Commercial School
Tangled tale of Singapore Commercial School and a vocational school in Shenzhen, China
深圳华强职校校长澄清“发假文凭”事件
2009-12-03 15:15:00 来源: 深圳新闻网(深圳)
深圳市华强职业技术学校和新加坡商业学院(Singapore Commercial School)合作开办酒店管理课程，21名学生学习后，有学生及家长投诉“拿到的是假文凭”。而新加坡商业学院校长江莉莉Lily Kong也声称他们没有介入到实际的联合办学中，且没有收到任何联合办学的费用……这是近日几家媒体报道的华强职校合作办学“发假文凭”事件，引起市民广泛关注。
昨日，华强职校张健校长接受了记者采访。 华强职校与新加坡商业学院的协议书，双方校长张健与江莉莉签字。
出国项目来龙去脉
为了还原事实真相，张健校长向记者详细介绍了事件的来龙去脉，并拿出许多证据资料让记者核实。
2004年初，新加坡商业学院的校监黄世仰和海外合作部主任张小萍来到华强职校，联系引进新加坡政府工艺教育局的技能证书课程。当时，新加坡商业学院是新加坡合法的办学机构，也拥有新加坡教育部工艺教育局ＩＴＥ授权的ＮＩＴＥＣ（新加坡国家技能中级证书）课程教学资质。华强职校在考察时得到了新加坡律师和我国大使馆的多项证明，于是在深圳和新加坡商业学院校长江莉莉签署了联合办学协议，合办酒店管理课程。联合课程办学项目上报区教育局和市教育局审查批准，再经深圳市政府发文批准。
合作协议确定，学生第一、二年在中方就读，由华强职校负责。第三年根据自愿选择去新加坡学习政府工艺教育局ＩＴＥ的ＮＩＴＥＣ（新加坡国家技能中级证书）课程，由新加坡商业学院负责。课程合作项目引进三门主要课程在华强职校学习，考试合格后新加坡方颁发三门合作课程成绩合格的项目证书。另外，招生简章标明，学生毕业可取得华强职校毕业证书及新加坡政府颁发的国家技能二级证书文凭（ＮＴＣ－2）。被认为是新加坡商业学院的“假文凭”，其实是“酒店管理合作课程证书”。
前两年合作良好
华强职校于2004年8月招收了40名酒店管理专业学生，这些学生也自愿选择了和新加坡联合办学的合作课程。华强职校认为，该合作课程前两年教学效果良好，而第三年的违约责任主要在新加坡商业学院方面。学生和家长包括后来的投诉者都认为，前两年教学质量没有问题，但2006年7月，21名深圳学生到新加坡商业学院后出现了问题。
按合同约定，学生签证由新加坡商业学院在新加坡国内移民厅递交签证，再寄回深圳。但办理学生签证过程中，新加坡商业学院擅自将学生申请ＩＴＥ的ＮＩＴＥＣ（技能）课程签证，改为ＬＯＮＤＵＮＵＮＩＶＥＲＳＩＴＹ的ＢＡＣＨＥＬＯＲＤＥＧＲＥＥ（管理）课程签证，而后者不能在新加坡实习和考证。因此，2007年初，理论课程学完后，学生们的工作实习没法安排。问题产生的原因是，新加坡政府对办学课程资格是两年一次审批授权，新加坡商业学院在与华强职校合作时虽然保证肯定能获得续签批准，但资质还是在2007年2月被终止，无法再提供协议约定的酒店管理课程培训以及推荐实习。其后，新加坡方学校仍隐瞒事实，误导和欺骗华强职校向其输送新的生源，而华强职校发现情况后就及时发函终止了双方合作。
