16 July 1999

SPEECH BY RADM (NS) TEO CHEE HEAN, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION AND SECOND MINISTER FOR DEFENCE, AT THE CHINESE HIGH LECTURE 1999 ON FRI 16 JULY 1999 AT 10.15 AM AT THE CHINESE HIGH SCHOOL

World Class High Schools

The topic for today is World Class High Schools. This is a very broad topic, there are many facets to world class schools. I would like today to focus on two important aspects of world class schools:

	First, a world class school must be world class for its students, and
	Second, a world class school must be world class for the country.

World Class for the Individual

To begin, world class schools should be world class for the individual students. What does being world class for the individual students mean?

A Good Education System
We have a sound and robust education system that is world class in many ways. Singapore has done very well in terms of education. We can objectively say that Singapore has, over her short history since self-government in 1959, made very good progress in education. However, we should never be complacent. Indeed, we are often our own harshest critics. But we should also know our strengths so that in seeking to be better we do not inadvertently destroy that which is good.

Mass Education
Today, we take for granted that almost every child of school-going age attends school. Before the government took over responsibility for education in 1959, there were many children who had no school to go to. Indeed one of the motivations of the founders of your school was to provide education of a quality and type that would not otherwise have been available. The fact that we have a place in school for every single young Singaporean today is a significant achievement for our education system.
Higher Education Levels
The overall education levels of our students have also risen. It was amidst much heated public debate that streaming was introduced in 1980. Today the outcome speaks for itself. Streaming has achieved the objective of allowing our students to progress at a pace and in programmes more suited to themselves and to reach a higher level than they otherwise would have. Our education system as a whole and our schools have come closer to being best-of-class in the world in providing education and meeting the needs of their individual students.

This chart shows the sharp decline in the percentage of school dropouts since streaming was introduced in 1980. Dropout rates for primary schools decreased from 11% in 1980 to a mere 0.4% in 1997. For secondary schools, the dropout rate decreased from 19% to 3.5% in the same period. Nearly every Singaporean today receives 10 years of education at a pace suited to him.
In this chart, we see that in 1980, only 20% of the age cohort had 5 ‘O’ levels or more.

Today, this figure is more than 60%. Education is enabling successive cohorts to attain higher levels of educational qualifications.

This slide shows the cohort participation rate at each stage of education.

About 85% of each cohort receives post-secondary education, while almost 60% receive higher education in the polytechnics or the universities. This is very high even by international standards and is comparable to, if not better than, statistics in developed countries.

A System of High Averages

We have no failing schools in Singapore, only good schools, and very good schools. We often think of the best schools and universities in Britain and the United States and compare ourselves unfavourably against them. The truth is our top schools are not far behind and even comparable to top schools abroad. What is more important is that our average schools are far better than average schools in most countries. High quality education is not reserved for the brightest or richest pupils; it is delivered to all.

In 1994, the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, or TIMSS, was conducted. More than half a million pupils from 41 countries participated in the study, including nearly all the developed countries (like UK, US, Japan, Australia, Canada and France, amongst others) and newly developed East Asian economies (Hong Kong and Korea). The test questions were developed according to the curricula of each country so as not to favour anyone; they were also not the typical examination questions that our pupils are familiar with. They tested creative problem-solving skills and our pupils’ response to open-ended questions.

Our 9 and 13 year-olds took part and did extremely well.

We came in first in Mathematics for 9 and 13 year-olds. For Science, our 9 year-olds were 7^th. Now you may think that is not very good, but bear in mind that our primary pupils only begin studying science at Primary 34, and so children in other countries had a headstart on our pupils. But by the time we come to Secondary 1, we had more than made up the difference and overtook the children in those countries. Our 13 year-old pupils were top in Science.

The study did not pit the best pupils in Singapore against top pupils from other countries. The pupils participating in TIMSS were statistically representative of the student population at those age groups reflecting diverse abilities, ranging from the academically able to the weaker pupils – this was a requirement of the study. Our results are even more telling for that fact. It showed that our system has been successful in raising the achievement of pupils across a broad ability spectrum, and not just of the top pupils.

Our TIMSS performance has made other countries sit up and take notice of our education system. The well-respected British newspaper, the Times Educational Supplement, hailed Singapore as "the most academically successful nation in the world". California, where Silicon Valley lies, has also adopted Singapore as its benchmark for mathematics in their schools.

