Potential Impact from Rising Tuition Expenditure on Educational Equity

Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Education in view of the disparity in spending on private tuition between households of different income quintiles (a) whether the Ministry foresees a widening of social inequality as higher-income families gain disproportionate access to educational advantages; (b) whether the Ministry can share its assessment of the long-term implication of this trend, particularly on social mobility; and (c) whether any policies are being considered to mitigate these effects.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Based on findings from the Household Expenditure Survey 2023 conducted by the Department of Statistics (DOS), the overall growth in tuition expenditure across all households was similar to the growth in overall household income from all sources. It was also similar to the increase in the Consumer Price Index for enrichment and supplementary courses.

The Ministry of Education (MOE) recognises that the reasons for taking up tuition are varied. While there are some students who genuinely need more dedicated help in coping with their studies, there are others who take tuition even though they are coping well. Excessive reliance on tuition can diminish students’ joy of learning and take time away from their holistic development. It can even be detrimental when students struggle to cope with the additional demands of tuition.

MOE has introduced policy changes to shift away from an over-emphasis on academic results and broaden the definition of success. But these moves will not be as effective if mindsets do not shift. We must shift our focus from putting our children through excessive competition against others based solely on academic results, to giving more time and space for holistic development of our children and also helping them to maximise their individual talents and strengths, so that they can be the best versions of themselves.

As Dr Wan Rizal and Mr Yip Hon Weng highlighted, the data from DOS also shows a disparity in tuition expenditure between households of different income quintiles. This is consistent with global trends, where parents who are better endowed will use their resources and networks to support their children’s development. They sign their children up for more, or more expensive enrichment and tuition, hoping that this will help their children in their studies. MOE is not in a position to intervene in such personal decisions.

But regardless of a student’s socio-economic background, MOE will continue to make sure that our education system provides sufficient opportunities for all students to reach their fullest potential, regardless of their background and this is even more important for students from lower-income households.

To this end, MOE has devoted significant resources to support students with higher needs. For instance, our schools provide specialised academic intervention for primary and secondary school students who need more support to build their literacy and numeracy foundation through the Learning Support Programme and the Learning Support for Mathematics. [Please refer to "Clarification by Minister of State for Education", Official Report, 5 February 2025, Vol 95, Issue 151, Correction By Written Statement section.]

Schools also have partnerships with volunteers and self-help groups that provide affordable academic support. One example is the Collaborative Tuition Programme, which provides students, particularly those from lower-income households, with subsidised tuition.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022 has affirmed our efforts. Our students from lower-income families out-performed the OECD average in the core domains of reading, mathematics and science, as well as in creative thinking.

Mr Speaker, MOE cannot advance social mobility on our own. A whole-of-society effort is needed to share our resources and networks with those who are less well-endowed, broaden our definitions of success, reduce academic stress and recognise the contributions of those with different skills and talents.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for the reply. I am glad to hear that we are doing things to change the mindset of this perceived idea of the necessity of tuition. Beyond financial concerns, is MOE studying the impact of this tuition culture on students' well-being and stress levels? Such information could be helpful for us to push further a change in this mindset.

My next question is really on how I have heard about the financial support for the lower-income families, but I do also note that there are families who are in the middle-income who feel that they need support for their children. Are there measures by MOE to address these issues and concerns by such families?

MOE is certainly concerned as well about stress that can be brought onto students because of excessive reliance on tuition, especially if the tuition does not help students in improving their learning and understanding of the subjects that they are studying but instead, take away precious time for them to grow and develop themselves holistically. So, certainly, we will be keen to undertake studies and also research with partners in this field.

On the subject of support for students from middle-income families, we do have broad-based support. In fact, we have increased the amount of bursary that is provided to our students, even for those from middle-income households. And our education system, in general, provides support for students, even for those from middle-income households.

I would like to say that actually the more important thing for us is to understand why there is demand for tuition from students and their parents. I think, tackling that is the crux of the matter and for that, we seek the support of parents and the community in helping shape the mindsets about over-emphasis on academic results and broadening the definition of success for our students.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her reply. I have two supplementary questions. Has the Ministry conducted or considered conducting longitudinal studies to track the long-term outcomes of students of various income backgrounds, particularly in relation to their access to private tuition and subsequently social mobility?

