Debated in Parliament on 21 Jan 2014.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn."
Question proposed.
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Education is a subject of immense interest to many Singaporeans.
In a meritocracy, it is an important tool for social mobility. Education is also the passport by which every child has a shot at maximising his potential. Education shapes our society-to-be. And it usually even takes the biggest blame whenever our young do not meet our expectations. It is no wonder that education occupies one of the top three spots in the allocation of our national
Page: 105
budget.
Someone once said that "we can only connect the dots that we collect"; these dots in life come in the form of inputs, observations and experiences one encounters. For today's Motion of "Educating our Young for the 21st Century", I wish to first acknowledge the persons from whom I have collected many important "dots": (a) the activists and women Members from the PAP Women's Wing, especially Dr Intan; (b) the MOE professionals and the Our Singapore Conversation (OSC) participants; and (c) other friends, young and old, who share a keen interest in educating our young for the future.
As I study the many developments in the education scene, I observe a series of dots that cluster around several themes. Let me first summarise these clusters of dots according to, first, the Future; and then, the Current. I would then conclude with a Proposal for the Minister to consider.
The Future. When we think about educating our young for the future, we cannot ignore how Technology and, especially the Internet, have opened up learning to the point where anyone can learn anything from anyone else at any time. Learners find at their disposal content that range from repositories, portals, open-courseware, free ware, e-books to online classes. Prof Clayton Christensen, author of "Disrupting Class" and one of the world's foremost experts on innovation and growth, insists that "technology is disrupting how people used to learn and teach".
And when traditional brick-and-mortar schools do not reinvent themselves, the rise and success of Online Academies may one day render them irrelevant. For instance, Khan Academy is a non-profit educational website that boasts an outreach of 10 million students per month and has delivered more than 200 million lessons. It has a personalised learning engine to help learners track their learning and chart their pathways. It boasts of a library of online learning videos of more than 4,500. Even Microsoft chief, Bill Gates, was reported to have said that he had used Khan Academy with his own kids. Mind you, there are other online academies like Khan Academy which may or may not be even more successful.
Indeed, in a country as highly wired as Singapore, students, the young and old will find that they can learn anything, anywhere, any time. The rise of online education could effectively render weak teachers redundant, while making great educators more widely accessible, levelling the playing field for learners across the world. But we know that just because our young have access to their
Page: 106
modern mobile devices, and use them for chats and all, does not mean that these devices are used for learning. There is still an important place for educators, if they keep up with the times.
Sir, the Traditional Model of the Educator being the teacher and chief dispenser of knowledge – a mental model in which students are often one or many steps behind their teachers – is a model that will not stick in the digital age.
Teachers who express the desire to only teach will have to reflect on what that really means and how they might be even more relevant to teaching in the digital age.
Educators of the Future can take on one or more of the following four roles:
(a) As Content Curators – adding value by sifting and sorting through numerous repositories of content that are created every hour in cyberspace. They could suggest and guide their students in accessing those that are most relevant and most reliable.
(b) Educators of the Future can be Lesson Designers – designing lessons using blended pedagogy that combines good quality online lectures with their own personal facilitation. Educators of the Future can also be Online Course Developers and Deliverers – learning how to teach online, producing and delivering high-quality online courses.
(c) But they can also be Life Coaches – guiding the young who, in spite of their impressive digital assets, may still need help in honing their character and building their values; learning what Indian leader Mahatma Gandhi has taught us – that knowledge without character, freedom without responsibility, and science without humanity are the deadly sins of the human soul.
The days of repeating lecture notes and power-points of yester-years are numbered.
Online academies, educators as content curators, designers, online learning developers and deliverers and life coaches! To be future-ready, we have to reckon with these developments and these future roles of educators. We need to rethink and even reform how we identify, select and develop skill
Page: 107
sets of school leaders and educators for schools of the future.
