Guidelines For Schools on Setting Criteria for Direct Admission Scheme

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Direct School Admission Exercise for Secondary Schools (DSA-Sec) provides a pathway for students to enrol in secondary schools, based on their diverse talents and potential. Schools have the flexibility to determine their selection and assessment criteria, so that they can select students who will benefit most from the school's development programmes.

At the same time, schools are required to adhere to the Ministry of Education (MOE)'s selection guidelines and, to uphold the key principles of transparency, objectivity, inclusiveness and student-centricity during the selection process. For example, schools are required to update and publish their selection criteria on their website before each DSA exercise. Schools are also required to form selection panels, led by the school leadership team, to evaluate each applicant. These selection guidelines are reviewed and updated before the start of each year's DSA exercise.

Over the past five years, there have been an average of seven cases per year from parents querying the outcome of their child's DSA selection. Based on MOE's review of each case, we have found the schools to have conducted their selection processes rigorously, objectively and professionally.

I thank the Minister for his reply and I think that the impetus, if I may share for the question, has been some anecdotal evidence that has been shared with us about the possibility that – especially, since the criteria for selection of some of these DSA applicants, especially in sports, where the recommendations of the coach may hold a certain undue weight – there is a concern that some coaches, perhaps within the system, are making implicit promises that access to certain sports in certain schools would be favourable, because they also happen to be the coaches for those schools.

I am not making any accusations, to be clear, that there is any kind of corruption going on. But rather, I think the need for transparency behind the DSA process. I wonder, whether the Ministry has any plans for a far more thorough review, rather than on a case-by-case basis, of the entire the DSA system in its entirety?

Mr Speaker, Sir, as Assoc Prof Jamus Lim has said, if we believe that the system is right and if you have anecdotal evidence that you think requires our attention, we welcome you to pass it to MOE and we will take a look at it. But if you think that there is a problem with the entire system, then, I would also suggest you let us know where your areas of concerns are so we can take a look at this.

Because, as the Member has suggested, I think there is a difference between anecdotal evidences, where someone says something versus a system problem. If there are anecdotal incidents, even individual cases where you suspect that there is something is not right, you can let us know and we will get to the bottom of it.

But I make a distinction between isolated cases and what we talk about – the system.

Just to put things in perspective – what is seven cases out of 4,000 successful applications? That percentage is lower than even the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) appeals. So, that is just to put it in context: seven cases out of 4,000.

And I will make the following two other points.

First, when we look at DSA, we are looking at, essentially, the potential of a child. And we are also looking at how the child is able to fit into the school's programme. Granted that this system will be, so, such that there is some degree of assessment on potential and not just based on current performance. And we would hope that people do not hothouse their children for performance, in lieu of potential.

And we need to understand one step further behind this system. When we only had the PSLE system to allocate students to school, there were comments, there was feedback, that perhaps we were too rigid, too narrow. And the reason for the DSA is to widen the spectrum of talents and abilities that we assess a child, in order to best site the child in the right place for the secondary school.

And granted, any system like that will require a level of assessment on the potential of the child and beyond the performance of the child. And I can fully understand that there will be isolated cases where they may not have gotten their choice and there will be questions, perhaps allegations, of unfair practices. But if there are such things, let us know. My assurance to you is that MOE will look at each and every of this case thoroughly.

I had received a Written Reply from Minister to an Oral Parliamentary Question I had filed on DSA, prior to this. So, I would like to thank Minister for that reply and I have a supplementary question to ask.

I would like to just ask Minister: I really appreciate the fact that MOE has shifted the focus, quite significantly from the past, from the more academic-related DSA to the more sports-, arts- and interest-related DSA. While I believe MOE would review the areas of DSA that can be used, is MOE also receptive to the schools giving feedback? For example, if certain schools feel that some areas that they would like to suggest or nominate, for DSA consideration; would MOE also be open to such feedback to look at how they increase the diversity of areas that can be used for DSA to be admitted into secondary schools?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the short answer to Mr Darryl David's question is, certainly, yes. In fact, many of our schools have proposed to MOE the areas which they would like to focus on, in terms of their DSA selection.

For example, certain schools have very strong traditions in certain areas. And this may go beyond the sports or arts arena; and, we allow the school to have that diversity of areas which we want our children to fulfil. And, as Members know, I have been an advocate that we need to allow a greater diversity of models, a greater diversity in the types of talent that we recognise in our children and to help them fulfil that potential. That adds to the resilience of our society.

And this is the reason why we have allowed our schools to propose grounds up. But regardless of what you propose, there are certain rules that we hold dear to ourselves in order to make sure that the system is transparent an objective.

First, whichever field of area that the school proposes, it must be communicated transparently to everyone, not just to a sub-group of people – so that anyone who is interested can apply for it. That is the first criterion.

Second, there must be some ability to objectively assess the potential of the child in that field. I accept that it cannot 100% be done in a matrix, because not everything might be able to be captured scientifically, especially when we are talking about the potential of a child.

Even in sports, we know this. Supposing we are choosing a sprinter. Someone at a certain age might sprint faster than someone else. That is performance. But that does not necessarily correlate to potential. And what we want is not just performance, but potential. So, there is some degree of subjectivity. But to the extent that we can, we want a professional panel to make sure that these are assessed objectively, both performance and potential, and it can stand up to scrutiny, because that is how we uphold the integrity of our system.

The third thing that we need to do well for DSA is that, when it comes to the selection process, we must follow through. This means we must have an upstream process to look at the potential of our children, whether they come from a privileged or less privileged background, we must be able to identify those talents, work with the parents to continue to develop those talents in the children.

This process does not stop at primary six, because it must have a hand over, a handshake, to the secondary school to continue to develop those children who we have identified.

So, these are the basic core principles that we must adhere to regardless of the field or the area of DSA that we have allowed the schools to do.