A Re-Definition of World Class

The point is, in Singapore, we cannot have world class schools just for top students. The strength of Singapore’s education system is that across the whole spectrum of schools catering to students of all abilities and aptitudes, our schools do a better job of educating our students than schools in other countries, while our top schools are comparable to the best in the world. We believe that every Singaporean has some talent and ability, and we should develop him to his fullest potential.

World class schools are not just those at the top of the ranking tables. World class schools are those which add value to their students, whatever their abilities, whatever their family background. Excellence in education does not mean producing the best absolute score in a common test. Excellence means providing each student the opportunity to be educated to be the best he can be, doing the best he can under all circumstances, according to his combination of talents and abilities. By this measure, potentially every student can excel, every school can be world class.

Mass Customisation

To maximally develop the diverse talents and abilities of Singaporeans, we are adopting an ability-driven model of education. The Ministry of Education will increasingly adopt a mass customisation approach in the planning and delivery of education. At first sight, the term "mass customisation" looks like an oxymoron, that is, something that is inherently self-contradictory. But it is actually a very powerful concept indeed. Let me illustrate with a lunch menu analogy.

We used to have, before your time, one standard meal for everyone. There was the O-levels you had to take at the end of four years in secondary school. The choice of dishes as well as the amount of food was fixed, regardless of your taste or appetite. And you had to gobble it down within a certain amount of time – in Britain and elsewhere, the ‘O’ levels were done in five years, at the end of Form 5, not in four years. In our system, the food may not have been tasty, but it was definitely filling. Unfortunately, there were those who could not stomach the food and left the restaurant, unfulfilled. It was not ideal: to expect students of different aptitudes and abilities to study the same subjects and take the same examinations within the same number of years. But for the limited resources we could devote to education, that was the best we could do.

Then we developed three set lunches in the menu: the Express, Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) streams. This allowed some a limited choice to accommodate differences in taste and appetite – what you want to eat, how much to eat, and how fast you take to finish your meal. With this, many ate enough of the food they liked, and left the restaurant largely satisfied.

The next step for us is to develop an a la carte menu. We want to increase the number of choices. We want customers to choose freely the food they like and the quantity they want; but they can only choose from the menu. This, in essence, is mass customisation. Customisation caters to the talents and abilities of our students, but this is done within the resource constraints of mass education. The challenge for Education is to increase the number of options on the menu, add international cuisine, starters, desserts, hot and cold beverages, et cetera – bearing in mind what the kitchen can is able to produce.

Mass customisation can occur at three different levels. First, MOE can mass customise education at the education system level. Streaming is one example of mass customisation at the system-wide level. This is supplemented by sSpecialised programmes like the Music and Art Elective Programmes, Gifted Education Programme. Even the recent changes to the teaching and learning of Chinese; these are efforts at mass customisation at a systems level were an effort at mass customisation.

We can further mass customise at the school level and in the classroom. I want to invite you to think how the concept of mass customisation can be applied to your school and in your classrooms. You may want to share some of your thoughts later at the Q&A session. I am sure your Principal would like to hear your views. Just as a world class education system must adopt a mass customisation paradigm, so world class schools must also think hard about how they can mass customise the education that is delivered to students.

Mass Customising Pre-University Education

One area of mass customisation which I will ask you to think about today is pre-university education. We have in Singapore a 6-4-2 education structure – 6 years of primary education, 4 years of secondary education and 2 years of pre-university education. It has not always been like this, in the days when we had vernacular schools in Singapore, the Chinese schools system had a 6-3-3 structure.

But we now follow the 6-4-2 structure. Each stage of education ends with national examinations, after which students are posted to different schools or institutions for the next stage of their education. Students are streamed by their results so that they learn as much as they can, at a pace suited to them. Flexibility in the structure allows for different routes which lead to three post-secondary education options; at the Institute of Technical Education or ITE, polytechnics or universities. O- and A-levels are no longer considered terminal qualifications today, much less the PSLE.

The O-levels serve mainly as general preparation for the next level of education. The ‘O’ levels also help to differentiate those who are better suited for the practical orientation of a polytechnic education from those who are more suited to the academic and theoretical orientation of the ‘A’ levels and subsequently a university education. The pre-university terminal examinations, currently the A-levels though changes were announced last week, identifies those who are able to benefit from a degree-level education and sorts out which students should do what course at which university. Both examinations are necessary from the systems viewpoint. And both examinations provide the impetus for students to stretch themselves and strive for a high level of achievement.

University-bound students require both the breadth of taking a range of O-level subjects, and the depth demanded by the A-levels in a smaller number of subjects, in order to prepare for university. Those who are more suited for the practical orientation of polytechnic education are better off going directly to the polytechnics from the broad-based O-levels. These students are unlikely to benefit from or cope well with spending another two years taking a narrow range of academic A-level subjects. Our secondary school system and the O-levels are well suited for the majority of our students as they go to polytechnic or ITE. But the question is whether our secondary plus JC system makes the best use of the time of those going on to university.

For individuals who have clear-cut aptitude and ability for university studies, two major examinations within such a short period of time results in much time wastage. Less than 2 years after their O levels, students have to re-start the cycle of Many schools spend up to 6 months preparing students for the O- and A-levels, covering the material in the syllabus, revising lessons taught before, and preparing for the A levelsdoing mock examinations, priming students for the major examination coming. Between these examinations, a further 3 months are spent waiting for O-level results. It is not clear that this makes best use of the time ofThus a university-bound student actually "wastes" 15 months of his last three years in school.

Now I’m not saying that gearing up for an examination is not good. There is a certain value in students pushing themselves against their best, acquiring self-discipline and raising their threshold for taking pressure. What I am asking is whether for I am also not saying that the first 3 months spent in JCs is meaningless. students who are clearly suited for university, this time preparing for two examinations in close proximity can be better spent on more scholastic and non-scholastic development, and becoming more deeply engaged in moral, social and national education.

Some Overseas Models

I have visited some good pre-university schools in other countries in the past few years, and there are indeed some useful points we can learn. In particular, I would like to describe to you what I saw at the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Virginia, USA.

Thomas Jefferson High was established in 1985 to provide science, mathematics and technology education. It has an enrolment of about 1600 students from Grades 9 to 12 (roughly equivalent to our Secondary 3 to JC2) who have a particular bent towards biological, physical, mathematical, and computer sciences and who intend to pursue further studies in the hard sciences. The school is a model of innovation in curriculum development, teaching strategies and assessment modes. It has a unique partnership with business and industry, and companies like Boeing and Novell help to fund the school, mentor the students, and donate technology to the school.

Team-based projects are the norm, as are team-based assessments. Project work and portfolios account for about 30% of a student’s final result. The curriculum has been trimmed to release time for the teaching of processes. There is also an emphasis on problem-finding rather than problem-solving, on project management, and on ethics. With such an all-rounded programme, it is no wonder that graduates from Thomas Jefferson High are well sought after by renown, world class universities like MIT and CalTech.

Can We Adapt?

Now can we do some of that in our schools? I am not saying that every student, nor even every university-bound student will benefit from such a system or environment. Some will flourish, some will flounder. But what is preventing us from adapting these good features to our schools right now? I raise this issue here at The Chinese High because yours is a school known for innovation. As an Independent School, The Chinese High has led the way in innovative programmes and processes. Take the example of abolishing mid-year examinations. From when it was first mooted, it took a few years before parents were convinced that the move was beneficial for students; now, it is generally recognised as a good move. The principal, teachers, parents and students all gave the system a fair chance to succeed, and succeed it did. This is exactly what Independent Schools were set up for – to innovate, to try out new things; boldly, yet in a level-headed manner.

Now back to my earlier question: how can we allow those students who are suited to make better use of the last 4 of their 12 years of general education? Is it possible for us to have a programme which stretches from Secondary 3 to JC2, without the need to stop to take the O-levels and then the A-levels within a few years of each other? How do we manage it, while ensuring that the students continue to strive across a broad range of subjects before specialising in the final 2 years? Perhaps the principal, teachers or students here can give me some ideas. This is something worth thinking about. The challenge is to provide an education that makes the best use of the time available and prepares a student for university education while meeting other objectives like ensuring broad-based education at the secondary level. We can discuss this during the Q&A session later on.