华强职校要求新加坡方更换可以工作实习的正确签证，但在更换过程中，全体学生遭移民厅拒签。2007年4月，张健前往新加坡与移民厅交涉，最终说服移民厅，批准了学生的政府技能课程签证。21名学生中部分学生在2007年7月学生签证到期后回国，其余学生继续选择在新加坡升学或就业，其中6人在新加坡读大学，2人获得新加坡工作签证留在新加坡工作。但由于华强职校此时已发函终止了双方合作，于是新加坡商业学院故意刁难学生，不给填写学生在新加坡商业学院学习期间的出勤率，不提供有效证明，2007年12月底，有5名学生遭到移民厅拒签。张健再次到新加坡，找到新加坡移民厅、中国大使馆、新加坡工艺教育局等部门交涉、协调，最终使这几个学生全部获得签证，现还在新加坡继续大学学习。
此前媒体有误读
在以前媒体的报道中，投诉的学生和家长出示了两张“ＣＥＲＴＩＦＩＣＡＴＥ”，认为是新加坡商业学院颁发的假文凭。但张健校长告诉记者，其中一张是酒店英语课程成绩单，另一张是酒店管理课程项目结业证明。他说，新加坡商学院并不是此前媒体误读的大专院校，而是和华强职校层次相同的中职学校，这两张证书只是学分互认的依据，不是文凭。
据了解，按照双方联合办学协议约定，2004级学生的酒店英语合格证书在2005年7月颁发，后两门课程合格证书在2007年6月颁发。无论是否去了新加坡学习，该班原40名学生中考试合格的学生都拿到了这些课程的成绩证书。如果学生自愿选择新加坡商业学院就读，可凭证书获得该校的学分认可，省去半年的学习时间。张校长告诉记者：“招生简章说，学生毕业可取得新加坡政府颁发的国家技能二级证书文凭，是要在新加坡商业学院修完规定技能课程，参加政府组织的考试合格并完成实习任务后，由新加坡政府统一颁发，任何国家的文凭证书都不可能不经过考试合格而随意颁发。”
张校长说，至于有些媒体解读成“假文凭”，是因为2007年后，新加坡商业学院和其香港代表处黄世仰校监在新加坡高等法院有司法纠纷，江莉莉声称，2007年其香港代表处发给学生的英语成绩合格证书和酒店管理三门合作课程项目合格证书不是她亲自签发的，她不知道此事。但记者昨日在华强职校见到了黄世仰出具的一系列材料，包括新加坡商业学院校长江莉莉的委托授权协议文件和江本人签名的证书样板。文件表明，在联合办学时，黄世仰被新加坡方校长授权为新加坡商业学院的校监，在香港设立代表处，并被授权负责处理联合办学的招生、收费、学校盖章等合作办学事宜。
张校长说，黄世仰及其新加坡的代表律师也都严正声明，按照协议从他本人的身份确认、收费、盖章到签发三门合作课程结业证等行为和整个过程，都是代表新加坡商业学院，其校长江莉莉都是非常清楚的，是有法律依据的。至于江莉莉所称，没有收到香港代表处发来的21名学生的学费，记者见到了黄世仰2006年6月28日和11月22日两次共汇给新加坡商业学院新加坡币18万元，并有江莉莉于12月5日签名确认查收。
张健校长告诉记者，清楚了事实真相，就知道当初与新加坡方的合作办学完全合法，符合中外合作办学条例及实施办法的要求。
正打官司维护学生权益
华强职校也承认，总体来讲，该批学生没有达到预期培养目标。为了维护学生权益，2008年3月，该校在深圳市中级人民法院起诉新加坡商业学院和江莉莉，要求其承担违约责任，并赔偿学生的相关损失，今年10月21日首次开庭。张健表示：“关于合同纠纷和经济赔偿的问题，华强职校的态度是积极明确的：等法庭公正判决后，分清责任所属和赔偿标准，学校再和新加坡方共同承担起赔偿责任。即使新加坡方因不同国家法律方面原因赔偿执行难度大，我校也会完全承担起赔偿责任，解决好所有遗留问题。”
- 21名中国学生留学新加坡遭遇“野鸡大学”
2009年07月01日 (来源)
