Speeches
FY 2009 Committee of Supply Debate: 1st Reply by Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen on Seizing Opportunities to Build a World Class Education System
(I) Building on Strong Fundamentals, Expanding Opportunities for All
First let me thank the members who have spoken, for their comments and questions. It is clear that the financial meltdown around us has dominated this year’s Budget and Committee of Supply. And as you read the newspapers, no wonder, as superlatives have been used by commentators to characterise this crisis. The worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and likely the century. It has caused the most rapid rise in OECD unemployment since the early 1990s. A bank run has occurred in the UK, not seen since 1866 - the list goes on. Singapore, of course has not been spared. MTI’s projection of minus 2% to 5% makes it possibly the worst recession since independence. The STI lost 50% of its value in 2008, the largest annual drop in its 42-year history. A good friend remarked that he opens the newspapers nowadays with fear each passing day, certain that more bad news would come. Indeed, we are in difficult times.
No one can be certain how long this downturn will last and it will get worse before it starts to recover, but there are good reasons that Singaporeans should remain optimistic. Despite the turbulence, our society remains cohesive and confident. We have a stable, responsive and effective government. It is this cohesive society led by a good government that will see us through this crisis. In years of plenty, we have spent prudently and put aside reserves, that we can now draw from for dire circumstances like the present one.
A World Class Education System for Singaporeans
Specifically for education, there are opportunities that we can seize in this downturn to continue building a World Class education system. Let me explain what I mean. To me, three essential elements characterise such an education system. One, it is an education system that is respected for its high standards and has peaks of excellence comparable to top institutions worldwide. This not only refers to Universities, but schools, ITE and polytechnics. So I agree with A/Prof Kalyani Mehta that we should not look at the worth of an individual based on academic qualifications. I do not spend less on an ITE student because I deem that he will be paid less than a JC student. We spend enough to build up their full potential. We should aim for our institutions to be best in their class. Two, it provides universal access based on merit, with bridges for students to cross over to different institutions, as they progress. Poor or rich, Singaporeans should be able to rise through education. Those without financial means should be given support to do so. In the same vein, those who are well-to-do, should not be held back. Third, it must be responsive to the diverse palette of talents and learning needs. We should have a wide spread of programs and institutions that provide individuals with different strengths and at various stages of their life opportunities to develop themselves and become more productive. We must have institutions that build character and values, and I agree here with Prof Mehta. A world class education system must have all three elements, but tensions will always exist between them. For example, when we try to provide universal access, we run the risk of lowering standards - this is a problem that UK now has to grapple with in its tertiary sector. Peaks of excellence which benefit select students require large resources which could have been better spent to provide opportunities for the masses. The Ivy league Universities with their large endowments exemplify this. We live with these tensions, never completely resolving them but always adjusting and finding opportunities to approach a golden mean. These three essential elements serve as guide posts in our quest. We will use this downturn to step up our efforts, so that when we emerge, we will have a better education system that will benefit this and future generations of Singaporeans.
Dr Lily Neo has hit the nail on the head, when she says that forward looking planning is essential, and that we must keep an eye on longer term fundamentals. Looking ahead, our education system must continue to evolve in Singapore, to response to the needs of a changing economy and profiles of Singaporeans. SMS Fu, SMS Lui and SPS Masagos will provide details and respond to specifics of your questions. What I would like to do is to provide the larger backdrop of MOE’s plans to steer and build further our education system in the next few years.
More opportunities, many pathways
Despite economic uncertainties, we must and will continually invest in building up our human capital. Indeed, we have been spending steadily over the last decade, around 3% to 4% of our GDP on public education ($4.9b in FY98 to $8.7b in FY09, in nominal dollar terms). It has been money well spent because we have made progress. Our education system is internationally respected for its rigorous standards. We have a competent and motivated professional teaching workforce led by capable principals. We produce quality students who are welcomed by top institutions in Singapore and world-wide. More importantly, our education system has benefited all students across the spectrum of academic abilities. As a whole, they excel in international comparisons in maths, science and languages. Almost 99% of each cohort receives at least 10 years of education and enter the workforce with employability and marketability. Singapore was ranked first by the World Competitiveness Yearbook in 2008 for having an education system that best meets the needs of a competitive economy. McKinsey also named Singapore as one of the world’s top-performing education systems in 2007. These achievements should neither make us proud nor complacent but careful to preserve and improve on what we have built. So when Denise Phua says be bold, she didn’t quite say take a chance. But every time we make a change, it’s a calculated one, we ask Principals, we make sure it can be implemented, because how we got here is very important, and it’s easy to lose our strengths in education, even through simple changes.
