3 June 1997

SPEECH BY MINISTER FOR EDUCATION, RADM (NS) TEO CHEE HEAN AT THE OPENING CEREMONY OF THE 1997 PRE-UNIVERSITY SEMINAR, "SINGAPORE AS BEST HOME: FROM SCENARIOS TO STRATEGIES" ON 3 JUNE 97 AT NUS @ 9 AM

SINGAPORE AS BEST HOME : FROM SCENARIOS TO STRATEGIES

Good morning,

Distinguished guests,

Ladies and gentlemen.

From Survival to Success

Singapore's post-independence story has often been regarded as an economic miracle. In the three decades since independence, we have been able to attain a per capita GNP of about S$37 000. This is 23 times what it was in 1965. Our people now enjoy much better housing, health, education and employment.
In 1997, Singapore was again ranked as the world's most competitive economy, according to the Global Competitiveness Report compiled by the Swiss-based World Economic Forum. We continue to emphasise workforce productivity and upgrading. Fresh initiatives such as Singapore ONE, an island wide broadband multimedia network, have been launched to build up world class capabilities and infrastructure. These measures will help ensure that our businesses and workforce can stay ahead of the competition and continue to attract investments to Singapore.
We have expanded our economic activities beyond our shores. Our regionalisation programme, launched just five years ago, has taken firm root. Total investments in the target countries, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam stand at S$50 billion.
We are encouraging innovation and the development of local companies, especially high technology companies, so that they can spearhead a new wave of growth in our economy based on home-grown entrepreneurs and home-grown technology.

From a colony of immigrants to one free and independent nation
The story of Singapore is not just a story of economic success. It is also the story of how from a colony of immigrants, one free and independent nation was formed.
Historically, very few of our forefathers called Singapore home. Many of them came to our island in search of a fortune. Having made it, they eventually returned to "motherland" China, India, Europe or to elsewhere in the Riau Archipelago. If Singapore was considered home, it was at best temporary. But their hard work and the desire to do well created an exciting and dynamic atmosphere. It was a place with opportunities aplenty; where goods were traded, where deals were struck, where fortunes could be made or lost.
In those early days, there was no sense of a common identity nor shared destiny. The Whampoas, Syed Aljunieds and D'Almeidas set up home because of family and business. The many races and communities were distinct and separate. Singapore as homeland was a non-entity. This mindset continued till World War II. The experiences of the Japanese Occupation and the defeat of the British made your grandparents' generation long for independence from the British. This found expression in the struggle for self-rule in the 1950s and the desire for independence through the Federation of Malaysia in the early 1960s. But home continued to be defined along ethnic lines: the ethnic enclaves of Chinatown, Geylang Serai and Little India illustrate how racially divided Singapore was. And the racial fault lines, so easily exploited, were used from time to time by unscrupulous elements to instigate riots.
The tribulations of two years of merger in Malaysia, followed by separation in 1965 brought into sudden and stark reality, the need for our own home, our own free and independent country. Independence was greeted with cheers and with fear: jubilation that we were now free to decide our own future according to our own values and ideals; fear that our vulnerabilities and constraints would overwhelm us.
Out of the struggles of this period, a nation gradually took shape. These struggles had the effect of binding us together as one people, living together as one nation and sharing Singapore as one home. In the three decades since independence, the government has worked hard to reinforce these bonds and attachment for Singapore as our home. Our people were integrated in housing estates and schools. Subsidised public housing and share ownership let every Singaporean own a part of Singapore. National Service and Total Defence gave every Singaporean a shared responsibility for defending our way of life. Educational opportunities allowed every Singaporean to strive for a better future.
With the hard work of the last three decades, we have forged a nation and provided a good life for our people. But our nationhood is still fragile, and a good life is never assured. With a new millennium dawning, there are new challenges. We need to build a shared vision for Singapore in the 21st Century, and work towards achieving our vision of Singapore, Our Best Home in the 21st Century.

What will the 21st Century be like?
We cannot say with certainty what the world will be like in the 21st Century. Futurists such as Charles Handy and Ian Morrison tell us that "the future will not be an extrapolation of the past". The success recipes from the past may no longer be the success recipes for the future.
We will have to live with the world as we find it; we are much too small to shape it. There will be new alignments of power as the relative weights of China, the US and Japan shift. The future will bring us much closer to the world through advances in technology and communication. More countries will open up for investment, trade and the exchange of knowledge and ideas. Singapore has to co-exist with other societies and their value systems. Economically, our entrepreneurs and businesses will need to be far more outward-oriented. Of significance will be the growth of new economic centres that will challenge and compete with Singapore for trade, investment and influence. We have to build new coalitions that will allow us to have peace and security, and to grow and prosper.
Within our island-home we will have a better-educated population that will demand greater involvement in the decisions that affect their lives. Our people will want more efficient and responsive government with better public services. As basic material needs are met, our people will seek to satisfy their higher order material and non-material desires. Our population will be greyer, with a smaller proportion of working people. We will have to attend to the needs of an older population which will have increasing political clout.
In short, Singapore will face many new challenges both externally and internally. We cannot stand still - standing still is not an option. We are not riding on an escalator. We cannot just hop on board and hope to enjoy a ride to the top. We have to keep climbing, and it is a hard climb, with the ever present risk of falling behind or falling off. We will be running the race of our life. How we do in this race will determine the kind of home we will have in the future.

Meeting the challenge: Be quick and adaptable, strong and united
In meeting the challenges of the 21st Century, we must prepare ourselves not just to meet one particular scenario or outcome. We must be prepared to meet any outcome and make the best of it. That is why we must do scenario planning - to examine the range of possible scenarios and test our plans against them. This will ensure that the plans we make are robust, and that we are not caught flat-footed. If we imagine that all will be well and things will always go our way, and make plans accordingly, then we will face a rude shock and may fail to survive when they do not. If we plan only for the worst, then we are unlikely to be well positioned to take advantage of fleeting opportunities when they arise.
To prepare for the widest range of eventualities, we must be quick and adaptable, strong and united.

To be quick and adaptable
We must make ourselves as knowledgeable, as adaptable, as nimble and as quick as possible, so that whatever the new products or technology we will be ready for it , whenever there is an opportunity we will be able to seize it.
Thirty years ago, we made shoes and shirts in our factories; twenty years ago, we assembled radios and TVs, ten years ago, we started making TV tubes, and computer peripherals. Today we are making sophisticated petrochemical products, and wafers in our own fabs.
We did not know twenty years ago that we would be making wafers. And we cannot be sure what we will be making in twenty years' time. But we can prepare ourselves and create an attractive business environment, so that no matter what high value product that is needed then, our people can be easily trained to make it efficiently, and it will make sense for any global player in that field to want to make it here. The same goes for the service industry.
Education is a key element. What is crucial in ensuring our ability to adapt to and deal constructively with the forces of change in the 21st Century is not simply education but a constant re-education of our people.
The time is quickly passing when an individual could pass through the formal education system in the earlier part of his life, undergo a predetermined amount of training for a set number of years, in only one particular field, and be well prepared for the rest of his life. We need 'thinking schools' and a 'learning nation'.
As people progress through their lives, they will be confronted with a changing economic landscape. They will be required to acquire new skills, and periodically switch jobs and careers. If you ask CEOs today what their corporation needs, they will tell you: thinking, flexible, proactive workers. They want creative problem solvers, workers smart and skilled enough to move with new technologies and with the ever-changing competitive environment. They need people who can think in innovative and novel ways, articulating problems and envisioning solutions beyond the conventional.
But it is not just a few people at the top who need to be adaptable and innovative. For a company to change, its workers must be prepared to change.
For a country to change, our people must also be prepared for change. Take the undersea tunnel connecting France and England for example. Visionaries on both sides of the channel have dreamed about such a tunnel for centuries. Their dreams turned into reality in 1991, when workers tunneling from both sides of the Channel joined hands midway and celebrated the occasion with French champagne and English biscuits. Although the English are now physically linked to the European continent, the habit of living on an island, separate and distinct from Europe, and being quite proud of that fact, is not easy to discard. After all, that narrow stretch of sea has protected them from invasion by Napoleon and Hitler, and from infection by rabies. To build the Chunnel is a feat and took many years to bring to fruition. But a change in mindset is a greater feat, and is required to make the link to Europe not just a physical reality, but also one in spirit.
Mindset changes are necessary before we can break free of old ways of thinking and doing things and push beyond the boundaries of what is possible. Today information technology links us to the world in exciting new ways, but it requires a mindset change in our people - a mental revolution before we can exploit IT's full potential. Those who do not make this mindset change will continue to live in their own little island. With IT, we are already connected with the rest of the world. The boundaries exist only in our own minds.
A change in mindset is particularly difficult to make when the old paradigm has brought success. This is therefore something that Singaporeans need to remember as the accolades roll in. The Americans would say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." But we must constantly ask ourselves: What is it that we have done that works? Which parts will continue to work in the future? Which parts will not? Have we become fat and complacent? Are we so sure of our success that we have become too settled, too self-satisfied and too set in our ways? It is not pre-ordained that we will be No 1. But fortunately, it is also not pre-ordained that those who are No. 1 will inevitably fall prey to their success. Our future is what we choose to make of it . And we will have a good chance of succeeding if we remain quick and adaptable.

To be strong and united
But being quick and adaptable is not enough. As a small country, we also need to harness our strengths, make the most of our advantages, and minimise our disadvantages. The best economic policies and programmes will not bear fruit if we are not strong and united.
What is foremost is good government and an efficient public service. Good, honest government that acts in the interest of the people is universally desired. It is not so simple to achieve in practice.
As a small country with limited resources, our room for manoeuvre and for error is much smaller than that of larger and better endowed countries. We need to evolve a system that is best suited for us - one that maintains the right of the people to choose their government, and also allows the process of government to proceed efficiently and decisively. In this way, we can exploit the advantage of small size to change direction when necessary and mobilise all available resources quickly to meet new circumstances.
Our continued success is dependent on having a core of able and dedicated leaders in government and the public service who set the tone, and the framework for the country as a whole.
Our leaders must have the vision and provide the direction for the nation. They must have the necessary skills to mobilise the people to meet future challenges. Weak leadership, the wrong policies, or corrupt politicians or public servants will spell doom for our nation.
To ensure that we have good government and an efficient public service, we need to inspire and attract our best and brightest to come forward to serve and lead the nation. However, the attractions of a career in the private sector are many, and the rewards of public service are few.
The public service is often a thankless task, especially with a public that is slow to praise but quick to criticise. That is why the government has to make the public service as attractive as possible, and remove as many of the disincentives as possible. We hope that bright young people like yourselves will be motivated to come forward to serve, and enjoy the satisfaction of doing something not just to boost the bottom line of some company, but for a greater good.
National Education is a key element in harnessing our strength as a nation. We cannot build our home and make it the best home without knowing where we have come from, what forces have shaped us, or what our relationships are with the world around us. A sense of history, of knowing who we are as a people, the past we share and the future we are heading towards will better equip us to meet the challenges of making a better home.
National education is not just another subject to be learnt in school, for good grades, to pass exams. National education is not just a 'thinking' subject to know the history, the facts, the dates, the events. It is, as one thoughtful principal put to me, not just a 'thinking' subject but also a 'feeling' subject. We must seek to understand the depth of feeling of those who were involved in the struggles of those tumultuous times. But what is most important is that we too must feel for Singapore and our fellow Singaporeans - to stand up for Singapore, to feel that sense of pride when Singapore does well, to feel the ache when a fellow Singaporean suffers misfortune, to lend a helping hand, to pull together in times of adversity.
Knowing our history, understanding our strengths and weaknesses, learning to make the most of them, will give us a realistic appraisal of our circumstances, and allow us to sally forth into the 21st Century with added and well-founded confidence in our future.
Fostering stronger bonds between our people will give us comfort and strength as we know that we will travel this path, not alone, but with companions who share our aspirations and whom we can depend on in good times and in bad.

Some food for thought
As you will be discussing scenarios and strategies, I thought it would be interesting to share with you the findings of a study carried out recently by The Ministry of Education in all schools and educational institutions.
The purpose was to obtain base-line indices on students' feelings and perceptions about the nation so as to provide input for the implementation of school-based National Education programmes. More than 80,000 students were randomly selected from Primary 3, Primary 6, Secondary 2, Secondary 4, Pre-University 2, the Polytechnics and ITE. The Universities will be sampled later. The survey was designed to test responses which reflect the four desired outcomes of the National Education programme.
The findings were on the whole positive. 70% of students had favourable views about national issues pertaining to our survival and success. Junior College students, gave a significantly higher percentage (75%) of positive views than other students. But interestingly, the five 'top' junior colleges as a group had slightly fewer positive responses than the other JCs.
Certain survey statements drew very favourable responses. For example more than 90% of students from Primary 6 upward were proud to be Singaporeans. 80% were willing to do their part to keep Singapore going should we face economic difficulties. They were confident of Singapore's continued economic strength with the people's effort. Our students agreed on the need for religious harmony and accept friends of different religious beliefs. The percentage of those who saw the need for National Service ranged from 70% to over 80%.
Younger students lacked awareness of the possibility of racial riots. Barely half thought that racial riots could occur. This is a positive indication that the races are well integrated in Singapore, and in particular, that younger students accept people of different races. I'm glad to note that a high proportion of students from among you, that is, in the junior colleges and centralised institutes, recognised racial fault lines. This recognition means that you are sensitive to issues of race and thus more likely to deal with these issues successfully.
Students also appreciated the importance of honest and stable government. However, there was a general belief that corruption is dealt with too harshly in Singapore. This is something that bears thinking about. This indicates a lack of awareness of the pernicious effect corruption can have on a society.
We also discovered that little things mattered as much as big things to Singaporeans. When asked what were the top three things they liked about Singapore, "Safe and secure country" featured at all levels. This was cited by more than 80% of respondents. Students also appreciated the good quality of life in Singapore, in terms of education, a good environment, housing, medical care and transport.
When asked what was the most important aspect (as distinct from what they liked) about Singapore, "Safe and secure country" was ranked top by all groups. "Singapore is my homeland" ranked highly, as did "Honest government" and "stable government", and "Good education system".
What did students dislike? "Inconsiderate people" was among the top three aspects of Singapore most frequently cited as a dislike among all groups. Almost 70% of students cited "inconsiderate people" as an aspect of Singapore they did not like. Among the younger students, "dirty public toilets" ranked as the top "disliked" aspect. But as they grow older, "Stressful life" ranked as the top "disliked" aspect from Secondary 4 onwards, and the cost of living also begins to figure as they prepare to earn their own living.
In addition, about half of the older students cited each of these: "Government decides everything", "Too many rules and regulations", and "Lack of freedom of speech" as aspects they disliked about Singapore.
The findings on the whole indicated that students were positive about Singapore and our future. They also indicate to us which are the areas that we should try to improve upon, not just for the purposes of teaching national education, but to improve our nation as a whole.

Conclusion
The theme of this year's seminar, "Singapore As Best Home: From Scenarios to Strategies" gives you an opportunity to develop and articulate your vision of Singapore in the 21st Century, and your strategies for achieving this.
I have offered my views on what I think are important - being quick and adaptable, and staying strong and united through: education, a mindset geared to change, honest and efficient government, and building confidence in our future by understanding our own circumstances and building bonds as fellow Singaporeans.
Both big things and small things matter. Both are part of making Singapore our best home. It is not just economics and material well-being that count but also family, friends and community, a safe, clean and green environment, good schools, considerate neighbours, and clean toilets and lifts.

As future leaders of our nation, you have a special responsibility. You need to start preparing yourselves now. In the 21st Century when the torch is passed to you, it will be your turn to take Singapore on through new challenges, to new heights. I hope that during this seminar you will share with each other your hopes and dreams, and also your anxieties and fears, so that together you gain a better understanding of how we can make Singapore our Best Home.

SUMMARY REPORT ON NATIONAL EDUCATION BASELINE STUDY

PURPOSE

The need for a National Education (NE) programme was highlighted by the Prime Minister at the Teacher's Day Rally on 8 Sep 1996. As part of the plan to launch the National Education programme this May, the Ministry of Education conducted a base-line study in early April in all schools and educational institutions to obtain indices on students' feelings and perceptions about the nation. This information will provide input for the planning of the school-based NE programmes and enable schools to monitor their own progress in the implementation of these programmes. The findings of the base-line study will also be used to chart future evaluation and development of the NE programme
This report covers findings from schools, the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) and polytechnics. The university survey will be covered in a separate report.

DESIGN OF STUDY
The survey collected responses from 80,648 students at Primary 3 (P3), Primary 6 (P6), Secondary 2 (S2), Secondary 4 (S4) and second-year level in junior colleges (JC), centralised institutes (CI), ITE and the polytechnics. The survey was designed to test responses which reflect four desired outcomes of the NE programme. These are as follows:

Desired outcomes

Confidence in the country's future

Commitment to the country

Cohesion among the people

Conviction about the country's defence

KEY FINDINGS

Overall Index
By level and stream. The overall index hovers around 70, indicating that 70% of responses to the questions, taken as a whole, reflect favourable attitudes towards national issues. JC students had a significantly higher index (75) than the rest, and ITE students a significantly lower index (67). The more academically able students tended to have more positive attitudes towards national issues than the less able students.
By level and race. Of the three main ethnic groups, the Chinese had a slightly higher index at each level compared to the Malays and Indians (except at P3 level).
By level and dwelling type Indices were comparable for most dwelling types. The groups whose indices were low compared to the level indices were residents of private housing for CI and Polytechnic, and HDB 5-room/Executive/HUDC for ITE. This could probably be because these students had higher aspirations which they felt were not being met.
By level and gender. There was little difference in the overall index between males and females.
By level and school rank. Schools were ranked according to academic performance at the national examinations. The better-performing schools had a higher overall index than the average-performing schools at the P6, S2 and S4 levels. The reverse was true for the P3 and JC levels. The index for the five 'top' junior colleges as a group was slightly lower than that for the group comprising the other colleges.

Index For Desired Outcomes
Indices were calculated for four desired outcomes, namely, Confidence in the country's future, Commitment to the country, Cohesion among the people, and Conviction about the country's defence. The younger students were higher than the older students (S4 and above) on the first two, that is, Confidence in the country's future and Commitment to the country. Being younger, their optimism is probably less dampened by an awareness of the realities of life. The older students, in particular those from the junior colleges, centralised institutes and polytechnics, were higher than the rest on Conviction about the country's defence, suggesting that they were more convinced of the need to address practical issues relating to the defence and survival of the country. Indices for Cohesion among the people, were slightly lower than for the other three desired outcomes, especially for the polytechnics and ITE.

GENERAL FINDINGS

Responses to survey statements
Because of differences in the level of maturity and comprehension, the survey questionnaire for P3 students was significantly different from those for the P6 and higher level students.

P3 Students
Most P3 students could sing the National Anthem and recite the Pledge. They were loyal to their family, to their school and to Singapore; they were willing to help those in trouble and to defend Singapore; and they knew the importance of hard work. However, less than half understood the words of the National Anthem, and even fewer had a sense of Singapore's vulnerabilities.
With regard to the degree of racial integration, the proportion of each ethnic group having friends of the same race was, as expected, higher than the proportions having friends of other races. Social integration of other races with the Chinese was generally high, with nine in ten having Chinese friends. Social integration of the Chinese with the other races was lower, possibly reflecting a lack of opportunity to interact because of the smaller sizes of the Malay and Indian communities.

All Levels Except P3
Survey statements which drew uniformly high proportions of favourable responses from students from P6 upward were: pride in being Singaporean (above 90%); willingness to play a part in keeping Singapore going during economic difficulties (above 80%); willingness to cooperate with other countries (above 90%); and acceptance of friends of different religious beliefs (above 80%). Agreement on the need for religious harmony was above 80%, except for P6 and S2N(T) levels. Endorsement of National Service was above 80%, except for ITE and Polytechnic (about 70%). Confidence in Singapore's continued economic strength with the people's effort was also above 80%.
Younger students and those in S2N(T) lacked awareness of the possibility of racial riots. Even among S2 students in academic streams, and S4 students, barely half thought that racial riots could occur. While this could be a positive indication that the races are well integrated in Singapore, and that these younger students accept those of different races, it could also indicate a lack of understanding of potential faultlines. A high proportion of JC/CI students (84%) did, however, recognise racial faultlines. At P6, S2, S4 and ITE levels, there was also the belief that corruption is dealt with too harshly in Singapore, indicating a lack of awareness of the pernicious effect corruption can have on a society.

Responses to Structured Questions

P3 students
General knowledge about the country The proportions of P3 students who correctly answered three out of the five general knowledge questions asked were high (83% to 95%). The five questions were on: the name of the Prime Minister; Singapore's size in relation to Malaysia; the date on which Singapore's National Day falls; the reason we stand to attention when singing the National Anthem; and the sufficiency of water in our reservoirs. On the question about the sufficiency of water in our reservoirs, only 18% of P3 students knew there was not enough water, while 27% thought there was more than enough.

All Levels Except P3
Extent of racial integration. The students were asked about their acceptance of racial differences for ten different categories namely, Prime Minister, Member of Parliament, doctor, teacher, neighbour, project team member, close friend, brother-in-law/sister-in-law, boyfriend/girlfriend; and husband/wife. There was a high level of social acceptance of racial differences with respect to professional or non-personal relationships. In particular, students' acceptance of teachers of any race was close to 90% and above. However, the proportions of positive responses declined sharply for the three categories of intimate relationships: brother-in-law/sister-in-law, boyfriend/girlfriend; and husband/wife.

Good and bad aspects of Singapore.

17.1 The top three "liked" aspects most frequently chosen by students at each level are shown in Table 1. 'Safe and secure country' featured at all levels, and except for S2 N(T), was the most frequently chosen aspect with more than 80% of respondents citing it as an aspect they liked about Singapore. Other aspects frequently chosen reflected an appreciation of the high standard of living in Singapore: housing, education, medical care, transport and the environment.

Table 1

Level	Top Three "Liked" Aspects Most Frequently Chosen
P6	Safe and secure country Good education system Clean and green environment
S2 N(T)	Good housing Singapore is my homeland Safe and secure country
S2 S/E/N(A)	Safe and secure country Good education system High standard of medical care
S4	Safe and secure country Good transport system Good housing
CI	Safe and secure country Good transport system Multi-racial society
JC	Safe and secure country High standard of medical care Good transport system
Polytechnic	Safe and secure country Good transport system Clean and green environment
ITE	Safe and secure country Good housing Clean and green environment

17.2 Table 2 shows that there was a consensus among the students from the different levels on the "most important" aspect of Singapore, namely, that it is a 'Safe and secure country'. Other "most important" choices included 'Honest government' (P6 and S2); 'Stable government' (JC and Polytechnic), 'Singapore is my homeland' (P6, S2 N(T), JC, Polytechnic).

Table 2

Level	Top Three Aspects Chosen As "Most Important"
P6	Safe and secure country Singapore is my homeland Honest government
S2 N(T)	Safe and secure country Honest government Singapore is my homeland
S2 S/E/N(A)	Safe and secure country Good education system Honest government
S4	Safe and secure country Good education system Many facilities like swimming pools, parks and libraries
CI	Safe and secure country Multi-racial society Good economy
JC	Safe and secure country Stable government Singapore is my homeland
Polytechnic	Safe and secure country Stable government Singapore is my homeland
ITE	Safe and secure country Many facilities like swimming pools, parks and libraries Good education system

17.3 Table 3 shows aspects most frequently chosen as disliked. These were 'Inconsiderate people' (all levels), 'Stressful life' (S4 upwards), 'Expensive to live here' (CI, JC, Polytechnic, ITE), and 'Dirty public toilets' (P6, S2, S4).

Table 3

Level	Top Three "Disliked" Aspects Most Frequently Chosen
P6	Dirty public toilets Inconsiderate people No religious tolerance
S2 N(T)	Dirty public toilets Inconsiderate people No religious tolerance
S2 S/E/N(A)	Dirty public toilets Inconsiderate people Stressful life
S4	Stressful life Inconsiderate people Dirty public toilets
CI	Stressful life Expensive to live here Inconsiderate people
JC	Stressful life Expensive to live here Inconsiderate people
Polytechnic	Stressful life Expensive to live here Inconsiderate people
ITE	Stressful life Expensive to live here Inconsiderate people

17.4 Table 4 shows that among the "least liked" choices, 'Stressful life' was the choice of students from S2 upwards. 'Inconsiderate people' was a predominant aspect that featured at all the levels except CI.

Table 4

Level	Top Three Aspects Chosen As "Least Liked"
P6	Inconsiderate people Dirty public toilets No religious tolerance
S2 N(T)	No religious tolerance Inconsiderate people Dirty public toilets
S2 S/E/N(A)	Stressful life Inconsiderate people Dirty public toilets
S4	Stressful life Inconsiderate people Government decides everything
CI	Stressful life Multi-racial society Expensive to live here
JC	Stressful life Inflexible education system Inconsiderate people
Polytechnic	Stressful life Expensive to live here Inconsiderate people
ITE	Stressful life Lack of freedom of speech Inconsiderate people

17.5 In addition, from the aspects provided, roughly half of the older students chose "Government decides everything', 'Too many rules and regulations', and 'Lack of freedom of speech' as aspects they disliked about Singapore. Responses to 'Multi-racial society' were notable: about 60% and above chose it as a liked aspect, and less than 10% chose it as a disliked aspect. Few post-secondary students (except ITE) chose 'No religious tolerance', and not more than about 25% chose 'National Service' as aspects they disliked.

Confidence in Singapore's Future water constraints. When presented with the scenario on Singapore's dependence on other countries for water and the possibility of a water shortage, more than half of S4 and higher level students did not have confidence in Singapore's future growth. There was less confidence among older than among younger students in this regard. Those who were confident (about 60%) felt that the government and modern technology would be able to solve the problem. The two most frequently cited reasons for students' non-confidence were 'our neighbouring countries may not want to sell more water to us' and 'water may become so expensive that our economy will suffer', both responses having proportions above 70%.
Commitment to the Country. Given an economic scenario in which salaries were not as high as expected and housing/cars were getting more expensive, roughly half of the students in S4 and above favoured working abroad, while remaining Singapore citizens. This was more so for Polytechnic and ITE students, only a third of whom preferred to remain in Singapore. However, fewer than one in ten, overall, would give up their citizenship. By dwelling type, those who lived in a private flat or house tended to be more inclined towards mobility than those who lived in HDB 1-3 room flats.
Of those who chose to work abroad but remain Singapore citizens, some typical reasons were 'Singapore will always be my homeland' (above 70%) and 'There are better job prospects overseas' (above 60%). For those who opted to stay in Singapore, their sense of security, sense of belonging and family ties were the major reasons. The small proportion of respondents who would leave Singapore referred to better opportunities overseas and the desire to pursue their dreams.
Confidence in Singapore's Future economic competition. This question was only for the JC, CI and Polytechnic levels. Responding to the scenario of Singapore facing stiff economic competition from neighbouring countries, eight in ten were confident of Singapore's continued growth and prosperity. The most frequently cited reason for the confidence was that 'Singapore's political stability and good reputation will continue to attract investment' (above 70%), followed by 'I am confident the government will devise appropriate strategies to meet the challenge' (above 60%). For those who were not confident, the majority cited 'we have fewer alternatives as we lack natural resources' as the reason.

CONCLUSION
The information from this study provides a baseline for subsequent studies to measure changes in perceptions and feelings. It also allows schools to better focus their programmes to achieve the objectives of NE. What is critical would be changes in the indices over time rather than the absolute indices themselves.

Click here to return to main page

	Confidence in the country's future
	Commitment to the country
	Cohesion among the people
	Conviction about the country's defence