与中国青年报记者见面时，卢贵阳随身带着满满一个皮箱的材料，这些材料都是不久前他从新加坡带回来的。作为一名学生家长，卢贵阳认为自己的儿子卢铭(化名)在就读深圳华强职业技术学校与新加坡商业学院联合开办的酒店管理课程班时被骗了。向多个部门投诉未果后，愤怒的卢贵阳觉得有必要自己去揭开这中间的“内幕”，为此，他远赴新加坡调查，带回了这箱他认为足以说明问题的“证据”。
留学梦看起来很美
2004年，卢贵阳的儿子卢铭中考后被录取到深圳华强职业技术学校，作为国家级重点职业学校，这所学校在当地颇有名气。“当初就是看中了华强的招牌我们才来的”，拿着一份当年华强职校与新加坡商业学院联合开办酒店管理专业出国班的宣传单，卢贵阳告诉记者。这份宣传单上写道：新加坡商业学院与深圳市华强职业技术学校联合开办酒店操作与管理课程班，招收应届初中毕业生，前两年在华强职校就读，第3年赴新加坡商业学院就读，新加坡商业学院负责所有学生的留学签证及相关手续。在新加坡的最后半年，学生还将由该院负责安排实习，并享有政府发给的实习津贴。
“报名时学校承诺说，孩子学成毕业后，可以获得新加坡教育部工艺教育学院颁发的证书，凭该证书可以申请移民新加坡，如果想继续修读，还可以免试升读新加坡理工学院或大学，甚至还能转到与新加坡商业学院关系友好的英国、澳大利亚大学继续深造”。虽然在新加坡读书一年的学费不菲，但考虑到孩子的前途，卢贵阳还是把卢铭送到了这个班。这一年，有40多个孩子成为这个联合办学班上的学生。
入学后两年间，学生们在深圳华强职校的学业一切正常，根据办学协议，有3门课程要由新加坡方面派老师来授课并组织考试，成绩合格的学生还获得了一张盖有新加坡商业学院印章的证书。虽然不知道这个证书到底有什么用途，家长们还是为孩子取得的成绩感到由衷高兴。
到了新加坡，一切都变了
按照教学进度，2006年7月，在向新加坡商业学院在香港的代表处汇出学费之后，21名学生最终赴新加坡开始了留学生活。令人奇怪的是，学生拿到的新加坡移民局签发的学生准证是“伦敦大学管理专业”而非“新加坡商业学院酒店管理专业”，沉浸在美好期待中的家长没意识到这有任何不妥。
但是，到新加坡的第一天，学生们就发现情况有点不对头，商业学院提供的住宿和学习环境与在国内时介绍的大相径庭，21个孩子被安排在一所看起来很不正规的公寓楼内，楼门口还挂着三个不同学校的招牌。原来承诺的2~4人一间的宿舍变成了6~8人一间，饭菜质量也很差。
此后的几个月内，学生宿舍、教室时常处在无人管理的境地，有时正常的上课也因为没有教师而得不到保障。勉强结束文化课的学习后，当初承诺可到五星级酒店实习也被校方一推再推最后没了踪影。最令学生吃惊的是，当新加坡酒店管理课程的考试时间临近时，他们发现自己竟然连报名的资格都不具备。
没课上、又不能出去实习的学生只好整天呆在宿舍里无所事事，有的孩子在2007年七八月就陆续回来了。2007年年底，签证到期，新加坡移民部门拒绝了留下的学生的续签申请，有学生哭着打电话给家长说，如果再不回来，就要因为非法滞留而被警方拘留了。
当年曾去新加坡探望孩子的一位杨姓家长告诉记者，当初发现情况不对之后，他们立刻就找了华强职校反映了这些情况，但一直没有得到改善。学生回国后，几位焦急的家长集体到华强职校讨说法，校方的答复是，出现问题的责任方在新加坡商业学院，是他们拒绝给学生出具“出勤率”证明，才导致学生无法继续在新加坡的学习，继而被移民局拒签的。
华强职校：我们才是受骗方