Despite the downturn, we will continue spending on education and indeed accelerate some major strategic initiatives. For this financial year, the educational budget has increased by 5.5% to $8.7 billion. MOE projects that the spending on education will increase by 25% to $11 billion by 2013. And this will include spending on IT. We recently launched the ICT Masterplan 3. This will include the scaling up of resources to schools, not only the top schools, but all schools in the neighbourhood and, if we can, to extend it even to other schools.
We will use these resources to strategically build on the strong foundations that underpin our system. First and foremost, we will continue to recruit a steady stream of passionate and competent teachers. No education system can rise above its teachers. We will invest heavily in their training and further expand their exposure so that they can take on leadership roles as principals and specialists. Only then can schools rise in standards and students develop to their full potential as the quality of teachers and teaching improves. I wish that we could just set up satellite schools and hope that they would do just as well. We found out that parents are more sophisticated than that - they go in, check out the teachers, check out the facilities. As much as we want to accelerate good schools, we are very much dependent on good Principals and teachers. We need to invest more in them, to have more good schools.
Second, MOE will continue to shape our education system to be more responsive to students with different aptitudes, styles and pace of learning. We have already initiated some programs to provide flexibility. Since 2004, as Mr Liang Eng Hwa noted, the Direct School Admissions have enabled students with specific talents to enter schools of their choice, not solely based on PSLE results. This year, over 2000 students from 155 (or 90%) primary schools successfully gained a place in over 60 secondary schools that participated in DSA, based on their talents in different fields. Without the DSA, many would not have been admitted based on their PSLE results.
Subject-based banding in primary schools has enabled students to learn at their appropriate level for each subject. At the secondary level we have provided more bridges and students can move across to their appropriate stream or take subjects at different levels. 1,100 students moved to a higher stream last year, and 25% of Normal course students took at least one higher level subject.
We will continue to open up pathways and bridges for secondary students. Let me give one exciting example where we have expanded the choice of subjects to cater to different learning styles - and in this case of Normal Tech students. 3 schools (Bedok Town, Shuqun and Siling Secondary) are implementing innovations in teaching the Normal Technical course. What are they? They are Computer & Networking (Siling Sec), Electrical Technology & Applications (Bedok Town Sec) and Mobile Robotics (Shuqun Sec). These new elective subjects are developed by ITE and MOE. ITE lecturers are seconded to the school to teach these subjects. Students can take these new elective subjects at N-levels for progression to ITE. It is these little experiments, test beds where we find new innovations, that help the whole system advance. If they succeed, we can scale up to help students of different abilities progress.
Let me give you another example. ITE has also piloted a new pathway to Higher Nitec courses, for qualifying Sec 4 N(A) students last year. This is if you like, a “through-train” for N(A) students and instead of spending another year to sit for their ‘O’-levels, they can instead obtain an ITE qualification earlier. 360 from the first intake successfully completed their first semester at ITE. Those that do well, can progress to the Polytechnics.
Schools for students with talents in specific fields are also bearing fruit. The first batch of NUS High School students who graduated last year have done well in international competitions and events. The School of the Arts admitted its first batch of students last year. The Sports School is also making a mark in its own niche. These initial successes indicate that such schools do complement and strengthen our educational offerings. Where appropriate, we can add more of them. The new School of Science and Technology starting next year is an example. It will cater to those with talents in applied learning and hopefully nurture more technopreneurs for Singapore.