About The Current. Sir, more than 20,000 educators, members of the public, students and families, participated in the Our Singapore Conversation (OSC). It was led by the Minister himself. They were asked what they would like to see in Singapore schools in 2030. Their inputs can be clustered into several key focus areas. They are to do with:
(a) concern over academic stress, especially caused by high-stakes exams;
(b) call for a broadened definition of success in schools;
(c) call for more inclusive schools so that children of all backgrounds can grow up together; and a more level playing field so that at-risk children can start school from a more equal footing; and
(d) stronger emphasis on character and values-driven education and future-ready skills.
The feedback from the ground did not go unheard. They, in fact, validated, I notice, the annual work plan assumptions of MOE of recent years. The inputs supported and strengthened the Education Minister's resolve to promote an even more student-centred and values-driven education system. Several measures were already introduced under the Minister's leadership.
(a) For example, to reduce the competitiveness of high-stakes exams, such as PSLE, banding instead of T-scores will be introduced. School rankings removed; so is public comparison of PSLE scores.
(b) And to ensure schools are more inclusive, the Minister has ensured that Primary 1 places are reserved to ensure that those without the alumni network are able to get into popular schools.
(c) To provide alternates to academic-based entries to Secondary schools, the Direct School Admissions (DSA) criteria were broadened to include special qualities, such as character, resilience, drive and leadership, expanding the criteria beyond sporting, artistic talents and academics, of course.
Page: 108
(d) There is now greater flexibility for Normal stream students to take higher-level subjects according to their strengths.
(e) The Citizenship and Character Education syllabi were reviewed and recently reintroduced and launched.
(f) MOE has also started to directly run several kindergartens using an approach that is based on play and also ensuring that these kindergartens take in children of all socio-economic backgrounds.
All these changes are testament to the Ministry's commitment to provide a broad and deeper foundation for lifelong learning for our young.
Connecting the Dots: A Proposal. Sir, up to this point, I have been describing the dots that I have observed in the education landscape, future and the current. Thanks to the steadfast leadership of our Education Minister and his team, some of the dots are already connected. I shared just now. But even these changes cannot be introduced without challenges. Many of these changes involve the detoxification of the mind and weaning of habits that would take years – and some would say generations – to complete.
For instance, for the longest time, the most prominent KPI of whether a school is admired is its academic performance in high-stakes exams. It is a mindset that is entrenched not only in many parents but also in many educators and employers, in public and private service. It will take a long time to switch to a mindset that values and celebrates other forms of intelligence.
Tuition, too, is the elephant in the room that we cannot ignore. The thriving tuition industry has become a security blanket for many. Now, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a triennial global survey that evaluates education systems worldwide amongst 15-year-olds. According to the latest PISA report, which sees, of course, Singapore doing very well academically, Singapore has the highest number of students who had one-on-one private tuition. It is understandable when academically weaker students seek extra help through tuition. But when it is reported that even some of our top students from top schools regularly attend tuition classes either on their own accord or encouraged or arranged by their parents, then there is a big cause for concern. The longer we ignore the root causes, the longer we delay in working out a multitude of solutions and thereby allow this thriving shadow education industry to keep growing, the harder it will be for us to trim this
Page: 109
elephant to size.
Then there are those of us who remain uneasy with the highly efficient way of sorting students with learning profiles and backgrounds in geographically separate schools. Granted, we all learn differently, with different strengths, learning styles and pace for learning. But the solution need not come in the form of physically separating students in different locations all the time in the form of Gifted schools, Normal (Technical) schools and Special schools. The solution can come in the form of scalable and quality programmes and learning support that can penetrate all schools. After all, as one OSC participant put it, "Inclusive societies must start with inclusive schools."
Another Current Dot. The Direct School Admission (DSA) scheme may also run the risk of another form of competition amongst school leaders to admit yet another superior pool of students of another profile – those who are very proficient and perform very well in music, arts, sports and, now, in leadership, perseverance and character.