接受中国青年报记者采访时，华强职业技术学校的校长张健同样也准备了厚厚的材料，这些材料，是学校为了向法院提起对新加坡商业学院的民事诉讼而准备的证据。
张健告诉记者，与新加坡商业学院方面正式合作之前，该院院长江莉莉曾3次来深圳洽谈，并声称拥有新加坡教育部工艺教育学院授予的相关课程的培训资格。后经深圳市政府批准，华强职业学校与其开展联合办学的课程班。
等学生到新加坡出现问题之后，张健等校领导曾多次赴新协调解决，这才发现，原来新加坡商业学院具备的培训资质早在2003年11月就已经被终止，这所学校根本无法提供协议约定的酒店管理课程培训以及推荐实习，更无法安排学生参加考试并获得新加坡官方认证的文凭证书。
“新加坡商业学院不但在签订联合办学协议时就刻意隐瞒了他们没有培训资质的事实，还在联合办学的过程中不断采取欺骗的手段，既损害了学生的利益，也损害了我们学校的声誉”，张健校长告诉记者，为此，华强职校已经向深圳市中级人民法院提起诉讼，要求对方赔偿相应的损失。
“现在，深圳市中级人民法院的传票已经送达对方，本案预计今年10月可以开庭审理”，华强职校的代理律师告诉记者。这位律师同时也对记者坦言，这样的跨国官司打起来会非常麻烦。
张健表示，虽然华强职校也是受骗一方，他还是觉得校方负有一定责任，对这些学生的遭遇，他本人也觉得有些遗憾和内疚。为此，他曾多次和新加坡教育部、移民厅、中国驻新加坡大使馆沟通，最终有6个学生得以留在新加坡继续升读大专课程。
联合办学是个值得尝试的新路，但与新加坡商业学院的这次合作却成了他们探索“联合办学”路上的一个暗礁，张健说。
被骗的可能不止华强职校
据本报记者了解，在与这家商学院合作办学中，有同样被骗经历的恐怕还不止华强职校一家。2007年，大连一家媒体就曾报道了当地一家学校送往新加坡一商业学院留学的20多名学生被“困”新加坡的遭遇，报道中描述的学生赴新加坡学习的专业、获取签证的手法以及后来在新加坡的遭遇，都与华强职校的学生有着惊人的相似。
在记者采访时，一个名叫张小萍的名字屡屡被学生家长提及，这个人曾协助全部学生家长办理向新加坡商业学院驻香港代表处电汇学费的事宜，并多次接待和处理学生家长的投诉。华强职校校长张健告诉记者，此人是新加坡商业学院驻香港代表处的工作人员，代表处的负责人黄某是新加坡商业学院的校监，该代表处持有新加坡商业学院的授权委托书，负责在香港、澳门及大陆的合作办学事宜，还可以发放入学通知信、盖章及协助学生办理签证。
记者通过互联网搜索发现，黄某与这个叫张小萍的人曾多次代表新加坡商业学院出现在广州、南宁、杭州等地的一些职业学校，洽谈的项目正是与新加坡商业学院合作开办“酒店管理”专业班。
一位陈姓家长告诉记者，虽然他的孩子回国后在华强职校领导的特殊关照下，最终考上了国内一所大学，结果还算满意，但对于被骗新加坡读书一事，他还是觉得有话要说。毕竟，这件事情中受损的，除了家长的金钱，还有孩子们宝贵的学习时间，应该有一个说法才对。
****************************************
2009年07月22日 10:34 來源：中國青年報
“深圳這21個孩子在新加坡的遭遇，簡直和我小孩的如出一轍”。看到本報7月1日刊發的《21名中國學生留學新加坡遭遇“野雞大學”》一文後，杭州的陳女士給本報記者打來電話說。
7月1日，本報報道了21名中國學生就讀深圳華強職業技術學校與新加坡商業學院聯合開辦的酒店管理課程班被騙的經歷，這些學生赴新加坡後，沒有得到良好的學習和生活待遇。