Dr Muhammad Faishal asked about more opportunities in the post-secondary sector, and this was echoed by Dr Ong Seh Hong and Mr Chiam See Tong. The Institute of Technical Education will step up its programmes to provide skilled manpower to maintain Singapore’s long-term economic competitiveness. Earlier this year, an external review panel, comprising local industry leaders as well as vocational and technical experts from Germany, Australia and the United States visited ITE. They were impressed by the high levels of student engagement and employability of ITE graduates. They also liked our idea of regional campuses under the “One ITE System, Three Colleges”. ITE will therefore push ahead with its plans to build two more comprehensive campuses for its Colleges. SMS Lui will elaborate more on these developments later.
With the increasing demand for a polytechnic education, MOE will increase the number of places available at the five polytechnics this year by 700 places compared to last year, for a total 25,700 places in Academic Year 2009 - for 42.5 % of the cohort. It’s been going up steadily, and was 39.7% in 2005.
We have also provided more opportunities for polytechnic graduates to upgrade themselves. Under the Polytechnic-Foreign Specialised Institution (Poly-FSI) framework, poly graduates can take degree courses in niche areas with an industry-oriented focus. This year, the six degree programmes - in Early Childhood Education, Retail Management, Naval Architecture, Food Technology, Creative Producing and Optometry - admitted around 300 students each year. We will more than double the places available to 700 over the next few years. The Poly-FSI scheme has shown that there are industry-oriented degree courses which are attractive to poly graduates and that are aligned with Singapore’s economic needs and valued by industry. There is a demand for these types of courses and MOE is now studying different ways to expand and accelerate such degree upgrading opportunities for polytechnic graduates. We will announce details in the later half of this year.
New University
Our existing Universities are limited by numbers of teaching staff and physical space in taking in more students. They also need to ensure that admitted students can withstand the rigour and pass their courses. Within these constraints, more places will be provided by our existing Universities this year. There will be 15,210 university places this year. This is an increase of more than 900 places on the 14,200 places that were taken up by students last year and caters to slightly over 25% of the student cohort, a target we had set to be achieved in 2010. We are providing more places where there is space and students are qualified.
To increase the proportion of each cohort entering into our public Universities from the present 25% to 30% by 2015, Prime Minister had already announced the set-up of the New University. Let me provide some updates. The New University at the East Coast will offer a unique opportunity to create something different and valuable to our educational landscape. It will be established at a time with different circumstances and challenges, when compared to NUS or NTU and even SMU, established only 9 years ago.
I am not referring to the current financial crisis, which will pass. This financial crisis will not threaten our physical survival. But there are critical issues that do and these will continue to exist when this crisis is over - global warming and sustainability, energy, food security and pandemics, to name the more important ones. These complex problems will need advances in science and technology to help solve if not mitigate their impact. Universities and scientific institutions here can play a valuable role in these efforts. For example, in the last SARS crisis, mass screening of body temperatures helped restore confidence and sped up the recovery. Some of you may not know that it was our Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) who worked with industry partners to develop the Infrared Fever Screening System, which was then adopted worldwide as the frontline defence during the outbreak. Scientists from the Genome Institute of Singapore also discovered the genetic sequence of 5 different SARS virus strains, and the research was instrumental in the development of a diagnostic test kit.
Our neighbourhood has also changed. The next few decades will witness the rise of Asia, as China and India build up their capabilities and extend their influence. The US, despite the massive lost of wealth in this financial turmoil will still be the dominant World power and scientific powerhouse for the foreseeable future.
So it is in this context that we must position the New University. We cannot know the future, but we can make linkages that will prepare us well for it. This was the idea behind forming partnerships with leading institutes in US and China for the New University. We have received good proposals from top US Universities to be a partner. For China, the idea of a tripartite partnership was brought up by Prime Minister Lee and Senior Minister Goh during their visits with senior Chinese leaders last year, who agreed that the proposal should be followed up. In December last year, I visited two leading Universities in China and met up with their Presidents and senior staff, and discussed a partnership proposal. The possibility of a transpacific Singapore-US-China partnership through a campus here in Singapore has gained interest, with the prospect of students and faculty from the three partners exchanging ideas and collaborating on long term projects. It is a significant challenge, we don’t underestimate it, but if done well, will benefit the institutions and their students and faculty immensely. This is worth doing and I am glad to report that the Presidents of both Universities I visited in China have formed Committees to evaluate this proposal and will be coming to Singapore in the next few months to further explore this link-up.