And what of the many who are later developers, the late bloomers, but who are sorted much earlier in life into the Express, Normal (Academic), Normal (Technical), IP and SAP learning tracks – with little chances of interacting with each other regularly in their school years?
Chasing the academics excessively, tuition, excesses of DSA, late developers, segregating versus inclusion – these are pervasive challenges that still dot the current landscape.
Now, Sir, I have full empathy that the Ministry has to tread carefully at a pace of change that is acceptable to its many stakeholders. And, indeed, at the national level, treading at a realistic pace may be the way forward as there is frequently no one response that is supported by all the different stakeholders in the system. For everyone who prefers less formal exams and rankings, there are others who cannot imagine a world without exams, top schools and tuition. Had the system been drawn from scratch now, many senior educators have said they would have the liberty to design the system in a bolder manner. Hence, I understand the need to tread carefully and slowly.
However, Sir, there is a segment of Singaporeans – myself included – who believe that we should be given the chance to go beyond the current trimming of the excesses of the system. We believe that we can move more boldly and swiftly to realise the aspirations of a segment of our population – a segment
Page: 110
who wishes to help co-shape a system that addresses more aggressively the hot buttons of the day and also respond more expediently to the beckoning of the future.
I do not think it is necessary nor wise to copy wholesale admired education systems of others, bearing in mind that we are different and that even the much-lauded Finnish system is, itself, in need of change. According to Pasi Sahlberg, the renowned education ambassador from Finland, even the Finns need to connect their own dots better.
Sahlberg said this recently, "Ask Finns about how our system will look in 2030, and they will say it will look like it does now. We (the Finns) do not have many ideas about how to renew our system. We need less formal, class-based teaching, more personalised teaching, more focus on developing social and team skills." And he said, "We (the Finns) are not talking about these things at all" – words from an education expert from Finland itself.
Indeed, Singapore should work towards creating our own brand of education to underpin the kind of country and society we want to sculpt. Let us not be overly concerned by our ranking in the systems constructed by other parties, such as the PISA. Let us, instead, develop our own balanced scoreboard and measure what we, Singaporeans, aspire for Singapore.
In this regard, I would like to propose that MOE consider starting a Pilot Cluster of Schools, very much like how it is experimenting its MOE-run kindergartens, a cluster of schools which attempts to connect the dots of the current and the future. I am proposing, Sir, schools that offer a straight 10-year quality through-train education without the need for a make or break high-stakes exam in Year 6, such as the PSLE.
I am proposing schools that, while they maintain academic rigour, do not sort and stream students into Gifted, Express, Normal (Academic), Normal (Technical), as a result of their PSLE performance and, thereby, increasing the porosity for students to take a mix of different subjects at either the Foundation, Standard or Advanced levels, banded according to their abilities and interests.
I propose pilot schools that are inclusive and are a microcosm of our society, reflective of students of different socio-economic backgrounds, abilities, race and language, allowing them to interact daily in core non-academic activities, such as morning assemblies, dismissals, recess times, play times, PE, outings, so that our young will learn to live with, tolerate and value differences from a
Page: 111
young age.
I propose pilot schools that do not physically segregate students at the extreme ends of the proverbial normal distribution into separate groups from the rest; but allow them to benefit from programmes that will suit their learning needs, whichever end of the curve they are at.
I propose pilot schools that do not excessively assess their students through competitive tests but help students develop their own portfolios and use assessments and tests to self-drive their own learning as much as possible.
I propose schools led by future-ready leaders and fellow educators who themselves are lifelong learners and game to take on value-adding roles of being content curators, online learning developers and/or life coaches.
Schools where service to fellow school mates, the school and the nation is a daily exercise and not a subject or project to be graded. In a very progressive education village I visited several years ago, Secondary level school students took turns each day to feed lunch to their severely disabled school mates who were also located in the same building – a vision I cannot forget till today
I propose a pilot of schools that recognise that, in life, one can only connect the dots that one collects; and, therefore, the need to make special efforts to level up their disadvantaged young, to give them additional dots so that they can collect from boarding schools to longer school days, to the provision of computers, mobile devices and daily nutritious meals.
