Umany calls out UM for defending direct intake system

Umany calls out UM for defending direct intake system


Published: Jul 5, 2025 11:40 AM
Updated: 1:40 PM


Summary

• A student group criticises Universiti Malaya’s direct intake system for allegedly sidelining STPM students and compromising fairness.

• The group cites admission data showing a disproportionate number of direct intake students with higher fees compared to STPM students.

• The group calls for transparency in admission criteria and enrolment data, urging the university and government to ensure equitable education.

A student group has criticised Universiti Malaya’s (UM) defence of its dual admission system, claiming the university’s direct intake channel has sidelined STPM students and compromised educational fairness.

University Malaya Association of New Youth (Umany) president Tang Yi Ze took aim at the university’s “Satu” pathway, an alternative to the Higher Education Ministry’s UPUOnline system.

“Satu is not a blessing, but a barrier for STPM students,” he said in a statement today.

This comes after UM vice-chancellor Noor Azuan Abu Osman’s June 27 statement defending student recruitment through both UPUonline and Satu.

According to Tang, Noor Azuan insisted the system “does not squeeze the quota for UPU students and does not cause the marginalisation of STPM students.”

Tang also cited UM associate professor Adelina Asmawi’s remarks that Satu was designed to help the university address financial challenges due to government subsidy cuts.

Contrary to these assertions, Tang pointed to UM’s 2023 admission data for dentistry, which showed only two STPM students admitted out of 337 places, while 102 spots went to Satu students paying significantly higher fees.

“This shows the university would rather admit students who can pay tuition fees up to 10 times higher for financial gain, rather than accepting more STPM students,” he said, adding that UM’s claim of giving equal emphasis to both channels “simply does not hold up”.

Tang further criticised the university’s lack of transparency.

“It would be very simple to verify UM’s theory; they only need to reveal how many students rejected by UPU managed to realise their dream through Satu. Why doesn’t UM openly disclose this data if it’s positive?” he asked.

He also questioned the tuition fee increase for Satu students - from RM299,000 to RM500,000 for the Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) programme - demanding details on the costs of upgrades that the fees were meant to fund.

Responsibility of a public university

On financial aid, Tang said UM’s claim of assisting Satu students contradicted previous statements made to the student union.

“Previously, the management told us financial aid only covers UPU students, insisting Satu students are from wealthy families,” he said.

He also alleged that UM’s “Zero Balance” policy forces Satu students to settle their fees in full before receiving student loans, exacerbating their financial difficulties.

Tang argued that the Satu channel’s original purpose - to offset funding cuts - has evolved into a system forcing high-achieving students into an expensive, fee-paying route to secure places in competitive courses.

“This violates the principle of educational fairness that a public university should uphold. UM should be committed to creating a fair and inclusive admission system, not evolving towards a high-fee, market-oriented model,” he said.

As such, Umany called on UM to disclose its admission criteria and enrolment data, ensuring transparency, unified standards and a fair selection process.

“As a public university supported by national funding, UM has a responsibility to ensure the fair distribution of educational resources and to guarantee that STPM students are not marginalised,” Tang said.

The group also urged the government to reform the education system to ensure free and equitable education, cautioning against turning public universities into tools for financial gain.