Primary School Review
This downturn also provides us an opportunity to accelerate major initiatives. The primary school review is one clear example. Staff in MOE together with principals and educational specialists had been studying ways to improve our curriculum, better suited for the “21st century” environment and challenges. We wanted to introduce new programs, provide more time and space for schools to better develop character and soft skills and imbue correct values into our students.
This downturn provided an opportunity to accelerate these worthwhile goals. I appointed SMS Fu to lead a Committee and come up with a road map on the priorities, programmes and resources that are needed to adopt these curriculum changes and bring primary education to the next level. This Committee is called PERI, and they released their preliminary report and recommendations in early January. It’s a good report and SMS Fu’s Committee has done an excellent job in seeking views from all stakeholders and formulating key strategies and practical recommendations that will help us improve primary school education. You know they have garnered enough feedback when there are two views to every point. There may be disagreement over implementation details, but there is broad support that we need to enhance primary education.
There have been many worthwhile suggestions from the public that ought to be considered by the Committee. I also welcome views from members of this House this COS, or even after it, before the report is finalised in March. But lest we be distracted by numerous details, we should focus on the key strategic thrusts recommended by SMS Fu’s Committee. Firstly, it is clear that to achieve what they have asked for will require significant resources and long term commitment. Around 80 existing primary schools will need to be expanded with better facilities. We need to build 18 new schools. More teachers will be needed to improve the teacher-student ratio by a further 20% in 2015. To provide for a more rounded education with greater emphasis on love for learning, appreciation of aesthetics, sports and arts, we will also need to re-train and add to the teaching force to provide these capabilities. This is the point that Dr Lily Neo was talking about. It is clear that the new curriculum will require more space and time that single-session schools provide, and more facilities for outdoor and experiential learning. Beyond this, MOE may need to build Centres of Excellence, to help schools in areas such as the arts, music and sports development for our students.
To implement these recommendations as I said will need sizeable resources not only in financial terms but of sustained effort. So I would characterise the time frame of the PERI report as a building phase of 10 years, of infrastructure, enhanced curriculum and pedagogy to enable change. As in most educational enterprises, it will take some time to achieve our goals. Initial projections for both infrastructure and for more trained teachers. Initial projections for both infrastructure and more teachers indicate that it will cost MOE around $4.5 billion more over the next 10 years. But beyond this, we also have to develop capabilities in our teachers to better engage students and employ different modes of assessments. SMS Fu will address specific queries related to the report, but let me address one question brought up by Mr Teo Ser Luck and Dr Ong Seh Hong about the PSLE.
In any educational system, assessments are necessary to provide feedback on the overall standards and performance of individual schools and students. Among most educators now, there is little, if any, argument that testing is required. There was a phase in the evolution of educational thinking that if you motivated students to learn on their own, they would. Very few educators believe that now. Most believe that testing counts. For Singapore, the PSLE has been critical in playing that role. Countries that avoided or did away with such assessment systems have regretted it, because they have basically witnessed a decline in standards. Take Denmark for instance, which has long avoided a culture of testing and evaluation in the spirit of being egalitarian. Last year, a team from MOE visited Denmark and learnt that they are in the midst of reforms to introduce national tests at selected grades, so that schools can provide feedback on student and school outcomes. South Korea also did away with national assessments. But principals I spoke to there want it back, because they say without it, they can’t tell how they are doing. They find it difficult to gauge how their students and schools are progressing.
Japan is another example of how we should make calibrated changes, and not be too quick to discard what has worked well. And Japan is interesting, because it’s almost like Singapore. In response to public pressure to reduce stress levels for primary-school children, Japan since the late 1970s has reduced the amount of material taught as well as the number of teaching hours. Makes sense - reduce stress, less content, less teaching hours. Now they are seeking to reverse this move, because of a drop in their rankings in international benchmarking studies in math and science. Last year, Japan announced an increase in classroom hours for major subjects for the first time in 30 years, in a bid to curb falling standards.