2005年，陳女士的兒子劉明(化名)參加了由杭州中策職業學校與新加坡商業學院合作開辦的酒店管理專業班，與華強職校一樣，杭州中策也是當地一家頗有名氣的公辦學校。在該校完成了兩年的學習後，根據教學流程安排，2007年9月，劉明和班上的50多個孩子一起到了新加坡。蹊蹺的是，孩子們拿到的新加坡移民局簽發的學生準證上並不是聯合辦學的另一方——新加坡商業學院，而是一家名為“哥倫比亞商學院”的學校。雖然心存疑問，但懷著孩子“完成學業後可在新加坡繼續攻讀理工大學”的美好憧憬，陳女士和其他家長並沒有想太多。然而，接下來與深圳華強職校21名學生幾乎一樣的遭遇卻讓他們意識到，現實遠沒有招生簡章上描繪的那麼美好。
半年並不正規的文化課程結束後，按照教學計劃應該到了實習的時間，但是新加坡合作方卻遲遲無法安排孩子到酒店實習，一些孩子甚至被安排去打“黑工”。學生們既沒拿到新加坡商業學院的酒店管理專業文憑，招生簡章上“成績合格即可升讀理工大學”的承諾更不見了蹤影。無奈之下，2008年8月，劉明回到了杭州。陳女士告訴記者，與她兒子一起去留學的50多個孩子最後大都被迫回到了國內。
看到本報的報道之後，陳女士才意識到，杭州中策職業學校在這一事件中負有責任，因為在2007年她的小孩去新加坡留學的時候，新加坡商業學院已經喪失了開辦酒店管理專業的資質，應該知道這一情況的中策職業學校並沒有把實情告訴家長。
看到本報的報道後，7月14日晚，新加坡商業學院院長江莉莉也給本報記者打來電話。江莉莉說，她的學校確實曾與深圳、大連、杭州的三所職業學校簽署過合作辦學協議，辦學的具體事宜由商業學院在香港的辦事處負責。辦事處的負責人是香港人黃世仰，此前新加坡商業學院與此人曾合作在香港招收學生。為了能招收更多中國內地學生來新加坡留學，江莉莉給黃世仰簽發了授權書，委託黃辦理在中國內地聯合辦學的事宜。
“雖然我和中國的學校簽署了聯合辦學的協議，但沒有介入到實際的聯合辦學中，新加坡商業學院沒有收到任何聯合辦學的費用，包括學生的報名費，學校也沒有派老師到華強學校授過課，更沒有為中國學生簽發過任何文憑和成績單”。江莉莉告訴本報記者，是在接到中國學生的投訴之後，新加坡商業學院才知道，原來香港代表處背著他們做了這麼多事情。江莉莉說，經了解，深圳華強職校的學生手裏的成績單和證書都是黃世仰在新加坡商業學院及她本人不知道的情況下私自簽發的，中國學生到新加坡學習和實習也都是由黃和他的職員張小萍負責管理和安排，實際上這是他們利用新加坡商業學院的名義和國內學校一起辦學。
江莉莉說，鋻於自己學校的名譽受到嚴重損害，她已經向新加坡高等法院起訴黃世仰。
“華強職校在狀告新加坡商業學院，新加坡商業學院又在告它的香港代表處，惟獨我們學生的利益沒人顧及”，華強職校的一名學生家長無奈地對記者說。
而杭州的陳女士認為，無論杭州中策和新加坡商業學院之間在聯合辦學中存在什麼樣的糾紛，也不管江莉莉和張小萍之間有什麼矛盾，她小孩的損失都是顯而易見的。特別是在已經知道新加坡商業學院喪失開辦酒店管理課程的資質後，學校還是把學生送去了新加坡，這一點，她一定要討個說法。
江莉莉則說：“我不理解的是，為什麼中國學校校長會讓他們的學生把留學費用不是匯到我們學校，而是匯到一個香港的私人賬戶，也沒有學校直接和我們核實一下聯合辦學的事情。我覺得中國警方應該對此進行調查——看看這些學生來新加坡上的是什麼學、發的什麼文憑、學費究竟給了誰。
************************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment