Debated in Parliament on 8 Apr 2026.
Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh asked the Minister for Education (a) how the Ministry assesses Singapore's economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) slope ranking of second out of 79 in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) systems, given that comparable high-performing systems such as Japan and Korea rank significantly lower; (b) what specific measures target a reduction in this slope; and (c) what progress is expected.
Based on our Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results, Singapore has a steeper slope representing the association between the socio-economic status (SES) background and performance of our students, compared to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) average and most other systems. This is because, while our students from our lower-SES homes, as a group, performed better than their OECD counterparts with similar SES, our students from higher-SES homes outperformed their peers by an even larger margin. This differential gives rise to the steeper slope.
One simplistic way to flatten the slope is to stop our higher-performing students from doing so well. But that is not educationally sound and goes against our education philosophy of helping all students to develop to their full potential.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) is committed to uplifting students who need more help, without capping the potential of those who can excel. We do so through targeted measures, such as providing additional support to students who come from lower-income households or who have higher needs, including school-based after-school programmes for students from more challenging home environments.
Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh.
Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Minister of State again for the response. I think one of the concerns is, what the economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) slope implies or suggests is whether performance is driven by income or at least affected by income. I am not saying that it is caused by income, but whether there is a strong correlation between SES and performance.
So, it is not about capping potential, but whether or not the folks from higher SES backgrounds have more opportunities, and because of that, that leads to that increase in academic performance.
And my second supplementary question, it is related to the one I had asked before – whether or not this is an indicator that MOE will look into tracking because it can give a sense of whether the measures that have been implemented are working or not.
I thank the Member for his questions. I think the first question was more of a comment, I did not really catch the specific question, the first part of it.
Yes, it is more of a comment in response to her point about capping potential of high performance. So, the Minister of State was talking about one way of flattening the slope would be to lower the top end. But I do not think that necessarily means depriving people of opportunities. I think what it suggests is that there might be a certain group of people with more opportunities. And because of that, that gives them the chances to do better and hence, you see that the stronger relationship between ESCS and performance.
So, it is maybe putting forth a different interpretation of the data, and likewise, with the different interpretation, there could be different policy implications as well. Specifically, my question is whether MOE would consider that different interpretation and how that might change the policy.
Absolutely, I thank the Member for the clarification. Yes, we will continue to watch this trend and this indicator closely, as part of a suite of overall indicators that we use when assessing the overall educational outcomes for our students. I think on the first comment, my assurance is that we want to make sure that all Singaporean students have as much access to opportunities as possible, regardless of SES.
Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Thank you, Speaker. I will just reiterate that I agree with the Minister of State that none of us that argue against early tracking do so because we want to suppress the performance of our top students.
However, I am wondering if she is aware of research by professors Eric Hanushek and Ludger Woessmann, this was published in 2006 in Economic Journal, that argues that the result of early tracking is that it raises the impact of SES on educational inequality – not so much because of allowing those who are high achievers to blossom, but rather by lowering the performance of both groups, even the high achievers, and it lowers the ones of the low achievers even more.
I do not think I heard a specific question, but if the question is about whether I am aware of the research, well, after today, I definitely will be.
PAPERCUTS