We should therefore keep the PSLE, but it cannot be the only measure of success or drive all of our educational efforts. And I think this was the point that Mr Teo Ser Luck was referring to. To have a singular drive by one metric distorting educational outcome is detrimental. And indeed, an over-emphasis on exam grades as the only outcome of education can be detrimental. This is especially so for lower primary students, who can be discouraged to form good habits of learning or lose confidence because of unrealistic expectations. It is against this backdrop that the PERI Committee recommended bite-size assessments for lower primary students. They think that this will be more appropriate to form stronger fundamentals for the many school years ahead. But amidst all the letters that have been going to the press, I note the concern by parents that this might mean that students would be less prepared for the PSLE. Let me provide an assurance that MOE will monitor students’ performance if this recommendation is accepted, to ensure that there is no fall in standards of performance for PSLE subjects. And we will only roll out the recommendations at a pace that allows us to assess progress.
It is clear that in order to realise the quality improvements that the Committee has proposed, processes and also mind-sets of all stakeholders must also be aligned. If we want teachers to engage each student to spark their love for learning and develop them fully, we have to ensure that the way we assess student outcomes, assess schools, and how parents respond to new initiatives must work in support of our goals and the desired outcomes in education.
(II) Key Focus Areas in 2009
Investing in our educators
(a) Stepping up recruitment of teachers and education professionals
The plans that MOE have, to step up to build a world class education system will allow us to accelerate our hiring plans and recruit additional teachers from amongst fresh graduates and mid-career professionals. As Dr Ong Seh Hong has suggested, there are indeed good quality candidates who are unable to secure a job in the current economic downturn, a point made also by Ms Denise Phua. This year, we target to recruit 3,000 teachers.
Let me make one point abundantly clear. We will continue to be rigorous in our selection of teachers and ensure that only those with the passion, aptitude and commitment to teaching are selected. If this means that we will not meet recruitment targets - so be it. We would rather hire less to get the type of teachers we want, to maintain a quality teaching force. They are targets, but they need not be fulfilled if we cannot find the right type of teachers.
My ministry will also increase the hiring of Allied Educators (AEDs) who partner teachers and provide specialised support in areas like counselling, teaching and learning and special educational needs. We aim to recruit 500 Allied Educators (Teaching and Learning) this year, 200 more than earlier planned, and around 90 Allied Educators (Counselling) and Allied Educators (Learning and Behavioural Support) each to provide valuable teaching support in our schools. These allied educators will provide much needed support, a point raised by Ms Denise Phua, to enrich learning experiences as well as to cater to those with special needs and “occasional needs” of mainstream students in their growing-up years.
All our Allied Educators will receive fully sponsored training to help prepare them for their specialised roles in schools. For example, to equip our Allied Educators (Teaching and Learning) with the necessary skills to partner our teachers, they will undergo a three-month specialist diploma training programme at NIE. NIE also provides relevant training courses for Allied Educators who specialise in counselling and supporting children with special educational needs. In total, the training will cost $13.1 million or on average $20,000 for each Allied Educator.
In addition, MOE will recruit mid-career professionals with strong language skills, who can come in as language facilitators, to complement our language teachers in our primary schools. We speak what we hear, this is what educators tell us, and MOE wants to provide students with a longer exposure in a better language environment with these facilitators. Mid-career professionals with leadership and managerial experience, can also contribute as Vice-Principals (Administration), forming part of the school leadership team.
Within MOE-HQ, my ministry is also looking at recruiting high calibre young graduates who are keen on policy-making and want to contribute to shaping the future of our education system. In all, we will be recruiting to fill close to 3,800 positions in 2009. This is an increase of 600 jobs in MOE HQ and schools, compared to annual recruitment targets in the last few years.
The local post-secondary institutions too, will take this opportunity to recruit quality staff, including mid-career professionals, to contribute in the areas of teaching and research.
(b) New qualification pathway for Kindergarten Teachers
To meet the large demand for well-trained kindergarten teachers, a new Advanced Diploma for Kindergarten Education-Teaching (ADKET) has been developed by the Singapore Polytechnic. This new diploma course offers a shorter training duration compared to current courses. The course can be completed on a part-time basis within 700 or 900 hours over 10 months, approximately half the training time compared to the current courses. ADKET will provide much needed teachers to raise the quality of pre-school education. SPS Masagos will provide an update on these efforts later.