World Class for the Country

Let’s move on. World class schools are also world class for the country.

Even as we attempt to mass customise education opportunities to help students achieve improve against their best and excel themselves, students must understand their responsibility towards society. World class schools must be world class for the country, they must inculcate in students a sense of commitment to society, a sense of belonging to the nation. A world class school in Singapore must derive inspiration from its identity as a Singaporean institution; from that, they shape how young Singaporeans develop, and in doing so, they shape the future of the country.

This present generation of Singaporean students have s many more had much better opportunities than your parentsany previous generation. And this is only because preceding generations have unselfishly decided to set something aside for this generation. Only if every succeeding generation is prepared to put in something for the next generation will a country progress. If succeeding generations take out more than they put back in, the country will stagnate and decline.

Schools and Singapore 21

Singapore 21 is a collective vision of Singaporeans, on what they would like Singapore of the 21^st century to be like. It is about Singapore’s heartware. Schools are crucial to S21. The successive cohorts of students passing through our schools today will become citizen-players of S21. Indeed, from today’s batches of students will come the movers, shakers and leaders of the future. The challenge is for continual renewal and regeneration of not just the leadership and citizenry, but of the vision and the values underlying the S21 vision.

I do not propose to go through each of the 5 principles of S21. No doubt you will have read about S21 in the newspapers, and your teachers may even have dealt with this as part of your National Education. I would just like to touch on three of the five key ideas and point out a few things to show that in many ways, what world class Singapore schools must do is entirely consonant with Singapore 21.

Every Singaporean Matters

We believe that every Singaporean matters. We strive to develop every student to his fullest potential, because, as I said earlier, we believe that every student has some unique mix of talents and abilities. Schools give all their students due attention, and not just those in the top class. A world class school must broaden notions of success beyond academic or other more visible forms of achievement. Too narrow a definition of success will leave many discouraged. It will also lead to undiscovered, under-explored, under-developed talent. World class schools are able to create an environment which gives expression to the diversity of talents and abilities inherent in their student population. We want a potential first-rate astronomer to be an outstanding astronomer, and not a second rate doctor or third-rate engineer. By encouraging a diversity of talents on campus, world class schools possess and build up a certain vibrance and dynamism in the school culture.

Active Citizens

On the other hand, eEvery Singaporean, including students, matters to Singapore, and should pull his full weight in contributing to the betterment of society. We want every student to feel and know that he has they have a contribution to make, to his their school, to society. This is important, because it is through such contributions that individuals carve out for themselves their own niche in society, and develop a sense of purpose, a sense of identity, a sense of belonging. Now you don’t imbibe a sense of national identity just because teachers tell you to have one! World class schools create the opportunities for students to be actively involved in the school and the community.

The Chinese High School is a beneficiary of many active citizens in the past. People like Mr Tan Kah Kee, Mr Lee Kong Chian, the brothers Mr Awu Boon Haw and Mr Awu Boon Par. These were true philanthropists, who did not simply make monetary donations, but were personally engaged in matters of society and had a genuine desire to serve others.

The Singapore Heartbeat

Lastly, world class schools pulsate with the national heartbeat; in our case, the Singapore Heartbeat. National Education plays a major role in inculcating the Singapore Heartbeat in students early on in life. As Singapore becomes more international in outlook, we need our national bonds to be strong. World class schools teach their students to cast their eye on the world, to step boldly into foreign shores of opportunity, but to have their hearts planted firmly in Singapore soil.

Perhaps we can discuss later also, how you think your school and you can contribute towards S21.

Conclusion

The location of a school is not incidental but central to its character. The Chinese High started as a beacon of Chinese culture in South-East Asia. Today, it is still a beacon, strongly rooted to Singapore. The Chinese High is a premier school in Singapore, where students are given many opportunities to develop themselves and undergo a variety of educational experiences. It has achieved much in both academic and non-academic fields.

But that alone does not make it a world class high school. In the light of S21, the challenge for The Chinese High, and for all schools in Singapore, is not just to produce top results and talented people, but Singaporeans who are mindful of their obligations to society wen they leave the school, Singaporeans with sound moral values and a clear social conscience, who will each play an important part in realising our S21 vision.

I am sure The Chinese High School will continue to strive to be world class – world class for its students, world class for Singapore. Thank you.