Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)

The Chairman: Head K, Ministry of Education. Mr Patrick Tay.

2.45 pm

Education – The Next Bound

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): Madam, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

In the past 60 years, Singapore has transformed from a developing economy with limited resources into a globally competitive powerhouse. At the heart of this success is our commitment to education. None of this progress would have been possible without the hard work and dedication of our teachers, educators, school staff and our Ministry of Education (MOE) headquarter staff.

As we look ahead, we must continue to strengthen our education system by expanding pathways and adapting curriculum to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow. It must be equipped to support all learners, with different learning needs and speeds, at every stage of their life.

In the last two years, I spoke about ironman suits and multivitamins. This year, I will be a bit more in. I will focus my speech on what I call the 3 "INs": innovating the continuing education and training (CET) ecosystem; integrating support for the special education (SPED) sector; and inclusiveness in school admission.

First, innovating the CET ecosystem. The year 2025 marks 10 years since the Government launched the national SkillsFuture movement with the aim of promoting CET as a national priority. I submit that it is now timely to conduct a comprehensive review of SkillsFuture to ensure alignment with evolving workforce needs, as well as consolidate efforts and streamline offerings across different arms, such as Employment and Employability Institute (e2i), Workforce Singapore (WSG), SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG), training providers and the various Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) in Singapore, including the various Ministries and sector agencies and associations.

It is commendable that, today, we have a wide range of CET courses. However, some programmes offered by different arms of the CET ecosystem may overlap and the proliferation of choice may leave many learners feeling overwhelmed. This fragmentation can create inefficiencies and duplication in resources. Therefore, there is a need to break down silos and identify gaps and overlaps. In the same vein, a strategic review of the CET ecosystem can support innovation for the next bound of the SkillsFuture movement and align it to the in-demand skills for the future.

For example, a more cohesive CET ecosystem can lead to creating robust frameworks for credit recognition and transferability across institutions and industries, which can encourage a skills-first mindset, instead of the traditional emphasis on formal academic qualifications. Learners can have their acquired skills validated by a unified and credible authority, whether gained through formal education, short-term courses or on-the-job training. This streamlined process of accreditation can be integrated with the MyCareersFuture portal.

The review should also include an evaluation of school-industry partnership initiatives, such as the Institute of Technical Education's (ITE's) Work-Study Diplomas and the Teacher Work Attachment Plus, especially the outcomes for participants in terms of employability and career or wage progression, so as to further explore areas to improve and expand.

Second, integrating support for the SPED sector. It is commendable that MOE has made significant efforts to break down silos between mainstream schools and SPED schools, including increased opportunities for intermingling among children, as well as attachments, rotations and secondments for teachers, such as through the SPED Leadership Development Programme.

However, I believe that more can be done to ensure that SPED teachers, educators and staff are not overlooked in the policy decisions surrounding their well-being, protection and career progression. I submit that the Ministry adopt a more integrated approach that brings together the full spectrum of support across MOE, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) and our social service agencies (SSAs). This approach should also be extended to supporting SPED students.

The current SPED landscape is fragmented, which may limit the impact of these support systems on SPED students and their families. There needs to be more "porosity" – to borrow an analogy from the Minister for Education – not only between mainstream schools and SPED schools, but also across education, healthcare, manpower and social services. The SPED sector is inherently diverse, comprising a wide range of physical, intellectual, emotional and behavioural needs. A more concerted effort in bringing together professionals and experts across various fields to address these needs via tailored approaches can more holistically and seamlessly support SPED students throughout their education journey.

One area that warrants more attention is workforce transition support for SPED students. I was deeply dismayed by a recent MSF report that showed a decline in positive attitudes and a rise in negative attitudes towards persons with disabilities in Singapore's workforce in 2023 compared to 2019. While great strides have been made through initiatives like the Open Door Programme and the Enabling Employment Credit, more can be done to shift mindsets and reach the Enabling Masterplan 2030 target of 40% employment rate for persons with disabilities by 2030. The Ministry can consider more school-to-work bridging programmes to connect SPED students to internship, apprenticeship and training-and-placement opportunities through stronger collaboration with industries.

The third and final "In" is inclusiveness in school admission. We have come a long way in developing diverse and inclusive pathways for our students in mainstream schools. Last year, we fully implemented Subject-Based Banding, replacing the old system of streaming. I am also glad to hear that MOE will review the Direct School Admission (DSA) system.

As we embark on this review, I submit that greater consideration should be given to students from lower-income families, who have less access to enrichment classes and private coaching or even exposure to high-cost non-academic talents in sports or the arts. While it is commendable that MOE and our schools have taken active steps to support students from lower-income families to participate in DSA, such as the Junior Sports Academy, we must acknowledge the inherent disparities that can exist within the DSA process.

Besides expanding the selection process to account for potential in addition to performance, the Ministry can consider offering additional resources and financial support to students from lower-income families to discover and hone their non-academic talents. Schools should also be required to publish clear and transparent selection criteria and rubrics, as well as conflict-of-interest policies.

To conclude, our education system must aim to foster not only academic excellence, but also resilience, adaptability and holistic well-being.

Question proposed.

Future-ready Education for All

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Madam, Singapore's MOE has made remarkable progress in building a future-ready education system for all. No other country has invested so heavily or innovated so rapidly in education. Minister Chan Chun Sing himself has painstakingly championed a broader definition of success and lifelong learning, but three significant barriers could hinder this vision.

Barrier one – on mindset. Despite MOE's efforts, many parents remain fixated on academic excellence or results, particularly excelling in exams, such as the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE), to secure spots in what they perceived as, "better" schools. Similarly, adults are also under-utilising SkillsFuture programmes.

The greatest challenge lies in shifting mindsets to value diverse pathways to success and prioritise lifelong learning. Minister Chan Chun Sing himself has rightly pointed out that systemic changes alone are not sufficient without cultural shifts. But since MOE has done as much as it deems possible, systemically, what additional plans are there in place to foster a mindset shift? Or is such a shift even possible?

Could removing the PSLE, a high-stake examination, and introducing a 10-year integrated programme from primary to secondary school level help to remove one hotspot or hotpoint, and maybe free time to also work on other important attributes and skills that support our future education model?

I have brought up this topic of removing PSLE and through-train integrated programmes for years now. But I think we need a deeper dive on this. It is no longer a question of removing PSLE or not, through-train or not. May I ask MOE to share what operational obstacles do exist, and are these obstacles insurmountable?

For adults, could every Singaporean gain access to formal skills development planning and coaching, not just those who are job-seeking? Could we also adopt achievable targets, like the 10,000-step health goal, to cultivate a habit of continuous learning? For instance, some multinational corporations (MNCs) I know set self-driven training goals, in terms of hours or programmes for their staff. Could this be explored and also scaled nationally?

Barrier two – on new literacies. A future-ready education must address technological disruptions, especially by artificial intelligence (AI). Nations and companies are already leveraging AI to transform education. So, I seek MOE's clarification on two points. What is the new literacy curriculum for learners in this age of rapid technological advancement? Two, how can we ensure that our learners become originators of ideas, not just consumers or managers of AI outputs and risk undermining development of their own critical and creative thinking skills?

Barrier three – on students with special educational needs (SEN). First, let me talk about SEN students in mainstream schools and IHLs. Over 80% of our students with mild to moderate SEN are in mainstream schools, necessitating robust support systems. Beyond academics, they need life skills to navigate living and working, especially post-school. So, while initiatives like SEN officers and learning support offices are very commendable and I really appreciate it, current support does seem to fall short.

So, may I ask MOE what feedback has been received on the current support model for SEN students in mainstream schools and IHLs? Are there gaps to be addressed? What is MOE's future plan in this space? What does it look like? How can stakeholders like the mainstream schools, IHLs, MOE's own special needs department, special education needs department and disability-focused SSAs and SPED schools even, improve knowledge sharing and best practices to strengthen support?

Let me also talk about SEN students in SPED schools. SPED students often need more time to master foundational skills for living, learning and working. Their need for lifelong learning is critical as technology transforms our world. However, the "cliff effect" – where support drops drastically after age 18 – stops progress for many of the adult learners with disabilities. This leads to skills loss, reduced independence, and increased burdens on families and society.

Can the Government commission a study to seriously address – study this "cliff-effect" and address the gaps thereof – and even adopt a top-up funding model for SEN adult learners, mirroring what was given before age 18?

Additionally, SPED leaders face overwhelming administrative workloads due to numerous policies and reporting requirements. While I appreciate MOE's increased support over the years, and I really think they are very good people in MOE for this, I urge a review to limit policies and reports to only the essentials and also to streamline processes.

Could SPED schools tap on public-sector systems – the good ones, like Form.gov.sg —

The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua, can you round up please?

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: — GeBiz, or Demand Aggregated Vendor Lists to reduce their administrative burdens and improve efficiency?

So, in conclusion, Madam, Singapore is at the forefront of creating a future-ready education system that empowers every individual. If any nation can turn this vision into reality, I believe, it is Singapore. So, thank you, MOE.

PSLE and Class Sizes

Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, first, let me declare that I am in the private education business.

Madam, this could be my last Committee of Supply (COS) debate. As such, I beg for your indulgence as I take this opportunity to make yet another call on the Government to implement a 10-year through-train programme in some schools where students can progress from primary levels to secondary levels without going through the PSLE. This is an issue that I personally feel most passionate about.

3.00 pm

I assure the Minister for Education that I continue to raise this not because I did not hear his concerns, but because I remain unconvinced that those concerns outweigh the merits of creating this additional educational path as an option for parents and students.

The Minister is concerned about how to cater to students with different learning abilities and needs in the 10-year through-train programme. This can be addressed in two ways: one, reducing class sizes to reduce the range of diverse learning profiles and abilities within each class; two, implementing Subject-Based Banding.

At the class level, we can use these two ways to manage the range of learning profiles. But at the school level, students will still benefit from interacting with a wide range of students and learning to respect and deal with differences. With the end of streaming and introduction of Subject-Based Banding, schools are already catering to diverse learning profiles. The Minister himself said this of Subject-Based Banding: "the positive outcomes in learning and social mixing give us confidence that this is the right thing to do."

If we can do it with Subject-Based Banding, we can do it with a 10-year through-train programme.

The Minister also made the point that PSLE is simply a means to help our children find a suitable learning environment. But PSLE is not the only means. Regular assessments within the school can also do this. This is being done all the time.

It is well-known how stressful PSLE can be not just for students, but for parents as well. Instead of enjoying the time spent building bonds with their children, many parents, instead, spent the time nagging or disciplining their children to study harder and longer to do better in the PSLE, in their anxiety to ensure their children's future. Such stress strains family relationships and adversely affects mental well-being.

It would not be surprising for anyone observing this to conclude that life is much better without children. A stressful education system can be a disincentive for parenthood. Is it a coincidence that regions known to have the most stressful education systems like South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore, also have the lowest fertility rates?

The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) also calls for class sizes to be reduced. This will provide greater opportunities for differentiated learning and allow teachers to personalise teaching and better support students with different learning profiles. As of 2023, the average class size was 33.6 in primary schools and 32.6 in secondary schools. This is far higher than the average public primary school class in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, which is 21.

With our total fertility rate falling steadily year after year, our student cohorts have been shrinking. By maintaining teacher recruitment levels and keeping schools open even as student cohorts shrink, we can reduce class sizes, without compromising on the quality of teachers.