In total, an estimated 7,500 teaching and teaching-support jobs will be available in the education sector, of which 3,700 will come from the post-secondary institutions and the kindergarten sector.
(c) Enhancing financial assistance
Let me talk about financial assistance, a point raised by Dr Lily Neo and other members. MOE is mindful that many families will be affected by the economic downturn. We will maintain the approach that no child will be denied a quality education because of financial difficulties. This is why general education is almost fully subsidised by Government, and we have a number of financial assistance schemes to help. In 2008, the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme (MOE-FAS) benefited a total of 44,900 students, compared to 42,200 in 2007. We have also increased the contributions to Edusave Accounts for pupils from the current $180 to $200 per year for primary students, and $220 per year to $240 for secondary students from this year onwards.
To help needy students, MOE will spend an additional $7.3 million for the Financial Assistance Scheme this year. I recognise that some breadwinners may face disruptive employment and temporary financial difficulties and yet not meet our eligibility criteria of existing schemes. To provide flexibility to schools and principals, MOE will provide each school with a one-off sum of $10,000 and a further $10,000 top-up for those with more than 10% of their students under the MOE FAS. In total, $5.4 million will be provided for this discretionary scheme for the School Advisory or School Management Committees to manage. I think they have more sensitivity there - give them this money, let them decide which students need to be helped and by how much.
For post-secondary educational institutions, MOE will spend $11 million this year to introduce a new short-term study assistance scheme for all undergraduate, polytechnic and ITE students whose household incomes fall within the bottom two-thirds of the population. This will address up to 66th percentile of households. This scheme will be for 2 years, for Academic Years 2009 and 2010. The extra assistance will be worth up to about $2,060 per student per year, and the actual quantum given out will depend on the level of study and the help needed by individual students. And students will have to tap on existing financial assistance before being considered for the short-term study assistance schemes. So this is a scheme that rides above all other schemes if you exhaust them. This will help those students who need additional aid, to cover the portion of schooling expenses that is not already covered by their existing bursaries and loans, and their post-secondary education account. To help new graduates, MOE will also suspend the loan repayments on the tuition fee loan and study loan, for a year. They need not pay interest on their outstanding loan during the period of suspension.
Taken together, MOE will provide $24 million more in financial assistance measures - or 120% more compared to last year - to benefit at least 50,000 MOE-FAS recipients in our schools and about 30,000 students in our post-secondary institutions. We will do more, if necessary.
(d) Improving the quality of private education
Our goal to build a world class education system will also extend to the private education sector. We’ve got good institutions — INSEAD, Chicago Booth School of Business and Digipen Institute of Technology etc. To strengthen Singapore’s position as a global education hub, the private education industry should offer a diversity of options and also be of good quality.
During the Committee of Supply Debate in March last year, MOE announced that we would introduce a Private Education Bill which will provide for the setting up of a Council for Private Education and the powers to regulate the private education sector. SMS Lui will give an update on the broad features of the regulatory regime, and address the specific queries posed by members.
If the Bill is passed by this House, the Council’s role will be multifaceted. It will play an important part in enhancing quality of the private education sector and looking after the interests of students. It will play a facilitation role to promote self-regulation by the industry and to provide more information about the quality of the educational programs and degrees offered. It will also look into initiatives to help the industry grow and develop, and if needed, the Council can take punitive actions against errant and irresponsible providers.
Conclusion
To sum up, MOE strives to improve the quality of both public and private education, and support all Singaporeans seeking a quality education. We will take steps to strengthen primary education, and invest the necessary resources to bring about improvements. We will accelerate our hiring plans so that qualified individuals can contribute in our schools and post-secondary institutions. In view of the economic downturn, MOE will spend a total of $24 million to enhance financial assistance measures to help families tide over this period, and make sure that no child will be denied an education on account of financial difficulties.
MOE and schools however, cannot accomplish our goals alone. Nurturing the next generation is a mission that involves society as a whole. But together, we can build a World Class education system that will give young Singaporeans the best future possible.