Secondly, are there efforts to build confidence in our public education system's ability to meet diverse learning needs without external supplications, such as private tuition?

In line with the Government's key priority of sustaining social mobility and mitigating inequality, MOE monitors the education progress of students from all income brackets across the key life stages. Similar to other countries, we have observed a correlation between socio-economic status and educational outcomes. Nonetheless, in some areas, the gaps have narrowed over time – for instance, among students from lower socio-economic status backgrounds, nine in 10 students progress to post-secondary education today, compared to five in 10 around two decades earlier.

On the hon Member's second question on improving confidence in our education system, I think parents generally believe that our schools are providing quality education to our students. But what I think is happening, at the same time, is the notion of competition, of getting into good schools and good courses, and it is perhaps undervaluing the unique talents and interests of individual students. And I think that is something that we want to continue to work on and we seek the support of parents and the community in this.

Sir, last month on the first day of school for Primary 1 students, it was 2 January, I was outside a primary school at my constituency and got to meet some parents there. As I was chatting with some of the parents, I saw a couple distributing flyers around us and I was curious to find out what they were distributing. And I soon found out that they are distributing tuition flyers.

I was very troubled with that and I offered my views to the couple who were distributing the tuition flyers and said that they should not be doing this on the first day of school for Primary 1 students. We do not want to create such unnecessary competition and stresses to our parents and the students on the first day for Primary 1 students. I told them that, perhaps later, if the students do have some weaker subjects and areas they need to improve on, well, perhaps they may need some tuition, but I still believe the school is capable of helping the weaker students. The couple left after I said all those things.

Can I ask the Minister of State whether there are any standing instructions or would MOE come out with some standing instructions to advise tuition centres not to do such tuition sales outside schools, especially on the first day of school for Primary 1 students?

I thank Mr Liang Eng Hwa for his supplementary question. We have observed some tuition centres employing undesirable advertising practices that appeal to parents' anxieties and fear of missing out. We do not support such practices. We think that it unduly induces parents to sign their children up for tuition and that is not healthy. Our schools certainly do not support such practices. We are studying how we could discourage tuition centres from doing this. We are reviewing our processes.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I wanted to address Minister of State Gan and thank her for her clarification. I have also encountered, just in January, a couple of instances where parents have shared that they have observed that their Primary 1 child, in the third week of school, has been identified to be weaker in a particular subject and hence, been designated to a smaller group with the additional support for the particular subject.

And while I understand that MOE is trying to give more support to students at an earlier age, I would like to ask the Minister of State, what kind of signal is MOE sending to parents and children, where we are rushing to identify their weaknesses or strengths at such an early stage in their primary school journey? The premise is that we are trying to get the students to perform better or to catch up and underlying that premise is a sense of competition.

Does MOE have plans to review its pace of curriculum to see whether it is necessary that we need to cram so much information and knowledge into a young child's life at such an early stage, and to review the whole entire premise of why it is that we are pushing our students to perform and to meet certain expectations of what kind of level of mathematics or literary skills they must have, and how we are benchmarking this? What is the ultimate purpose for this intensified learning pace in Singapore?

I thank Ms Carrie Tan for the supplementary question. I think it is important that we recognise that learning is for life and that it does not help if we rush through the learning only in the first few years of a child's life. It has to be a continuous journey. Secondly, we also recognise that it is important for our children to start well, even in preschool, to have some foundations in reading, communication and life skills, importantly.

That is why in our schools, if we identify that certain children seem to be weaker and falling behind in basic literacy or numeracy skills, teachers, out of care and concern, will want to bring this to the awareness of parents and work together with them to support the learning of our students. We understand that, sometimes, some households may not have the resources or abilities, and that is why we have specialised academic intervention programmes for primary school students who need more support in foundational skills.

These programmes include the Reading Remediation Programme and Learning Support for Mathematics, and we have seen good outcomes. More importantly, in building confidence of our students especially those from lower-income households when they go through these programmes. These programmes typically have fewer students and special additional resources, and they are done with consent from and also in partnership with the parents. It is not in any way intended to ask the parents to send their children for more tuition. If anything, it is to raise awareness of the parents, so that more can be done early to support the learning and to set our children up well for the longer term.