By making PSLE optional, we may also be able to reduce academic competition and demand for tuition. In such a scenario, MOE could re-employ teachers who have left the Education Service for the private tuition industry to reduce class sizes in schools. There will always be segments of the student population that is difficult for mainstream schools to cater to. So, if a small proportion of students require tuition, that is not worrisome, but if over half require tuition then that cannot be healthy.

In addition, examination preparation calls for memorising and repetition which are not skills that prepare our children well for a society that will soon be greatly changed by AI.

MOE has identified the 21st Century Competencies (21CC), including values, social skills, critical thinking and so on, that are needed to prepare our students for the future. But without systemic changes, wanna bet what will be the outcome of a poll on parents which they consider more important, PSLE or 21CC?

It is survival instinct to adapt our behaviour to that which brings rewards. And right now, our education system rewards efforts in preparing for PSLE more than efforts in building 21CC. Simply exhorting parents to change their mindset is not going to cut it.

In a through-train programme, time freed from PSLE preparations can be channelled towards building such competencies and better prepare our students for the future. As the Minister said, learning is a continuous journey, not just for 15 years, but for 50. It is important to nurture the love of learning in our children. A high-stress, high-stakes examination like the PSLE at such a young age does not help to do that.

Once again, I urge the Minister to consider making PSLE optional by implementing a pilot through-train programme and to reduce class sizes for the benefit of our dwindling number of children.

Supporting Educators

Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim (Nominated Member): Madam, empowering educators to be global leaders assists to foster innovation in education, address global challenges, encourage international collaboration and prepare students for a globalised world.

Providing continuous learning opportunities to educators, including collaboration across borders, as well as robust systems to support mental health and work-life balance, will assist educators remain confident and competent in the global environment.

In this context, how is the Ministry supporting educators to adapt to rapidly changing global needs and adequately prepare them for future challenges in the education sector? In what ways is the Ministry facilitating the creation of an environment that fosters and promotes the importance of lifelong learning among educators, and what strategies are being implemented to guide educators towards learning and teaching driven by curiosity and passion?

What initiatives are being introduced to ensure the curriculum for educators remains relevant and forward-thinking, and supports their continuous professional growth? And finally, what measures are being taken to support the mental health and well-being of educators?

The Chairman: Mr Darryl David, please take your four cuts together.

Admissions Criteria for Junior Colleges

Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Madam. Before I begin, I would like to declare my position as a chief executive officer of an education institution.

In Singapore, the majority of students' typical pattern of education after completing their "O" level is generally a binary one. They either attend a junior college (JC) or a polytechnic. The key distinction between these two routes lies in the type of education they offer, with JCs focusing on academic study that leads to the "A" levels and, often, university after that; and polytechnics providing vocational and technical training through a diploma programme, with increasing pathways to university education too.

In the 1970s, the L1R5 system, or the calculation of a student's aggregate score was based on their best language subject (L1) and five relevant academic subjects (R5). This system moved in 1980 to the L1R4 system. The number of relevant subjects for which the aggregate score was counted was reduced from five to four. This shift was aimed at streamlining admissions for increased focus on core subjects and specialised skills. The L1R4 system applied to both polytechnic and JC admissions, but the subjects counted could differ.

There was a return to the L1R5 system for JC admission a few years later. And presently, I believe that there are two systems, L1R4 for polytechnic admission and L1R5 for JC admission.

It might be good, in my humble opinion, to ensure parity between the two systems, especially with students opting for both JCs and polytechnics in their same application form as they make their initial choices. As learning becomes more personalised and catered to students' interests and choices become more diverse, having one aggregate calculation system based on L1R4 would also narrow the JC-polytechnic perceived divide.

Having the same point system for both also allows for recognition of different learning styles and interests, and alignment of entry points would also allow equality of access to higher education for both polytechnic and JC students to university in the future. Could I suggest that MOE review the post "O" level criteria for JCs to make it more aligned with that of polytechnics?

Rejuvenation of Junior Colleges

Still on JC, on 20 January 1969, National Junior College, the first JC, had its inaugural assembly with 572 students. It offered 40 subject combinations to students who could exercise wide choices in subject options to meet their interests and inclinations. Following that, several JCs opened their doors, with Hwa Chong Junior College the first Government-aided JC in Singapore, opening in 1974; and Catholic Junior College, starting in 1975 to combine pre-university courses offered by Catholic religious schools or orders.

The JC system was created to optimise the use of teachers and laboratory facilities while providing more educational opportunities for pre-university students. It aimed at creating a challenging learning environment and helping students develop their talents academically and non-academically.

Madam, in 2019, MOE announced the merger of eight JCs into four, partly to address declining student numbers owing to falling birth rates. The merged JCs – Anderson Serangoon Junior College (ASRJC), Yishun Innova Junior College, Tampines Meridian Junior College and Jurong Pioneer Junior College (JPJC) – adopted names that combined the full names of the original colleges, with the name of the older JC coming first to reflect its history.

As of November 2024, I believe that three JCs, Temasek Junior College, ASRJC and JPJC have been slated to move into new buildings by January 2028. Could MOE provide an update on the exercise to rejuvenate JCs across the island?

Professional Development for Teachers

Madam, teachers are one of the most critical resources in the teaching ecosystem. In Singapore, continuous teacher training occurs through a system of different professional development opportunities provided by MOE, including paid professional development courses, staff training opportunities, conferences, mentorship programmes, attachments, leadership development tracks and study programmes for further education.

There are SkillsFuture courses focusing on specific areas of practice to further teachers' professional growth and I believe that all teachers in Singapore are entitled to 100 hours of paid professional development every year. While a good preliminary foundation has been laid to ensure good training by the National Institute of Education (NIE), which also offers various degree courses and professional development programmes, I believe that continuing education is crucial to keep sharpening skillsets and keeping teachers relevant.

The focus on Research-Informed Practices also means that teachers need to update their practice with evidence-based pedagogies and strategies. Also, given the rapid developments in AI, technology and pedagogy and fast-evolving workplace landscape where skills must be practice-oriented, the emphasis must be on ensuring that our teachers improve the quality of their teaching through upskilling and continuous learning for teaching quality excellence throughout their careers.

I had previously made the point in Parliament via Parliamentary Questions relating to the importance of ensuring that our teachers have industry experience and exposure for their own professional growth that will, in turn, enhance the overall teaching and learning of our students. I would now like to ask if MOE can share more on the various programmes that are in place for the professional development of our teachers and if there are any plans to enhance these programmes anytime soon?

Internships for Neurodiverse Students

Neurodiverse students, including those with conditions like attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dyslexia, autism or other cognitive variations, learn in ways that are different from learning methods and strategies adopted by neurotypical students.

Neurodiverse students' learning styles evolve from their strengths and challenges they face. Each neurodiverse student is different but there are common strategies and approaches can support neurodiverse learners in achieving success. These include, focusing on their strengths, providing assistive technologies, allowing for visual and hands-on learning, and providing extended assessment-time alternative assessments. For students that need social support, there are also strategies for them to overcome anxiety and increase collaboration opportunities with their peers.

Much progress has been made in MOE schools with learning support and I am heartened to say this. The SEN Masterplan, our national framework, aims to enhance the quality and accessibility of SEN education. The Masterplan for Inclusive Education was introduced to ensure that children with SEN are integrated into mainstream schools wherever possible and that schools provide appropriate support.

Funding for SPED schools to create better facilities, resources and teaching staff to support SEN students is a plus, so schools can hire specialised staff and invest in assistive and supportive technologies. There is also mainstreaming of SEN support and services in polytechnics and the ITEs.

3.15 pm

Internships are a big part of ITE and polytechnic education, giving students with critical industry exposure and experience to complement their learning. These are significant as they offer hands-on experience, helping these students apply classroom skills into real-world, real-life scenarios. This practical exposure builds confidence and allows students to explore their interests and their strengths, helping with career and eventually, life choices. Internships also augment soft skills such as communication, time management and self-directedness, which are essential ingredients for workplace success.

These experiences help them thrive in professional environments and enhance social interactions with colleagues as well. Additionally, internships promote independence by teaching students task management and handling responsibilities.

I would like to ask what steps are taken to ensure that neurodiverse ITE and polytechnic students going on such internships have their internships calibrated to meet their neurodiversity and differentiated learning needs?

SkillsFuture 2.0

Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mdm Chair, I declare my interest as chief executive officer of an education institute serving the finance sector with programmes eligible for SkillsFuture Credit.

A decade ago, Singapore launched SkillsFuture with the foresight that CET must be a cornerstone of our growth strategy. We recognised that industry transformation, technological advancements and global shifts would continuously reshape job roles and skill demands. To future-proof our workforce, SkillsFuture was established to ensure that Singaporeans can adapt, thrive and seize new opportunities in an evolving economy.

Over the years, SkillsFuture has been enhanced to encourage adoption and advance workforce impact. However, despite the strong efforts, training participation rate declined to 40.7% in 2024, the lowest in nine years. Many, both within and outside this House, question whether SkillsFuture is delivering on its full potential.

To further SkillsFuture's impact, we must shift our focus from making training accessible with ensuring that it directly contributes to career outcomes. Switzerland offers valuable insights in this regard. The Swiss Federal Act on Continuing Education and Training establishes a structured framework to ensure high-quality, industry-relevant training. It mandates strict accreditation standards of CET providers, ensuring that courses meet rigorous quality and workforce relevance criteria. Crucially, CET in Switzerland counts towards formal qualifications that are integrated into hiring and career progression, ensuring that training translates into tangible employment outcomes.

Madam, I would like to call on SkillsFuture to focus on enhancing two key areas to strengthen the CET framework, drawing lessons from Switzerland.

One, strengthening Accreditation Standards for CET Providers. Whilst we appreciate that SkillsFuture funds thousands of courses, the current system does not distinguish adequately between high-quality programmes and those with limited workforce impact. Employers and trainees struggle to identify which courses deliver strong job outcomes. Funding is distributed relatively evenly across CET providers. This one-size-fits-all approach weakens SkillsFuture's strategic effectiveness as a workforce development tool and risks diluting its impact.

So, Madam, to address this, Singapore should establish a tiered accreditation system that categorises CET providers based on industry endorsement, their programme quality and workforce outcomes. Government funding should be directly tied to their level of accreditation, ensuring that providers with higher quality standards receive higher levels of support.

Additionally, research funding currently available to Government-funded IHLs should be extended to qualified CET providers. This will support the development of a new generation of world-class CET institutions to develop thought leadership in their respective domains of industry practice. This will enable professionals undergoing CET from these world-class institutions to remain at the forefront of emerging trends, new technologies and evolving global standards. By integrating the latest research into CET programmes, we can equip workers with cutting-edge expertise that strengthens Singapore's workforce effectiveness.

Two, making CET a cumulative pathway to meaningful qualifications. While individuals should have the flexibility to take standalone courses, CET should not be seen as short, unrelated training courses. Instead, it should be structured as a cumulative pathway to enable individuals to continuously learn and develop towards meaningful industry-valued credentials for specific jobs and professions.

Switzerland's, again, work-study CET model provides a strong precedent, where employees undergo continuous training while remaining in the workforce, earning recognised qualifications that offers tangible employment and wage growth. In Singapore, I am encouraged with the recently announced pilot of CET-integrated degree programmes for in-employment diploma holders in advanced manufacturing. So, this offers a structured learning pathway where individuals can train and work concurrently towards a degree qualification.

