I have to disagree with this. Useless is subjective. JC was an important foundation for my math and physics. Which really helped me in engineering in uni and hence, contributed to my work now as an engineer. Sure, if you make a jump disciplines, it may be useless to you. But if you were from a science stream and stayed in science and engin, I doubt you'd be able to make it through your first day in uni without your JC background. Same goes for humanities students as well.

But not to discount the poly students, what they've learnt can be easily applied to the working world, unlike JC students. The flaw in this argument is of course, comparing JC and poly is like comparing apples to oranges. The JC curriculum is more suited towards moving on to higher education ie university. The poly curriculum is more geared towards work and not much to do with academia. Not that poly students are not smart, just that they weren't taught enough theories unlike JC students. And of course, their math is terrible, nowhere near H2 maths. But then again, your math doesnt have to be that great for the diploma level job that poly readies you for.

So guys, don't compare poly vs JC. Cos theyre not the same. There are pros and con's in both systems.