Decline in Number of Students Opting for Literature and Training for English Language Teachers

Ms Janice Koh asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry is ensuring that all English language teachers are being trained in literary ways of reading and thinking, given the emphasis in the 2010 English Language curriculum on teaching a "rich language for all".

The decline in the "O" level candidature for Full Literature over the last 20 years needs to be understood in the context of an education system responsive to a changing social context, and which has offered increasingly more curricular choices for students over time.

MOE has increasingly provided multiple pathways for students to pursue their Secondary education. Students can now choose from educational options ranging from Junior College (JC), Polytechnic and Institute of Technical Education (ITE) to the Integrated Programme (IP). In addition, schools have more autonomy to shape their school-based curricula to suit the needs, abilities and interests of their students and to carve out niche areas for students to excel in.

To support the opening of multiple pathways, MOE has introduced new subjects, such as Drama, Physical Education, Computing and Economics. Schools could also work collaboratively with the Polytechnics to offer niche subjects to their students. These subjects include Media Studies, Creative 3D Animation, Biotechnology, Design Studies and Introduction to Enterprise Development.

Our schools offer Literature, History and Geography as compulsory subjects for Secondary 1 and 2 students. At the upper Secondary levels, the introduction of Combined Humanities, with the compulsory Social Studies component and an elective Geography, History or Literature component, was the main factor for the decrease in candidature of Geography, History and Literature as a full subject. Teachers and students have responded positively to Social Studies and have commented that this subject has helped them to better understand societal issues that concern Singapore and the world. Students have also acknowledged that Social Studies helped them to develop critical thinking.

Another contributory factor for the decrease in candidature in Literature was the common perception that it is difficult to obtain a good grade for this subject. MOE's data suggest, however, that students' performance in "O" level Literature has been consistently good. There has, in fact, been a slight upward trend in the pass rate for Full Literature, from 90% in 2002 to 95% in 2012. The percentage of students scoring distinction grades has also risen from 35% to 40% over the same period.

Page: 25

Schools may start classes based on available resources. There are enough qualified Literature teachers and, if necessary, MOE will recruit teachers to meet demand. In addition, MOE organises regular sharing sessions on the teaching of Literature and a biennial Literature Seminar to meet the needs of Literature teachers. A special interest group to promote sharing of teaching strategies and ideas has also been set up. These platforms have been well-subscribed to by teachers.

To make the subject accessible to and interesting for students, MOE regularly reviews and revises the Literature syllabus. The 2013 syllabus was developed to provide students with a strong foundation in the study of Literature and cultivate in them a love for the subject by the end of Secondary education. The focus of this syllabus is to strengthen the lower Secondary Literature instructional programmes in schools so that students develop a strong foundation in the subject and the confidence to offer Literature at Upper secondary, should they wish to.

Literature remains an important core Humanities subject in the curriculum as it helps us to better understand human nature and impulses for human behaviour. MOE will continue to support Literature and encourage schools to offer this subject in the context of a holistic and broad-based education.

Our approach to the teaching of English in schools is two-pronged. First, to enable our students to build a strong foundation in the use of the language skills of listening, reading, speaking and writing, and secondly, to strengthen that foundation by exposing students to different text types from print and non-print sources. This approach ensures that our students learn to use the language accurately and fluently, and to appreciate the use of the language to represent ideas effectively, appropriately and with impact.

MOE provides training to our English Language teachers to use this approach to enable their students to read, understand and critique both literary texts, such as stories and poems and informational texts, such as those in science and geography textbooks, and to produce such texts in speech and writing. The training is provided for student-teachers at the National Institute of Education (NIE) as well as for teachers already in our schools, in collaboration with the English Language Institute of Singapore (ELIS).

I thank Senior Minister of State for the reply. I have three supplementary questions. The first is, given that there is so much emphasis on academic achievement and ranking of our schools, are

Page: 26

our Secondary schools and school leaders pressuring students against taking up softer subjects like the Humanities and subjects like Literature? If so, then, is it really a choice for students if they are not given the opportunity to take up that subject at upper Secondary? How is the Ministry then trying to redress this imbalance?

Secondly, I have come across cases of students who may have entered the school and started studying Literature at lower Secondary and then realise that at the upper Secondary, their subject is not offered as an examinable subject in their school and they have tried lobbying the school to take up these classes but have been rejected. What is the Ministry doing to help students like these who want to take Literature but have no other options within their school and would the Ministry consider setting up centres for such students to do it independently outside their school?

And thirdly, would the Ministry consider publishing General Certificate of Education (GCE) enrolment take-up rates for subjects, the pass rates, as well as distinction rates of the different subjects to enable students and parents to better make choices as to what subjects they would like to take, so that it is not just a perception that the Humanities are difficult to score in?

I thank the Member for her questions. Her first question was given that there is so much emphasis on academic achievements, are schools pressurising students to take up the harder subjects. Let me just break that down. Even if you take Literature, there is an academic rate attached to it. It is not Literature, not academic, and other subjects, academic – that is the first point. But the more important point and I think the thrust of the question was are schools pressuring students to take the subject? And remember, in my answer, I have broken it down to Secondary and upper Secondary. In the lower Secondary, it is compulsory, so they have to take it. We are really talking about the upper Secondary. And in the upper Secondary, it is already a component of the Social Studies. For the Social Studies subjects, you have to take Social

Page: 27

Studies plus an elective. The elective would be either Geography, History or Literature. At that stage, they have a choice and it is very much the students' choice. They can also take it as an additional Humanities subject. That too, is a choice for the students but some would choose not to take that up; some may prefer Geography or History.

So, in answer to the first question, I would certainly hope schools are not pressurising them but the system is structured such that it is for the students to elect. And one would certainly hope that for those who love Literature as a subject and just for the language and what the subject has to offer that they would take it up as a subject, as a matter of choice.

The second question related to students who wanted to take it as an examinable subject and was not offered in their schools. For that, perhaps, if you have specific examples, you could send that along to MOE so that we can look into those. Certainly, the idea would be to encourage students to pursue their passion where they can, but at the same time balance it within the framework of what the school has available and the school's resources. But wherever one can, one should try to achieve that balance.

The third question on the question of publishing the enrolment and the pass rates. We have just moved away already from the publication of the PSLE results – who does the best. We have moved away from ranking. I think we are trying to move away from this system of "I compare with you and I compare with another person". I think we would want that if Literature is taken up, it must be taken up because you love the subject and it has much to offer. You should not take it up merely because it is a question of my comparison with somebody else, but if the question is directed to what can we do to encourage students to take it up and to at least indicate that it is not such a—because the pass rates do actually show that good results – if we can put that out to show that it is not a subject to be feared only because it cannot be scored at, that I think MOE would be happy to do.

Thank you, Madam. I would just like to check. I have been told by some people in the education field that the small pool of Literature students in schools means that there is smaller number of people taking Literature in the universities. Has the MOE experienced problems trying to get good Literature teachers given that small pool of Literature graduates to hire from?

Page: 28

My understanding is that at the present time, the resources – in terms of the teachers available – is sufficient, but as I indicated earlier, if there is a greater need, we would be happy to increase that pool.