So, I encourage and strongly urge the Government to extend such structured CET pathways to other professionals, such as in finance, where many individuals already hold degrees but require systematic upgrading to deepen their expertise and stay competitive. By investing in a series of stackable, industry-relevant CET courses, finance professionals can enhance their skills in real-world while working. These practice-based courses should be purposefully designed to count as credit toward postgraduate qualifications, such as advanced certifications, postgraduate diplomas and Master's degrees.

Minimum-entry Criteria Universities

Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Singapore has a skilled worker gap. Remarkably, the recognition that there could be such skilled worker shortages is not new. As far back as the 1980s, observers noted that demographic changes could threaten the viability of economic progress on our island if human resource needs remain unmet. Yet today, we still see reports attesting that as many as four in five companies face workforce talent shortages. This has, we are told, necessitated the continued stream of foreign migrant professionals.

At the same time, many in this House face a seasonal pattern of appeals after examination results are announced. Young residents, as well as their parents, often come to our Meet-the-People Sessions in a desperate effort to appeal for entry for their children into a given tertiary institution or programme of study. Often, this applicant actually possess the necessary scores required for entry. However, the limited number of spaces often mean that these local kids are unable to secure a spot, as spaces are filled by those who obtain grades better than their own.

These two problems, while seemingly unrelated, are actually not. Essentially, almost a half century after the matter of a potential skills shortage was first identified, our local schools seem still unable to fill the nation's tech worker shortfall, despite possessing secondary school students that are sufficiently talented and willing to pursue technically-oriented tertiary education.

One strategy we can consider is to alter the criteria for entry into certain autonomous universities, such as the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS), Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) and Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD), such that they can take in students so long as they meet absolute entry criteria, rather than relative to all applicants for a particular programme.

The proposal is not as pie in the sky as one might imagine. Similar approach to tertiary education is used in other places, such as France, Germany and the state of California in the US. In France, while entry into the private grande école system – and full disclosure, I teach at one such school – is indeed competitive and dependent on relative scores acquired in a national level exam, known as "concours", admission into the public university system is actually generally open to all who have passed the Baccalaureate, which is the equivalent of our local "A" levels.

German universities also are more forgiving with entrance criteria with certain programmes, even practising free admission. Essentially, all applicants that fulfill basic university and entrance qualifications are let in. Standards are maintained by introducing tougher courses in the earlier stages and having students voluntarily drop out. And in the science, engineering, technology and mathematics (STEM) subjects, this could be as high as nine out of 10 students.

And while the prestigious University of California system only guarantees a spot to high school graduates that fall within the top 9% of the state's high school cohort, admission into the next tier, what is known as the California State University system, is actually much more liberal and low-income residents who are first-generation, under-represented college students may even be assured entry into certain majors, subject to a commitment by the student that they complete their studies within four years.

One instinctive argument against this proposal is that grades serve as a filter for whether the potential student is likely to make it into the desired course of study. But this is precisely why the proposal will retain minimum criteria for entry into programmes to ensure that those who embark on a certain course of study have a realistic chance of completion. The key difference is that students that would otherwise meet this threshold do not get rejected, simply because of their relative underperformance.

Another objection is that system may be brutal and if students were to drop out, they could incur a debt burden with no degree to show for it. Relatedly, this also means that, at least in the earlier years, the system will require more funding to cater to a larger matriculating cohort.

But this is precisely what the threshold criteria are for. Those should be chosen to ensure that any student that meets the minimum requirements should be able to successfully complete the course of study. And perhaps, more importantly, if you believe, as I do, that any Singaporean who qualifies for a local university should have the opportunity to pursue a degree, then we should not shy away from expanding the system and set aside the resources necessary to ensure that this is so. In the long run, this could even pay off economically, since employers would be able to hire workers that they need while reducing the cost of searching for talent from abroad.

The third concern is that this liberal approach may end up churning out too many graduates. But in reality, there is a shortage of certain skilled professionals, especially in tech, and companies often rate skills over degrees. Yet, experts say that skills learned in our tertiary institutions do not necessarily align well with their needs on the job. Relevant skills are instead acquired with certification examinations, but the prerequisites or eligibility criteria for many of these certificates are actually incredibly accessible, often requiring only "O" or "N" level credits, and are not accompanied by a need for stellar grades. What we need to ensure, therefore, is a better alignment of training and the graduates that we churn out. Loosening the criteria for entry, while simultaneously tightening the conditions for graduation will help keep our tertiary offerings nimble, since we need to worry less about how failing out already small intakes could pre-emptively decimate programmes.

One may finally argue that removing the competitive entry could weaken the quality of our lauded universities, such as the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Nanyang Technological University (NTU). As suggested earlier, more flexible entry requirements do not appear to have undermined the standing of the best French, German and Californian universities. In any case, the suggestion is limited to the applied tier of our AUs, those that were less oriented toward academic accomplishment and research output to begin with.

The Chairman: Dr Wan Rizal, please take your two cuts together.

Polytechnic Common Entry Programmes

Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Madam, in a dynamic uncertain world, we need to prepare our learners to be nimble and adaptable. Task education should be flexible, yet responsive to students' diverse interests and aspirations. The polytechnic common entry programmes (CEPs) have expanded significantly, allowing students to explore different fields before selecting a specialisation.

With one in four polytechnic students now entering to the CEPs, could MOE share insights on how they have benefitted? Have they gained greater clarity in choosing their specialisation and have retention rates improved?

Beyond exploration, how are polytechnics ensuring that such students receive adequate academic and career guidance? Republic Polytechnic will begin offering broad-based diploma options in Academic Year 2025 (AY2025). Could this model be expanded to provide students with an even greater multidisciplinary exposure?

3.30 pm

How will MOE continue to enhance CEPs to ensure they remain available pathways for students to build relevant skills for the evolving job market?

Teachers' Workload

Madam, our teachers are at the heart of our education system, but many are burdened with administrative duties, taking their time away from students. Technology can help streamline these processes, allowing teachers to focus on what truly matters to them – nurturing and guiding our students.

The pilot feature on Parents Gateway to digitalise absence submissions is a positive step. Could MOE share the initial feedback from this pilot and how the Ministry plans to ensure a smooth nationwide roll-out? Beyond absence submissions, what other digital solutions are being explored to reduce teachers' workloads?

As flexible work arrangements are implemented across schools, how will MOE ensure that there are sufficient teachers, allied educators and administrative staff to support this transition reasonably? Ultimately, how will MOE ensure that technology is used effectively to support our teachers to reduce burnout and focus on nurturing students?

More Support for Special Educational Needs' Officers

Mr Ong Hua Han (Nominated Member): SEN officers play a crucial role in supporting students with special needs. According to MOE, "the number of SEN officers in mainstream schools has increased from around 450 in 2017 to about 680 as of July 2024".

Can the Ministry share if there is a target ideal number of SEN officers in mainstream schools and if so, what this is, and how it plans to continue enhancing the support and development of SEN officers?

Enhancing Lifelong Learning

Dr Wan Rizal: Madam, in a dynamic economy, lifelong learning is no longer optional. It is essential. Many mid-career Singaporeans want to upskill and stay competitive, but challenges, such as financial constraints and balancing work and family, remain.

Extending the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Training Allowance to part-time programmes is a welcome move. Could MOE share how these programmes are selected and how they align with emerging industry demands?

With a 24-month lifetime cap on training allowances, how will MOE support mid-career individuals needing further upskilling beyond this period? Will additional pathways or funding options exist for those in industries undergoing transformation?

As we build a culture of continuous learning, what further steps will MOE take to encourage greater participation, especially among lower-income and vulnerable workers?

Strengthening Self-employed Persons' (SEPs') Employment Resilience

Ms See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member): Freelancers lack access to training and development opportunities that are typically provided for traditional employees by employers. Given that freelancer-dominated sectors, such as arts and culture, media and design, rank among the world's fastest growing and rapidly transforming sectors, it is pressing and critical for the Government to boost training support for affected freelancers, such as arts educators, creative practitioners and media workers.

Could the Ministry share how freelancers can be supported by the new schemes, such as the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme and the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme, for workers studying part-time? Would the Ministry consider a top-up of SkillsFuture Credit (SFC) for freelancers who had utilised 50% or more of their existing SFC?

Freelancers would welcome such boosts in keeping skills relevant and livelihoods viable.

SkillsFuture Training Providers

Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Madam, let me first declare that I am a managing director and senior partner of a firm that does work in the area of skills development.

Budget 2025 continues to reinforce SkillsFuture as a cornerstone of our nation's commitment to lifelong learning and preparing Singaporeans for the opportunities and challenges of tomorrow.

In my conversations with my Woodlands residents, I am heartened that more and more of my residents are becoming aware and increasingly open to going for skills training, even though there are still many sceptics. A big part of it is from their own experiences or experiences of people they know, who have not been able to find a job even after attending multiple skilling programmes.

Madam, landing a job involves more than just attending training. You need to select the right training. The training needs to be effective. You also need to have the skills to search, apply and interview for jobs, network, plan your next career move. All these can be non-trivial.

We also need to build up agency and resilience in our people while we create an enabling environment around removing biases and encouraging companies to hire people with potential and fill in the edges rather than look for a ready-made hire.

With the increased demand for skilling, how will MOE ensure that selected training providers have a good track record of positive employment outcomes? What more can be done to drive positive employment outcomes?

School Sports for All

Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Mdm Chair, getting into a school's sports team can be very competitive these days. Schools usually hold trials to select only the best athletes to represent them at the national school games. Many students want to take up sports like badminton, basketball or football as their co-curricular activity (CCA) in school, only to be disappointed that they cannot get a place in the CCA. Some are left with no choice but to join a CAA they have little interest in.

To cater to students who want to play sports for leisure but lack formal training, schools should open up more recreational sports CCAs for popular sports. Many schools already do this, but some still do not.

To manage limited resources, schools could adjust the number of CCA places to match demand. This way, schools can ensure that every student who wants to participate in sports at their skill level has the opportunity to do so.

On the other end of the spectrum, top performing student athletes who have the potential to represent Singapore at international competitions are often still required to train with their school's sports teams. High performance sports training usually takes place outside of school, at training programmes run by National Sports Associations or private academies.

These student athletes should have the option to be excused from school training and competition so as to be able to better focus on becoming world-class athletes who can compete on the world stage and win medals for Singapore. They should still be allowed to earn LEAPS 2.0 points while doing so.

I will discuss the sports aspect of this further in my cut at the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) COS debate.

Enhancing Procurement for Coaches

Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mdm Chair, in 2022, the National Instructors and Coaches Association (NICA) and MOE established a workgroup to strengthen engagement with MOE instructors, many of whom are freelancers and self-employed. This initiative aimed to enhance collaboration between schools and instructors to improve the quality of CCAs and enrichment programmes for students.

Progress has been made, especially with an inclusive dispute resolution framework set for finalisation in this quarter. However, some issues require further attention.

One key issue is the procurement process for instructors' services. Currently, most schools only procure instructor services at the end of the school year for the next, resulting in a highly compressed and competitive bidding cycle. This process creates several challenges.

First, instructors face job insecurity as they receive little advance notice when their contracts are not renewed. This leaves them with insufficient time to secure alternative employment opportunities.

Second, the lack of a structured handover process between outgoing and incoming instructors disrupts students' learning. Without proper transition planning, students experience interruptions in their training and development.

Third, instructors often bid for multiple contracts to maximise their chances of securing a role. However, some who receive multiple contracts later withdraw their overlapping commitments, leaving schools scrambling to find last-minute replacements. Meanwhile, instructors who do not secure any contracts are left without work until the next bidding cycle.

We need to assess whether GeBIZ is the most suitable procurement process for coaching services. I urge MOE to work with NICA to review the current procurement system and introduce earlier notification of contract renewals or non-renewals, clear handover protocols and a more efficient —

The Chairman: Please round up.

Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui: — matching system between instructors and schools.

Financial Literacy Education in Schools

Mr Ong Hua Han: Madam, one in three Gen Zs and Millennials do not feel confident in making sound financial decisions in times of economic stress. This was from a survey conducted by Etiqa Insurance in 2023. Many young Singaporeans were also found to have relatively low confidence in investing and building emergency funds.

In our fast-changing financial landscape, young Singaporeans have more to grapple with than previous generations. We must support our youths in navigating these new realities.

To improve financial literacy education in Singapore, I would like to suggest a two-fold approach.

First, I urge MOE to take a targeted and more in-depth approach to incorporating financial literacy education in the school curriculum. Financial literacy should be taught in a way that is both relevant to the students' lives and tailored to Singapore's unique financial ecosystem. Students should not leave school without understanding the Central Provident Fund (CPF), housing loans, taxes and insurance. Financial literacy education must also constantly evolve to reflect new financial trends, such as Buy-Now-Pay-Later schemes and cryptocurrency.

Second, expand partnerships and funding for financial literacy programmes. It is crucial to start financial literacy education as early as possible. A strong foundation means that Singaporeans are equipped with the financial know-how to manage money effectively, setting them up for life.

That being said, I fully recognise the heavy workload that our teachers already shoulder. I am not suggesting that teachers bear this responsibility alone. We can tap on experienced external vendors to complement MOE's efforts.

MoneySense already promotes financial literacy through online resources and ad hoc talks, and then there are other organisations, such as The Volunteer Switchboard, who partners with corporates to conduct workshops for a select group of ITE students. By formalising partnerships with more of such organisations and expanding funding behind this, we can increase outreach, build up quality resources and bring in skilled trainers to complement existing efforts.

Imagine a future where every student graduates with the ability to manage their finances responsibly, a future where young Singaporeans feel confident and empowered to make sound financial decisions. By taking action today, we equip our youths with the knowledge and skills to secure their financial future.

Addressing Unhealthy Social Media Use

Miss Rachel Ong (West Coast): Excessive social media use amongst adolescents has been linked to an increased risk of anxiety and depression. In Singapore, a study by the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) found that youths who spend more time – more than three hours daily – on social media are more likely to experience symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress. Addressing this issue requires a multifaceted approach involving families, schools and sustained interventions.

One possible initiative is a disconnect to connect week, where students take a break from social media and engage in meaningful offline activities. While a short break may not change habits, it does encourage reflection on digital consumption and the wisdom to step away from online pressures.

Given these concerns, what steps will the MOE take to promote youth mental health in schools, particularly regarding excessive social media use? Will it consider implementing a disconnect to connect week to support students' well-being?

New Model of Assessment in Education

Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mdm Chair, I rise today to call for a shift in the way students are assessed in our education system. While our students excel in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) tests globally, we must consider whether our current assessment methods create opportunity cost at the expense of future critical skills, such as emotional intelligence, adaptability, creativity and critical thinking.

How are current assessment models aligned with the 21CC that MOE seeks to develop and nurture in our students? Why does Singapore still have an examinations-based system for the "O" levels when the United Kingdom has already moved on from it in 1988 into the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) model, which is more coursework-based in assessing students' learning and offers more flexibility in choosing pathways after?

Case in point, how are teachers marking composition and essay papers? Do we still allocate or deduct marks for correct punctuation and spelling? How can we shift the assessment criteria to focus more on the quality or originality of thought, creative expression and the ability to consider diverse perspectives over the accuracy of spelling and sentence structure?

While MOE has been encouraging schools to approach learning differently with several curriculum revamps in recent years, are our assessment models reflecting these changes? Many students still face stress, anxiety and disengagement due to rigid assessment frameworks. Private tuition is now a $1.8 billion industry in Singapore.

We still hear many stories of teachers who teach for tests or of parents who pressure teachers when they do not. We cannot fault parents for being "kiasu" when the assessment model remains the way it is.

I quote Minister Chan Chun Sing's recent speech at an Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) lecture, "Beyond just being able to distil information, learning to discern truth, quality and relevance has become more critical." How can we evolve our assessment models to capture this new emphasis?

I recommend that MOE revamp the assessment models for the PSLE and "O" levels and shift to a higher proportion of classroom participation, portfolio building, project work, discussions and less on-paper examinations. We already have this in tertiary education. Why not bring it forward to primary and secondary schools, too?

We must prioritise participation, engagement, articulation and other relational skills over technical correctness in the ways we assess children to best prepare them for their future. After all, AI can spell better and ensure accurate grammar better, too. Oral examinations can take a higher weightage and allow students to choose topics of their own interest.

AI can play a role in helping us revamp the way we assess students to capture qualities like engagement level, originality of thought, progress in personal vocabulary and articulation, creativity, confidence and other observations. These can make up a larger portion of weightage, taking priority over paper examinations.

3.45 pm

These qualities are hard for parents to outsource to tuition centres to train for excellence. Instead, parents will need to engage their children at home and in the community in social interactions and conversations that build their perspectives and help them develop independence of thought.

Physical and Mental Wellness Education

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Madam, on physical wellness education, MOE's Desired Outcomes of Education emphasise healthy habits and physical activity for primary and secondary school students, with post-secondary students expected to "pursue a healthy lifestyle". However, many healthy habits formed in school, if at all, do not carry over into adulthood.

Could MOE clarify if there are metrics to measure the success of physical health education? If so, what are these metrics and outcomes? If not, are there plans to strengthen the link between school physical health education and healthy adult lifestyles?

On mental wellness education, over the past years, we have constantly spoken in this House about supporting the mental health of Singaporeans. This is important because we have seen that Singaporeans consistently rank one of the highest in stress levels around the world. Besides families, schools play a part in addressing this issue.

I am concerned that our schools might take a "medical model" approach to mental health, in which students' mental health struggles are seen as problems to be fixed quickly rather than fostering lifelong stress management skills, with our varied personalities.

Could MOE provide an update on mental health education in schools? What are the expected outcomes and what future plans are being considered to strengthen mental wellness education to achieve these outcomes?

Parenting for Wellness

Dr Wan Rizal: Madam, parents play a crucial role in shaping children's mental well-being and resilience. In today's digital age, where young people face increasing stress and online risks, the Parenting for Wellness (PfW) Initiative is a timely effort to equip parents with practical tools and strategies.

Could MOE share how the PfW Toolbox for Parents is distributed and how its effectiveness is measured? Are there plans to expand outreach, such as partnering with community groups to better engage parents from diverse backgrounds?

Beyond resources, early intervention is key. How will MOE ensure that schools have sufficient support systems and trained personnel to assess mental health risks and intervene effectively? Will there be structured policies to encourage help-seeking while addressing students' concerns about stigma or future repercussions? As we continue to strengthen mental health support for youths, what further steps will MOE take to empower parents to safeguard their children's well-being?

The Chairman: Minister Chan Chun Sing.

The Minister for Education (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Chair, MOE thanks Members for their suggestions, comments and support.

Our education system has achieved much, but much is at stake. Much more needs to be done for us to stay relevant, stay ahead and stay together.

We have built a system that has uplifted our people amidst the challenges and opportunities through the years, and we have fostered a sense of cohesion and unity amongst Singaporeans, despite our diverse heritage and backgrounds.

Our foundations are sound. Our system is functioning well. But we must not be self-congratulatory. We can easily be bypassed if we become irrelevant, overtaken if we become complacent and disrupted if we fail to understand the pivotal forces shaping our world.

Our goals remain unchanged: for Singapore to defy the odds of history to survive and thrive; for our people to be the best versions of themselves; and for us to distinguish ourselves by our ideals of excellence, our unity and our unyielding spirit to overcome challenges.

But our approach, policies and mindsets must continue to evolve with the times. As the global order fragments and geopolitical tensions worsen, we need to hone our ability to bridge divides, connect diverse perspectives and forge partnerships. As economies become increasingly volatile and protectionist, we need to secure our relevance by adapting to new contexts, creating new value propositions and finding answers to tomorrow's questions ahead of time.

As societies fracture amidst rising inequality, heightened insecurities and divisive contestation in the information space, we need to strengthen our identity amidst these divisive forces to stay resilient and united, recognising that the competition is not amongst ourselves, but between Team Singapore and the rest of the world. As technology progresses and challenges convention, we need to master the new while integrating the best of the old to create breakthroughs in how we learn, teach and earn our keep.

Ms Denise Phua asked how we will provide a future-ready education for all. I will focus on two structural shifts we have embarked on to achieve this.

First, we must recognise, respect and embrace a diversity of talents to enable Singaporeans to thrive even amidst the uncertainties and untidiness of the world. We need to shift away from the narrow definitions of success, which may make us proficient in select domains but brittle as a system. We must also avoid "teaching to the average", which does not bring out the best in anyone. Instead, we must do better, by empowering Singaporeans to build on their different strengths, pursue excellence in their respective fields and contribute to society in their own ways.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Second, we must learn for life beyond schools and to practise continuous meritocracy. Singapore is no longer playing catch up. We are at the frontier. But to stay at the top of our game, we need to create new value propositions for ourselves and the world, by combining the strong foundation we set for our students in formal education, with the rigour and innovation we see in frontier industries. We cannot afford to be the proverbial frog in the well, or to build a cart behind closed doors, or as the Chinese say, "闭门造车".

The school cannot be our world. Instead, the world must be our school. We must remain open to different perspectives and work with people from different backgrounds and nationalities to enrich our thinking and solutions. And we must do this not just in the first 15 years of formal education, but also in the next 50 years of life beyond the formal school system.

I will elaborate on what we have done and what we plan to do in these two areas.

First, we need to embrace our diversity of talents. This reflects our aspiration as a society to recognise every individual's unique strengths and equip every student as best as we can to fulfil their aspirations.

In recent years, we have turned our focus to developing our students holistically. We want to nurture our students' resilience, adaptability and motivation to learn for life, and empower them to take ownership of their own education journey. To achieve this, we are gradually reducing an over-emphasis on academic results and moving towards more holistic development of diverse skills and attributes. We want to "Learn More, Test Less".

We removed mid-year examinations across all levels. We replaced the PSLE T-score with Achievement Levels to avoid an overly fine differentiation of examination results. Direct School Admission provides students with an alternative pathway to enter their preferred schools. And we will certainly take into account Mr Patrick Tay's suggestions in our current review. Ms Denise Phua and Ms Hazel Poa asked for a through-train from primary to secondary school. Ms Hazel Poa also asked for smaller class sizes.

Chair, MOE takes all well-intentioned ideas seriously. However, we should be clear what are the ends we are trying to achieve or which problems we are trying to solve, before we jump into our preferred solutions or ways and we should also be cognisant of the means required, trade-offs and unintended consequences of any well-intentioned ideas.

Members can refer to the discussions and considerations shared previously in COS 2023 and 2024, and more recently, in my speech at the MOE x NIE x IPS Lecture to appreciate the associated issues, operational challenges and opportunities.

At the secondary level, Full Subject-Based Banding (Full SBB) has been implemented for more than a year now. This gives our students the flexibility to customise their learning in each subject and at different stages of their learning journeys – reflecting our open, continuous and compassionate meritocracy.

School leaders and teachers have shared with us that their students are taking greater ownership of their learning. Subject classes provide appropriate stretch for each student. Meanwhile, mixed form classes create more opportunities for students from different backgrounds to interact with and learn from one another. These positive outcomes are only possible because of our educators' commitment. It is not an easy task. I would like to thank them for the work that they have put in, to recognise the diversity of our students and maximise their potential.

But, Chair, we are not done. We are judiciously embracing technology, such as AI to complement our teaching capabilities and capacities to move towards the effective class size of one, where we can mass personalise teaching and learning for our students. This will also refocus our educators' time and bandwidth on the higher needs students and hone the higher faculties of our students.

With Full SBB, we also announced adjustments to the admission criteria for polytechnic, to recognise students with more diverse subject level combinations.

For students exploring the pre-university pathway, we want to create more time and space to build on their strengths and develop them holistically. Hence, we will adjust the admission criteria for JC, starting from the 2028 intake.

JC admission scores are currently based on the L1R5. This was introduced in 1989 to specify the subjects counted towards JC admission. Previously, many were not prepared for JC and eventually performed poorly at the "A" levels. Since then, passing rates for the "A" levels have increased significantly from 65% to over 90%, and student readiness for JC is no longer a major concern.

Mr Darryl David will be glad to know that we will be revising the JC admission criteria from L1R5 to L1R4, by counting one fewer subject. This means that students will be able to take fewer subjects or take some subjects at a less demanding level, depending on their interests and aptitudes. They will thus be able to devote more time and effort to pursue their interests, deepen their communication and collaboration skills through CCAs, and uncover new strengths through school programmes.

Members can be assured that we are not loosening criteria for JC admission. We will retain the requirements for language and three relevant subjects – one in the Humanities, one in Mathematics or Science and the final one in any of these subjects to be included in L1R4. JC-going students will still have the foundation they need for JC.

On the other hand, we are also not tightening the criteria. With one fewer subject counted, students will need a gross aggregate score of 16 points, rather than 20 points, to be eligible for JC. This is a natural recalibration given that five subjects will be counted, rather than six. Based on our simulations, we expect that a similar proportion of students will continue to qualify for JCs. We will monitor their academic outcomes to ensure that students are benefiting from their JC programme.

With one fewer subject included, we will also adjust the cap on bonus points from four to three. Bonus points recognise key aspects of our students' holistic development, such as in CCAs and other language programmes. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Shawn Huang will elaborate more on CCAs and our review.

I will share more about learning of our mother tongues. Bilingualism is a fundamental part of our national identity and our competitive advantage to build bridges in a fragmented world. As announced previously, MOE will be taking additional steps to encourage the learning of mother tongue languages (MTL).

In the preschools, we are focusing on early exposure to MTL. We are piloting this in two MOE Kindergartens (MKs), and will expand this to four more MKs in 2026, and share our approach with other preschool operators. Secondary school students will have more opportunities to offer Higher MTL.

These and other MOE moves will help but they are not a panacea. Ultimately, our families and society must come together with our schools to create a conducive environment for the learning and use of mother tongues. If mother tongues are not used in homes and communities, they become second languages rather than mother tongues. What schools do, our families and society need to reinforce.

4.00 pm

We have made policy changes over many years to reduce an over-emphasis on academics. But to make a lasting impact, mindsets and culture must change too. Changing our scoring systems or assessment models as suggested or reducing mid-year examinations will not reduce pressure on students if we, as parents and as a society, compete to the last decimal point and pile on what MOE removes and reduces.

We must all recognise that academic results, while important, are not the sole definition or determinant of success. I invite parents and schools to work together to help our students to identify their own strengths and talents and to realise their potential.

Maybe at this point, Chair, I will just share a short story of an interaction I had with a group of JC students some years back. They told me that they were very stressed. So, I asked them: "Would it help if I cut your syllabus by half?"

They all paused and looked at me, wondering if I was pulling their leg. After a long pause, they almost all replied in unison, "Minister, please don't do that. If you cut our syllabus by half, the stress would be even worse."

I asked them, "Why?" One brave girl replied, "Sir, if we are only competing for half of the content, we will literally compete until the third decimal point rather than the second decimal point and we will all be more stressed."

Since they thought I was pulling their leg, I thought to counter-propose to them: "Perhaps then, I should increase your content by two times." They all did not know whether to laugh or whether the Minister for Education was being serious or not.

But that was not the end of the story. After a while, I paused and I asked them, "If you have some free time today, can you tell me something that you will want to learn, that your teacher didn't tell you to and your parents didn't ask you to do so?"

They took a long time before they gave me any answer. I was rather sad.

I want all my students not to be circumscribed by what is in the syllabus. I hope all my students, each and every one of them, will find something that they are passionate in, go forth and learn regardless of whether it is in the syllabus or not, so that they can each realise their own potential and bring their own unique strengths to the table to make for a more resilient Singapore. Hence, I am under no illusion that while we reduce what is counted for JC admission, if our mindsets do not change, we would not go very far.

Chair, as the Prime Minister announced last year, facilities in all schools will be progressively enhanced to make better use of technology and support collaboration. For JCs, MOE had previously announced the JC Rejuvenation Programme to enhance teaching and learning to cater for future needs.

Under Phase 1, four JC campuses are being redeveloped – Anderson Serangoon, Jurong Pioneer, Temasek and Yishun Innova – to have enhanced facilities, such as seminar rooms and more configurable spaces. This will support more student-centred, experiential and collaborative learning. Staff will also have multi-functional workspaces to promote interactions and professional development. Phase 1 is in progress and all four JCs are expected to operate from their rejuvenated campuses from 2028.

MOE is now developing plans for Phase 2, which will cover four other JCs – Anglo-Chinese, Catholic, National and Victoria. These are our next-oldest JC campuses. MOE is working with JCs on their infrastructure plans, including possibly moving them to new locations. As part of the plans, we are also discussing how the JCs can develop new programmes, work with industries and serve the community around them. We will share more details in due course.

Chair, from embracing our diversity of talents, I will now move on to our second structural shift – learning for life.

Over the years, we have significantly expanded opportunities for Singaporeans to pursue higher education and prepare themselves for the workforce. For example, ITE students can take up diplomas to build on their foundations, gain work-ready skills and get good jobs. Last year, we announced the ITE Progression Award, to help ITE graduates upskill early and boost their savings to support their long-term goals. Second Minister Maliki will provide an update on this.

Most education systems focus on preparing and equipping the young to enter the workforce. But even as we train our younger generation in skills that are in demand today, these skills will ultimately atrophy if they are not used or refreshed throughout life. Skills that are not frequently used or deliberately honed will eventually become obsolete with technology and demand changes. And the older generations, who had fewer opportunities in the past, are at an even higher risk of having outdated skills.

This is why we started SkillsFuture in 2015: to invest in and encourage our people to embrace a culture of lifelong learning and enable workers to develop their skills and stay relevant through their careers. We have enhanced accessibility and affordability of training programmes. We have invested resources to understand how adults learn.

The mindsets of workers and enterprises have also started to shift. Now, about half a million individuals take up training courses every year – 20% of our Singaporean workforce. Our goal is not just quantity, but more importantly, quality and relevance of the courses.

Lifelong learning must continue to be Singapore's competitive advantage and SkillsFuture will be a pillar of our social compact. We recognised this through Forward Singapore by turning SkillsFuture into a key pillar of our social compact. We must partner enterprises and training providers even more closely, to provide learning opportunities and ladders at multiple junctures. And our workers must never be afraid to pivot quickly to seize new opportunities to relearn, un-learn and keep learning.

Mid-career workers are a key focus group. For most, it would have been some years since they were last in school. With advances in technology, their skills may need a refresh. Yet, they may face other competing priorities or challenges in taking time off for the training they need.

To help them overcome these barriers, last year, we announced the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme for Singaporeans aged 40 and above. This includes the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Training Allowance of up to $3,000 per month to help cover some of the income they may lose out on while attending selected full-time courses. Applications for the Training Allowance for full-time training will open on 10 March, for eligible training from 1 April this year.

This year, as the Prime Minister announced in the Budget speech, we are expanding the Training Allowance to cover part-time training as well. Mid-career workers can continue working and drawing their pay when attending part-time training, but they will have learning expenses, such as books and transport. From early next year, we will provide a fixed allowance of $300 per month to defray some of these expenses. This will give workers some flexibility to choose between part-time or full-time training, depending on their specific needs and personal circumstances. Minister of State Gan Siow Huang will share more on SkillsFuture.

To cater to different learners' needs, we established the SUSS as our sixth AU in 2017. SUSS offers programmes that cater to the needs of different learners, including working adults. Many classes are run after working hours. Short courses can be counted towards a qualification or degree. SUSS has enabled more Singaporeans to pursue a subsidised degree, both fresh out of school and at a later stage in life. Since becoming an AU, SUSS has already seen more than 22,000 graduates pass through its doors.

Currently, SUSS is spread across multiple rented premises, including its main location at Clementi. This is not an ideal arrangement. It is time for SUSS to have its own, consolidated campus to accommodate its growing enrolment. As the Prime Minister said in his Budget speech, SUSS' permanent campus will be in the city, easily accessible to learners of all ages. It will be built at the site and vicinity of the former Rochor Centre.

SUSS' new campus will go beyond being just a building. Its design will enable SUSS' staff and students to create new knowledge and new value propositions with and for industry and society. It will allow SUSS to connect with alumni, industry and community partners, across generations, to bridge diverse perspectives and transcend diversity and differences, and it must contribute to society, befitting SUSS' vision to inspire learning for life and impact lives.

SUSS must be a beacon for lifelong learning, continuous, compassionate meritocracy and broader definitions of success. We will start mobilising the ideas and energies of the students, staff and alumni of SUSS to design the campus and bring it into reality by the mid-2030s.

Chair, MOE cannot achieve these ambitions alone. We need the partnership and support of our parents, society and industry.

Mr Darryl David, Dr Wan Rizal and Assoc Prof Razwana asked how we are supporting and developing our teachers. Previously, I announced measures that MOE is taking to set boundaries and expectations for teachers. Our teachers have a duty of care as much as the duty to grow for our students.

Teachers should not be expected to be everywhere, doing everything, at all times, for everyone. Over-provision, over-structuring and over-protection of our students can paradoxically stunt their growth, even if they perform and excel in the immediate term.

Letting students make decisions for themselves, take care of one another, and resolve conflicts amongst themselves are all important lifeskills. We, as adults, parents and educators, should not be too quick to jump in, take over and deprive them of opportunities to learn and grow.

MOE has refreshed the Guidelines for School-Home Partnership to provide clearer guidance on how parents and teachers can work together positively and respectfully. We will stand with our teachers to protect them from unreasonable expectations and conduct.

We will continue to streamline our teachers' administrative duties with technology. A new feature on Parents Gateway allows parents to electronically submit documents for their child's absence, so that teachers do not need to manually track these. This will be rolled out to all schools by the end of this year.

To inspire the best of each generation to teach, we must also develop our educators well, so that, in turn, they are well equipped to bring out the best in future generations. MOE and NIE are reviewing the 16-month Postgraduate Diploma in Education programme to ensure that it remains relevant and meets the evolving needs of new hires – both fresh graduates and mid-career individuals.