What would be the critical success factors of such a pilot?
The pilot will need to be co-shaped by a team that shares the same passion; and properly resourced in funding and other tangible needs. The pilot must allow for flexibility in the selection of like-minded board members, leaders and other team members, including the teachers and educators. It must allow for porosity to the rest of the current education system in two ways: one, use of resources that are currently available in schools that specialise in Gifted, Normal (Technical) and Special schools; and, two, movement of its students who choose to return to the current system.
I know that the proposed pilot will only address a segment of the learning journey of our students, but it is a good 10 years. In a separate future session, I look forward to an opportunity to discuss educating the young and old in the
Page: 112
next 10 years to come.
In conclusion, Sir, I wish to end with a statement that was made by President Abraham Lincoln of the US in December 1862 in his annual State of the Union address. Of the immense challenges he was facing at the time in his political career, he said that "the occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise – with the occasion."
Indeed, the occasion faced by MOE is piled high with difficulty; but Minister, those of us who believe in the direction you have charted, want to rise to and with the occasion for just one reason – to powerfully connect the dots we have collected about the future and the current – and to help prepare our precious young well for a Singapore that will be both successful and significant. With that, I thank you.
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would first like to thank Ms Denise Phua for supporting the Ministry's direction, especially in providing a broad and deep foundation for our students.
I would also like to thank her for her passion and conviction, and for being a consistent advocate for improving education in Singapore.
I fully agree with Ms Phua on the importance of education in our society and the need to think about the future, to assess where we are today and to imagine a better way forward.
Indeed, we have lively debates within the Ministry, and are constantly asking the same hard questions. In Our Singapore Conversation, we had also encouraged our students, parents and educators to share their ideals with us, many of which Ms Phua mentioned.
Like Ms Phua, I, too, believe that technology-enabled learning in general, and online learning in particular, has the power to unleash new ways of teaching and learning. I have spoken on this subject on several occasions, and have been studying the possibilities with my colleagues, building on what the Ministry has been doing since our first IT Masterplan.
Page: 113
The critical success factors, in my mind, are the motivation of the learners, and the skills of the teachers in blending online tools with experience and insights about learning, and doing so in new and imaginative ways. The caring and skilful teacher is just as important in an online environment as in a traditional classroom, albeit the roles they play differ.
For these reasons, the Ministry has placed a primary focus on nurturing our teachers, including enabling them to be facilitators of learning, to inject the spirit of inquiry, to be life coaches and to be adept with the use of online learning. Recently, I had the pleasure of speaking to a group of very passionate school leaders and teachers who are experimenting with all forms of online learning, as well as with a group of students who, as digital natives, have advanced their learning through a variety of digital tools. So, I would like to assure Ms Phua that we are exploring this area very actively.
Ms Phua spoke about the current dots in the education landscape – academic stress, tuition, late developers and social mixing. These are the result of a complex mix of policy, expectations, mindsets, perception and ground realities. We need to appreciate this.
I am always heartened when I hear the question: "Can we do better?" For me, education will always be a work-in-progress. We can always do better and, indeed, we must strive to do better.
The critical question is, "how?"
We can do better when we keep innovating. Indeed, over the years, we have had waves of innovation, each appropriate for their times. We built on our strong foundations and implemented key measures systematically across all our schools.
These waves of changes have allowed us to join the past, current and future dots, and enabled Singaporeans to thrive as our economy successfully transited from a colonial trading port to a knowledge-based economy and, as we grew up, as a nation and developed a sense of nationhood.
But for innovations in our education system to bear fruit, our approach must be guided by certain principles.