Beyond pedagogical skills, teachers will need to build up their skills to nurture the socio-emotional development of our children and to partner with parents. The review is expected to be completed by the end of this year.

The Teacher Work Attachment Plus programme sends teachers on short-term attachments and learning journeys to broaden their perspectives and share the culture of curiosity and lifelong learning with their students. Our schools and IHLs will continue to closely partner industry to tighten the nexus between frontier technology and academia and to create new value propositions; to ensure that our students and workforce are equipped with relevant skills; and to evolve our human resource (HR) practices to respect and reward these skills.

Chair, I have laid out the two structural shifts we must pursue in our next bound, for us to truly sustain a system that can realise our people's potential, embracing our diversity of talents and learning for life. While many may share a similar vision, few are able to achieve this because it is not an easy task. We will only realise our aspirations if we have the right ingredients. I will list what has brought us here so far and what will bring us forward.

First, a stable and consistent Government that enables both policymakers and educators to think long term; second, a society that respects, invests in and inspires its best people to join the ranks of educators for the next generation; third, a teaching force determined to do what is right for our children, nurturing their holistic and lifelong development beyond their immediate grades; fourth, a partnership built on trust, between educators and families, as we instill the right values and shared perspectives with our children; fifth, a robust academic-industry nexus that achieves speed and relevance in our curriculum; sixth, a sense of vigilance to keep watch on global forces, from geostrategic to economic, societal and technology, that impact our survival and success, constantly challenging ourselves to adjust, adapt and stay ahead.

Next, an open mindset that embraces those who are different, leveraging on their diverse capabilities to complement our own and to create new value propositions together; a nation that respects, celebrates and affirms the diversity of talents which makes us resilient; an ethos of continuous and compassionate meritocracy that inspires us to surpass ourselves throughout life and excel together as Team Singapore, rather than surpassing one another in internal zero-sum contests; and finally, a true mettle in our people, which propels us to set our sights ever higher and to turn our constraints into our winning edge.

4.15 pm

Chair, we are here because the Singaporeans before us gave their all to this generation and it is upon our shoulders to do the same for future generations. Let us all – Government, educators, parents, employers and industry – refresh our commitment to pay this forward so that every generation of Singaporeans can aspire to a better future and that every generation of Singaporeans will define our success by how we enable the next generation to do even better than ours. [Applause.]

The Chairman: Minister Maliki Osman.

The Second Minister for Education (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman): Mr Chairman, we have continually evolved our education system to meet the diverse and growing needs of all Singaporeans and to ensure that every child in our country has the opportunity to grow, blossom and realise their full potential, regardless of their starting point in life. I will focus on two areas MOE will do more in.

First, we will strengthen support for students with SEN. Second, we will expand and enhance our post-secondary pathways to ensure that students can find different avenues to succeed.

Let me start with our students with SEN. Mr Ong Hua Han, Mr Darryl David, Ms Denise Phua and Mr Patrick Tay have asked about our support for students with SEN in their education journey.

Mr Chair, the needs of our students with SEN are varied and multifaceted and require support from the whole of community, including MOE, Government agencies and SSAs, at different stages of their journey. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong shared the Government's plans to support persons with disabilities in their work and daily lives as part of this year's Budget. I will focus on our efforts during the schooling years. My MSF colleagues will touch on the support provided in the workplace and the community.

MOE's priority is to provide good education for students with SEN, whether they attend a mainstream or SPED schools. Today, about 30,000 SEN students, or four in five, attend our mainstream schools. That is, 80% of our SEN students attend mainstream schools. The remaining 8,500 – with moderate to severe SEN – receive special support in our SPED schools.

We start by ensuring that these children have a strong start in their education journey, as we do for their peers in our mainstream schools. Well before their primary school years, MOE collaborates with hospitals to guide parents and caregivers on choosing suitable school settings and support to meet their child's needs.

During the preschool years, children with developmental needs can also participate in early intervention programmes. These programmes are specifically designed to provide additional support for children in areas, such as speech and language, social skills and motor skills.

I encourage parents to tap on these avenues and work with relevant healthcare and early childhood professionals. Early engagement between parents and professionals often leads to better outcomes, allowing us to provide the right support at the earliest opportunity. By addressing these needs early, we lay a strong foundation for the future learning journey of these students.

We have put in additional resources for children with less-severe SEN and who can access the national curriculum to make a smoother transition into mainstream schools. One example is the TRANsition Support for Integration (TRANSIT), which we launched in 2021 to support schools in preparing children who may need additional support as they enter Primary 1. As of January 2025, we have implemented TRANSIT in 98% of primary schools. By 2026, we will extend TRANSIT to all primary schools.

In mainstream schools, our teachers undergo training to support our diverse learners in the classroom before they enter the teaching service. There are also around eight teachers with additional training in special needs in every primary and secondary schools.

Beyond teachers, we have grown our number of SEN officers from 450 in 2016 to nearly 750 in 2024. Today, all primary and secondary schools have SEN officers who work closely with teachers, school counsellors and parents to support the students. I want to assure Members that we are continually strengthening our support for our SEN officers by providing access to professional development opportunities to enhance their skills.

For students enrolled in SPED schools, we agree with Mr Patrick Tay on the importance of working closely with partner agencies, SSAs and families to support their diverse needs. Our priority is ensuring that students, teachers and leaders across all SPED schools have access to the same kind of developmental opportunities and support, as do their colleagues in our mainstream schools.

We can only achieve this by moving together, not as 25 separate SPED schools but as one SPED sector, so that we can maximise the potential of the SPED ecosystem and better support our SPED students. This is why we have strengthened our collaborations with the SPED sector over the years to enhance the accessibility and quality of education in our SPED schools.

Let me focus on three enhancements.

First, we will continue to raise the quality of curriculum in our SPED schools. In the past, there was no common curriculum among our SPED schools as each SSA leading their school developed their own curriculum. This resulted in diverse teaching and learning practices as well as schooling experiences for their students.

Between 2020 and 2024, we worked closely with our SPED schools to co-develop and implement seven SPED Teaching and Learning Syllabuses (TLS), giving more detailed guidance to the overarching SPED curriculum framework articulated in 2012. These syllabuses were progressively introduced across diverse domains – from visual arts to social-emotional learning as well as communication and language.

With the completion of TLS in 2024, we now have a national SPED curriculum across all SPED schools to pave the next lap of excellence in teaching and learning.

Having visited several SPED schools, I am personally encouraged by how our SPED practitioners, both educators and allied professionals, have leveraged the curriculum to deliver engaging lessons that meet the wide-ranging students' needs. I thank our educators and partners in the SPED community, who have worked tirelessly with us to develop this national SPED curriculum and encourage the broader SPED fraternity to deepen the use of these resources.

Second, we will partner with schools to better integrate digital tools in our SPED schools. Today, we have a range of technologies and applications to reduce the workload of teachers in our mainstream schools. So, for example, we have applications that facilitate communication between teachers and parents. Some of us who are parents, who are in schools today, we know that teachers will be familiar with using Parents Gateway to liaise with parents.

Our SPED schools, on the other hand, have different systems and processes to manage their administrative work because they are different organisations with different needs. There is room for greater productivity. So, for example, while teachers in mainstream schools can leverage technologies to track their students' progress and learning outcomes, some educators in our SPED schools do so manually today.

We are working with SPED schools and our SSAs to explore possible digital solutions for SPED school processes, including the potential extension of existing MOE systems to our SPED schools. We need to study this carefully though, to account for the diverse needs of our SPED students, parents as well as our SPED teachers.

For example, a parent of a child with SEN will have a significantly different admissions process and experience from a parent with a child in a mainstream school. While the process of applying to a mainstream school can be largely automated, SPED schools will need additional information from parents and professionals to better understand the child's needs. We will explore this collaboration, introduce these digital solutions and will share the outcomes when they are ready.

Third, we will work closely with our partners in the community to strengthen the collective expertise and professional creed among our SPED educators. We have worked with SSAs to progressively set up SPED Communities of Practice (COPs) as a platform for practitioners in schools, educators and SSAs to collaborate professionally. The platform will support SPED educators in keeping up with new practices in the sector and across the many sub-specialisations.

We established the inaugural SPED COP for Multiple Disabilities last October, led by Cerebral Palsy Alliance Singapore, with members from Rainbow Centre and Asian Women's Welfare Association (AWWA). Another SPED COP for Autism will be underway in the second half of 2025.

Mr Chairman, MOE's support for students with SEN does not stop at schools. We also ensure that they transition well into higher education and the workplace. An increasing number of students with SEN progress from our mainstream and SPED schools into our post-secondary education institutions, including our ITEs.

Today, ITE has a strong ecosystem in place to help students with SEN maximise their potential. These include dedicated SEN Support Officers and Education and Career Coaches as well as partners like SG Enable. To strengthen support for students with SEN to transit from classrooms to the workplace, ITE and SG Enable started a programme last year to provide them with further internship and employment support.

This was what Mr Darryl David had asked earlier. Under this programme, students with SEN undergo training in areas, such as personal grooming, resume writing and interview preparation. These students are then placed in suitable internship roles. Members would be pleased to know that ITE and SGE work very closely with participating students and employers to ensure that these internships are calibrated to meet the students' learning needs.

One student, for example, in this programme, is Joseph, a Year 2 student with autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in ITE's Higher Nitec in Retail and Online Business course. ITE helped Joseph secure an internship at the Uniqlo outlet at Waterway Point. Joseph initially had found it difficult to adjust to the work environment with high footfall and busy operations throughout the day.

To support Joseph, a job coach from TOUCH Community Services visited him weekly at the store to train him on work skills, including communication, problem solving and interpersonal skills. Very hands-on. The coaches was assigned personally to attend to students, like Joseph, during the internship experience.

He was also given opportunities by Uniqlo to learn and apply these skills around the store. Two months into the internship, Joseph had grown significantly and was awarded Best Customer Service Award by the store, just within two months of his internship. We are very pleased with that and we hope more students like Joseph will benefit from internship opportunities.

So, ITE and SGE are working closely to scale-up the programme to benefit more students. ITE will expand the internship support provided so that more students with SEN can benefit from such structured job support.

Ms Denise Phua asked about supporting continuing education for persons with disabilities. Mr Chairman, their learning needs are diverse and complex, as we all know. In addition to specialised training opportunities curated by SGE, we have been working with training providers to make mainstream training programmes more accessible to persons with disabilities. This is a work-in-progress.

More importantly, the lifelong learning ecosystem for these individuals must be well-integrated with inclusive employment models and opportunities. This is why we take a whole-of-society approach, with MSF and SGE taking the lead to support their lifelong learning journey.

4.30 pm

Joseph's journey illustrates how an ecosystem of educators, employers, dedicated agencies and job coaches can come together to support learning, internship and employment opportunities for SEN individuals. I hope that there will be more of such stories as we work together to build an inclusive society.

Mr Chairman, beyond supporting those in need, we will also provide multiple pathways to meet the diverse aspirations of our students.

For our students at their post-secondary level, we want to equip them with work-ready skills to thrive in the future economy.

For ITE students, we have made good progress in curriculum redesign. Starting with selected courses from AY2022, ITE introduced a new enhanced three-year curricular structure leading directly to a Higher Nitec certification. This curricular redesign streamlined the two-year Nitec plus the two-year Higher Nitec structure, providing a more integrated pathway to equip our ITE students with deeper skills and a robust foundation for future skills upgrading. Around 15,000 students have benefited thus far. The first cohort graduates this July and has enjoyed the rigorous curriculum and extended industry attachments. We hope they will enter the workforce empowered with a renewed sense of confidence. More students can look forward to these experiences, as ITE transitions all remaining courses to the enhanced structure next year.

Our support for ITE students also continues after they graduate. Last year, we introduced the ITE Progression Award (IPA), which provides young ITE graduates with a total of $15,000 to upskill to a diploma earlier in their careers. We recognise that many ITE graduates aspire to upgrade their qualifications with higher level skills and can benefit from financial support to defray education costs and boost their savings. I am pleased to share that by end March, we would have awarded around $90 million to support the upgrading journeys of about 12,000 ITE graduates who enrolled in or completed their diplomas in 2024. I congratulate all of our 12,000 ITE graduates who have benefited from the IPA.

To support our ITE graduates' different upskilling needs, we will extend the IPA to those who are upskilling via diplomas offered under the Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) from 1 June this year. This means that the IPA will be extended to more courses beyond those offered by ITE and the polytechnics.

These WSQ diplomas are aligned to the Skills Framework and allow individuals to acquire skills and credentials to access good jobs. With this expansion, more than 30 diploma programmes will be eligible for the IPA, on top of the 300 eligible programmes that we already have today.

Let me move on now to polytechnic students.

Mr Chairman, for polytechnic students, we piloted new ways of learning, such as flexible curriculum workloads for students and short-term work attachments. Over 1,000 students have participated in these pilots, with nine in 10 reporting that these programmes have helped them. Learning from the pilots, all our polytechnics will allow all students to customise their curriculum load. We will also work with institutions to provide students with a range of industry exposure opportunities earlier.

Beyond these efforts, we will encourage our polytechnic students to explore their interests and develop skills along the way through CEPs. Under the CEP, students can explore different specialisations within a sector through a common semester, before deciding on a diploma of their choice.

Dr Wan Rizal would be happy to know that since its launch in 2017, the number of CEPs has increased over four times to 25 today. They collectively provide access to 75% of all diplomas. While students can still choose specialised diplomas directly, the number of students entering CEPs has also increased to 25% of each polytechnic cohort, up from 10% in 2017.

We will continue to work with our institutions to innovate and provide space for students to broaden their exposure and competencies.

From AY2025, all schools in Republic Polytechnic (RP) will offer a broad-based diploma option for students. They will cater to students who desire to both engage in multidisciplinary learning within their cluster and gain specialised skills through a selected major. For example, rather than specialising in a specific domain of engineering, such as aviation or robotics, students can choose to enter the Diploma in Engineering.

While of the same duration as other diplomas, which is three years, this diploma provides broad-based training in essential skills related to the engineering sector like design, programming and data analysis, allowing students to major in Innovation and Design, Project Management and Sustainable Technology, depending on their interests. After graduating, students will have the flexibility to take on a wider range of jobs across different engineering domains. In this case, students will also have the option to pursue minors to broaden their knowledge or deepen their expertise in their respective disciplines. So, we hope the RP experience will spur other polytechnics to also consider new opportunities for their respective students.

Mr Chairman, allow me to very quickly continue in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Chairman, after 60 years of Independence, we continue to invest in the education of Singaporeans. We will continue to work hard to support the diverse aspirations of students, strengthen support for students with different needs and enhance post-secondary education pathways. With Singapore's rapidly changing economic landscape, Singaporeans need to be constantly ready to upgrade themselves with new skills to remain relevant in the working world – by embodying lifelong learning in themselves and their lives.

We are deeply concerned and understand the challenges faced by families with children who have special needs. Their journey is difficult, but they remain steadfast in facing the demands of raising their children. We will strengthen our support for students with SEN and their families. We will work closely with the social services agencies and other agencies to enhance curriculum support for students as well as strengthen professional development for educators in SPED schools.

We also recognise the importance of deepening students' interest in their mother tongue languages. With the revised eligibility criteria for Higher Mother Tongue Language in secondary schools, students who excel in Malay Language can take Higher Malay Language, regardless of their overall academic performance. This will also expose them to a variety of literary texts and complex issues, to deepen their appreciation towards Malay culture and expand their worldview. We will continue to provide specialised programmes to strengthen our students’ proficiency of the Malay Language, to develop future stewards of Malay language and culture.

We will also provide multiple pathways to meet the diverse aspirations of our students, and look forward to more students benefiting from the transition of all ITE courses to the newly enhanced three-year ITE curricular structure by Academic Year 2026. To provide opportunities for more ITE graduates to upskill via a diploma, we will extend the IPA to diploma courses offered under the Singapore WSQ. We hope more of our graduates can make skills upgrading a theme in their lifelong learning journey.

(In English): Mr Chairman, to conclude, MOE is committed to ensuring that all children, regardless of their background, have the opportunity to reach their fullest potential, with great care and attention, and in partnership with parents and teachers, and our fellow Singaporeans. We will ensure that the seeds we plant in our education system today grow into a thriving Singapore for generations to come.

The Chairman: Minister of State Gan Siow Huang.

The Minister of State for Education (Ms Gan Siow Huang): Mr Chairman, our nation's SkillsFuture story started in 2015. Our aim was to help Singaporeans develop to their fullest potential throughout life and also to build a fair and inclusive society.

In the same year, we introduced the SkillsFuture Credit Scheme, giving $500 to Singaporeans, to empower adults to continue to learn, upskill and reskill, whether in their early career, mid-career or silver years. Singaporeans use the Credit to improve their employment prospects or simply to pursue their interests and acquire skills to lead more fulfilling lives.

In 2020, we embarked on the Next Bound of SkillsFuture to strengthen enterprise ownership of upskilling. It is challenging but necessary to strengthen the link between individual upskilling, employment outcomes and business competitiveness. We stepped up efforts to support employers in building up workplace learning and capabilities in upskilling their workers. We also pioneered the SkillsFuture Queen Bees.

This marked a key shift to engage industry leaders as queen bees to uplift their sectors with skills advisory and training support for companies. Today, SSG has appointed 37 SkillsFuture Queen Bees in 14 sectors, benefiting 5,300 companies in these sectors. ST Engineering Land Systems Ltd is the latest appointed SkillsFuture Queen Bee, supporting the precision engineering sector. It will work with National Trades Union Congress' (NTUC's) Company Training Committee, allowing companies in precision engineering to also benefit from NTUC's expertise and resources.

This deliberate shift in focus has seen results. The number of employers participating in training supported by SSG has doubled from around 12,000 in 2018 to more than 24,000 in 2024 and the majority are SMEs. In the last three years, SSG disbursed about $440 million annually in course fee subsidies. More than 40% of the subsidies went to trainees who were sponsored by their companies. Companies that sponsored workers for training also saw positive returns in productivity, as seen in a Ministry of Trade and Industry study in 2021.

In line with these efforts, the Government has been stepping up expenditure on CET, from $0.5 billion in 2015, to more than $1 billion in 2024. With the investments, we significantly enhanced our landscape of industry-relevant training programmes, catering to training needs for adults across different ages, professions and sectors, and we have helped more individuals and employers access such training through enhanced subsidies, especially for mid-careerists and SMEs.

While the training participation rate of the resident labour force fell, we saw an increase in the number of employees sponsored by their companies for SSG-supported training programmes. In 2024, more than 550,000 individuals, and that is about one-fifth of our local workforce, took up training with subsidies from SSG, about a 7% increase compared to 2023.

Ms Foo Mee Har suggested that we target funding at programmes with stronger employment outcomes. We fully agree with that. In fact, SSG has already moved in this direction. From this year, the highest level of SSG's funding is given only to courses that deliver strong manpower outcomes, such as the SkillsFuture Work-Study Programmes which combine classroom learning with structured on-the-job training.

Today, SkillsFuture has become one of the key pillars of our refreshed social compact. The success of the SkillsFuture movement must ultimately be measured by whether Singaporeans have the confidence and competence to seize emerging opportunities in life and also whether enterprises can find skilled workers among the local workforce to capture new business opportunities. To this end, we must continue to strengthen the key partnerships between employers, individuals and training providers. They are the cornerstone of the SkillsFuture movement.

4.45 pm

Let me highlight the priorities for SkillsFuture going forward.

First, deepening the involvement of employers in skills development and training must remain a key priority. Employers complement the Government in skills investment and create enabling conditions to support workers' upskilling. They help inform individuals' training decisions when they identify their skills needs and articulate them. Employers can also create greater confidence for workers when they recognise the skills and competencies attained.

We will double down on our current suite of support measures in helping employers and enterprises, especially SMEs, take relevant skills action. For example, by providing jobs and skills insights, online resources and tools as well as substantial support to defray training and other workforce development costs such as generous SSG's course fee subsidies at up to 90% for SMEs, a fresh $10,000 SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit from second half of 2026, which will be enhanced to allow out-of-pocket costs to be offset upfront and corporate tax deduction for eligible training that has been enhanced from 100% to 400%, up to $400,000 per year, under the Enterprise Innovation Scheme.

We cannot achieve this alone and will require the partnerships of our sector intermediaries. For example, we are piloting Jobs-Skills Integrators in the precision engineering, retail and wholesale trade sectors that have higher concentrations of SMEs and mature workers. Job-Skills Integrators (JSITs) play a critical role in identifying jobs and skills needs in the sector, connecting employers with appropriate solutions.

Skechers Singapore is a company that has benefited from this pilot. Working with JSIT-Retail, led by the Singapore National Employers Federation, in partnership with the NTUC and WSG, Skechers implemented redesigned job roles and training, to streamline and automate its inventory tracking and goods retrieval system. Skechers successfully achieve a higher productivity operating model and upskilled its workers to take on higher-value roles such as data analysis and route planning.

Encouraging employers to adopt skills-first HR practices will be a key next bound focus. To support that, WSG and SSG have launched Career Health SG, which seeks to equip employers with tools and resources to support skills-first hiring and develop their workforce. More details on the initiative will be progressively rolled out in this year.

Next, maximising individuals' potential. Career Health SG also signals a key shift to bridge careers and skills. Through the initiative, we hope to empower individuals to plan their careers and chart their careers and skills journey. More details on the Career Health SG will be covered in the MOM COS segment today.

To support individuals taking ownership, we have expanded opportunities in upskilling. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim asked whether entry criteria to certain local universities could be eased to take in all students as long as they meet the absolute entry criteria.

I want to say that since the expansion of the Lifetime Cohort Participation Rate from 2023, we have seen more students admitted to our AUs. This means that more Singaporeans have the opportunity to take up significant training, not just at 18 years old but throughout their lives. Our approach is not to perpetuate a paper chase. Rather, our approach is to support purposeful, timely attainment of relevant knowledge and skills, with the qualification serving to reflect the mastery attained.

We remain committed to providing opportunities to realise the diverse strengths and aspirations of our students, while keeping in mind the needs of our economy and employers' confidence in the quality of our graduates.

We have significantly enhanced training support for mid-career Singaporeans aged 40 and above, who are at higher risk of skills obsolescence. Since launching the SkillsFuture Credit (Mid-Career) top-up of $4,000 in May 2024, I am heartened to see that more than 28,000 Singaporeans have tapped on the $4,000 top-up. To ensure that the Credit utilisation ultimately supports meaningful careers as pointed out by Ms Foo Mee Har and Ms Mariam Jaafar, we have curated over 7,000 courses with stronger employability outcomes, including market-recognised full qualifications and their stackable micro-credential constituents offered by the IHLs and SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme (SCTP) courses and so on.