First, we will have to start with the outcomes in mind. The outcomes that Ms Phua advocates are, in fact, not different from what MOE is advocating –
Page: 114
and I thank the Member for her support – to enable every student to have a broad and deep foundation for life and lifelong learning. This means, among others, to develop our children holistically; to inculcate a strong sense of rootedness; to be open and inclusive in our approach; and to be flexible with a range of learning opportunities throughout one's lifetime.
Second, we have to be forward-looking, while being responsive to current ground realities. That was our approach in Our Singapore Conversation, and we thank Ms Phua, Dr Intan and many other participants in this Conversation for their valuable contributions.
Third, we have to build on and retain our strengths. For all the areas that we are critical of, we also have to recognise that our system is highly regarded internationally, and has served our students well. This is not just because of our students' performance in international benchmarks, such as OECD's PISA, but the progress that our students have been making in academic learning, as well as the range of exposure they experience through co-curricular activities and other forms of learning.
And, indeed, all our attainments have been possible because we encourage effort and the pursuit of excellence, create opportunities for all regardless of background, and because parents value education, and teachers are dedicated. While these strengths can also result in an over-emphasis on, for instance, academic results at times, we must be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. We need a balance.
Fourth, we have a multi-layered approach to innovation which has served us well. The first layer is system-wide innovation. For example, the current structure of 10 years of basic education, and the multiple pathways are now key features of our system. The second layer is vertical or school-level innovation. For example, we have brought together innovative approaches and specialised programming on a whole-school basis, such as the Independent Schools and specialised schools like Crest and Spectra, SOTA and the Sports Schools. The third is horizontal or curricular-level innovation across all our schools. Innovations in specific areas – we scale across the whole system – to benefit all students in all our schools. For example, we have put in place the STELLAR reading programme, Programme for Active Learning, inquiry-based learning for science and problem-based learning for math, creative approaches for delivering Character and Citizenship Education, etc.
Page: 115
Now, this third layer of innovation – at the horizontal-level – is very important. It may not have the same visibility as setting up a specialised school. But its impact is systemic. Teachers are empowered to experiment and try better ways and share these with others. Parents are happy that their children benefit from these programmes without having to attend a particular school. The changes benefit thousands of students across our entire school system. This is why we have been able to help students across schools learn better, and not just in one or two schools.
Fifth, for innovation to be successful and sustained, pacing and prioritisation are necessary. Innovations are lasting and yield results, only if they are deeply internalised and owned by all our stakeholders – students, parents and educators.
We are changing at a pace that allows our students, parents and educators to adapt, and to build capacity to sustain these changes. We are also changing in a systematic, consistent way, across all our schools, so that all students can benefit.
We have, in the last few years, made some very important changes, some of which will be implemented in the coming years. Ms Phua has very kindly listed some of these – changes to the PSLE system, reserving Primary 1 places, greater flexibility for Normal stream students, new CCE syllabi, and a Values-in-Action approach, the teaching values and greater emphasis on sports and play. We are also in the midst of looking at scaling online learning. We are stepping up on the engagement of parents. We are implementing applied learning programmes and learning for life programmes across all Secondary schools. Now, all these horizontal changes across schools will have major systemic impact.
In conclusion, I appreciate that Ms Phua has not only been a consistent advocate of a better education system, but also a hands-on practitioner who successfully pioneered the development of Pathlight School. Ms Phua's proposal of a pilot cluster of schools with certain features adds to the list of ideas for innovation. I will give her proposal serious consideration, but I should also caution that having debated many of these issues in my Ministry, there are significant policy and implementation issues that we would have to consider. We also have to set this proposal in the context of the many changes that we are in the midst of implementing. Pacing and prioritisation are critical, and we are at this point rolling out a series of very important horizontal innovations.
Page: 116
Our goal is the same – to provide the best possible education to prepare our young for the future. I thank Ms Phua and her team for the constructive proposal which we will give serious consideration. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
I do not know about Members but I have seen and heard many dots. I think I have seen a line now.
*Question put, and agreed to.*
*Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn."*
Adjourned accordingly at 6.45 pm.
Page: 117
PAPERCUTS