SSG will work with sector agencies, industry and training providers to provide these courses and to refresh them regularly. This is to ensure that the courses are of high quality and can support economic and manpower needs.

Mr Song Wentao who is 56 this year is one beneficiary of the SkillsFuture (Mid-Career) top-up. After 30 years in the defence and maritime industries, Mr Song's role was unfortunately made redundant during the COVID-19 pandemic. He saw the potential to make a meaningful career switch, choosing the healthcare sector. He took up a five-month SCTP in Therapy Support at the HMI Institute. After receiving 90% course fee subsidies, he fully offset the remaining out-of-pocket fees of $1,300 using the $4,000 SkillsFuture (Mid-Career). Mr Song graduated from the course in September last year and is now working as a Therapy Assistant at St Andrew's Community Hospital where he finds meaning in supporting elderly stroke patients in their rehabilitation journey.

From next Monday onwards, mid-career Singaporeans who pursue full-time training like Mr Song can apply for the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Training Allowance. The training allowance is sized at 50% of their average salary over the latest 12-month period and the payout will range from $300 to $3,000 per month.

From next year, we will further extend the training allowance to selected part-time training, fixed at $300 per month. Eligible part-time programmes will include part-time SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme and part-time full qualifications and the stackable micro-credentials constituents offered by our IHLs. More details will be shared later. Individuals can receive training allowance for a maximum of 24 months, regardless of full-time or part-time training.

On Dr Wan Rizal's question on support for lower-wage workers' training, MOM will enhance the Workfare's Skills Support to provide a similar monthly training allowance to lower-wage workers aged 30 and above who pursue long form full-time or part-time training.

These support measures I have mentioned also apply to freelancers that Ms See Jinli Jean asked about. Freelancers aged 40 and above could use the $4,000 SkillsFuture Credit to offset their out-of-pocket training fees and also apply for the training allowance when pursuing training full-time or part-time training.

Finally, SkillsFuture requires the support of the Training and Adult Education sector that provides the crucial last-mile delivery of training to our adult learners.

Mr Patrick Tay suggested consolidating the CET ecosystem to break down programme silos. Today, we have taken a market-driven approach, allowing diverse training providers – IHLs, accredited CET Centres and private training providers – to provide training. This has helped to expand CET capacity and enabled the CET system to be responsive to diverse and evolving needs of different sectors and CET learners.

On the Members' suggestions to streamline programme offerings where needed and strengthen course accreditation, SSG has stepped up its quality assurance framework, to regularly prune the CET system of poorer-performing courses and training providers. We are also continually improving our sign-posting of training opportunities for both individuals and employers, so that they may better navigate the ecosystem.

Just as important, we must push for higher quality and professional standards within the Training and Adult Education sector.

Today, the Institute for Adult Learning supports adult educators through training courses to keep their skills current with industry developments and professional development programmes. Going forward, we will also explore new ways to support adult educators and professionalise the Training and Adult Education sector. These are currently being studied and we hope to share more soon.

Before I conclude, I would like to quote our former Deputy Prime Minister Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, who first spoke on SkillsFuture in 2014. He said: "We must be a place where everyone has the opportunity to build on their strengths, developing the skills that enable them to maximise their potential, earn their own success and contribute to society. It's about respecting the innate dignity of every citizen – the sense of fulfilment that comes from playing their full role and being valued for their contributions to society. It is the way we create a truly inclusive society."

Mr Tharman's vision of SkillsFuture remains relevant today. To realise the SkillsFuture vision, we must build strong partnerships with employers, unions, training providers and empower individuals to make informed choices on lifelong learning. The Government will play an enabling and integrator role. Together, we can help every Singaporean realise their potential and enable businesses to thrive, even in an age of disruptions.

The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Shawn Huang.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong): Mr Chairman, I thank fellow Members for their passion towards students' development. Ms Denise Phua spoke about students' health habits and Mr Gerald Giam called for sporting opportunities for all. Our students experience diverse sports in Physical Education (PE) lessons, exploring which sport best spurs their passion. This will drive them to pursue it and keep active throughout life. Most schools also work with SportSG to offer the Sports Education Programme to further increase quality sports programmes for our students.

CCAs remain key platforms where students discover their interests and talents and develop strong character. Today, nearly 40% of our students are in sports CCAs. To better cater to student interest, most primary schools do not conduct CCA selection trials.

While schools seek to provide a good range of CCA options to cater to students' varied interests, a lack of critical mass may prevent them from providing more CCAs. For example, Suresh Amirthanathan Tharshika, a Secondary 2 student from Broadrick Secondary School, was talent-spotted by her PE teacher after a school race. However, her school did not offer Athletics CCA.

This is why students like Tharshika welcome the Strategic Partnership CCA (SP-CCA). Since 2019, MOE has partnered with MCCY to pilot centralised, non-school-based CCAs, with Athletics and Water Polo as the first two sports. SP-CCA widens the choice of CCA for students beyond what is offered by their secondary schools. Under the guidance of coaches from the SP-CCA, she will be participating in her first National School Games Track and Field Championships this year.

Micah Choo is a student from Pasir Ris Secondary School. After two years in the SP-CCA Water Polo programme team, he grew in leadership skills and is now one of the CCA leaders. Micah met teammates like John Chia from Bukit View Secondary School and Zacharia Teng from Fairfield Methodist Secondary School. Although from different schools, these boys forged strong friendships beyond the pool. When Micah struggled with Mathematics, John helped him. Micah did the same for John with Humanities. Micah's story highlights how SP-CCA provides opportunities to cultivate values and life skills and promotes friendships with peers from different backgrounds.

I am pleased to share with Members that MOE, together with MCCY, will be expanding the number of sports offered under SP-CCA. We will include canoeing this year and will offer hockey in 2026.

Mr Chairman, providing opportunities is important. Finding the right coaches and instructors for CCA is just as critical. They play a significant role in students' development. Mr Edward Chia raised a point on procurement for coaches. The Government Electronic Business portal (GeBIZ), allows all instructors the opportunity to bid fairly for CCA services. MOE has been working closely with the NICA to address some of the issues raised by the Member and will continue to do so.

Miss Rachel Ong and Ms Denise Phua highlighted their concerns over students' mental health. Today, the impact of excessive and inappropriate social media use on children and adolescents' mental health is a widespread concern. Schools play a key role equipping every child with competencies to grow to be the best version of themselves – be it in their relationships, educational pursuits, or in the digital world.

The Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum has emphasis on Mental Health and Cyber Wellness. For example, students learn self-regulation techniques, interpersonal skills and problem-solving strategies. They learn to maintain a healthy balance of online and offline activities.

5.00 pm

For younger students, we encourage tighter screen controls. There are also initiatives, such as the annual Safer Internet Day, to promote screen-free time. Schools appoint dedicated personnel to oversee cyber-related issues. And when the need arises, schools connect students with counselling or mental health professionals.

Parents play a critical role in their child's well-being, complementing efforts in school. But not all parents may be aware of their children's difficulties. The Media Literacy Council and TOUCH Community Services polled parents in 2022 and found that 38% of parents with children aged between seven and 17 struggled to get their child to share about their online activities.

Hence, the Parenting for Wellness Initiative was developed by MOE, MSF and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) under the National Mental Health and Well-being Strategy to empower parents to, firstly, build strong parent-child relationships; two, support their child's mental health and emotional resilience; and three, parent effectively in the digital age.

Dr Wan Rizal asked for updates on Parenting for Wellness. To date, there are three different resources catering to parents with different needs. First, the Toolbox for Parents is a digital resource comprising bite-sized, just-in-time actionable strategies. This is suitable for busy parents. Second, parents who prefer more personalised support may log onto the Parenting for Wellness website on Health Hub. Third, the Conversation Card Deck helps parents and their children to have good conversations and deepen their mutual understanding. Copies are available via the schools' Parent Support Groups.

Parents appreciate Parenting for Wellness for its practicality, comprehensiveness and relevance. MOE's Student Welfare Officers also found the Parenting for Wellness resources beneficial. They are keen to use it in their work with families to support needy students. I would like to use this particular opportunity to call on more parents and professionals to join us in using the Parenting for Wellness resources to support our child's well-being and growth.

Collaborations across the Government, community and industry partners are essential to support our children's mental wellness. Miss Rachel Ong would be pleased to know that MOE is also working with Ministry of Digital Development and Information to address excessive social media usage upstream. We are developing a Positive Use Guide on Technology and Social Media Use which also provides recommendations on mitigating measures.

Students in mainstream and SPED schools learn to appreciate the importance of an active and healthy lifestyle through PE. In January, the Ministry of Health (MOH), MOE and MSF launched Grow Well SG, starting with mainstream primary schools. This is a new national health promotion strategy to enhance preventive care and inculcate healthier lifestyles. This includes cultivating good nutrition, exercise, device use and sleep habits. To Ms Denise Phua, these efforts lay the foundational habits for students to sustain a healthy, active lifestyle after they graduate.

Mr Ong Hua Han raised the issue of financial literacy. MOE has incorporated financial literacy into the school curriculum. Taught through a developmentally-appropriate approach, it includes areas, such as Buy-Now-Pay-Later schemes and CPF. Schools also work with partners, such as MoneySENSE and financial institutions, to offer financial literacy programmes.

Mr Chairman, MOE will continue to work collectively with our partners to provide all our students the opportunities to develop their strengths and talents, catered to their needs, regardless of their start points in life.

The Chairman: Our guillotine time is 5.20 pm. Any clarifications? Mr Patrick Tay.

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Sir, I have two clarifications: one for Minister Chan Chun Sing and one for Minister of State Gan Siow Huang. Firstly, Minister Chan, there has been numerous feedback. I have met people like Ms Pooja from EveryChild.SG, who has feedback on one key systemic change to have smaller class sizes of 25 or fewer for children in primary school. Has MOE done a study and assess what is the ideal best class size to achieve maximum education outcomes?

The second clarification for Minister of State Gan is in relation to the skills-based hiring. How does MOE as well as SkillsFuture Singapore intend to nudge more employers, especially to implement skills-based hiring and employment practices? Because that is a vicious cycle. You need to get them on board to recognise that.

Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, it has often been suggested that MOE should reduce class sizes and we take this very seriously. This is often a proposed solution, but I thought it is important for us to bear in mind what problems we are trying to solve first. And what class size should we aim for – 30, 20, 10? And, if so, why? Let us examine the issue more closely.

Is our problem statement the need to improve teacher-student interaction or is our problem statement to reduce teachers' workload, or is it because we believe that smaller is better, regardless of the subject being taught or the teachers' quality?

Chair, I think we all agree. We all want to reduce the workload for our teachers. But with a finite teaching force and a certain number of students, do we mean to ask our teachers to teach smaller classes but more classes? Or do we mean that we should employ more teachers, perhaps doubling our teaching force to halve all class sizes? Is that feasible without affecting quality? Is that the best way to use our teaching resources, even if we assume we can double our recruitment from broadly what is now about 2% of every cohort to 4% of every cohort?

Or do we mean for our teachers to teach less? We have benchmarked our curriculum with other developed countries. We are already teaching just similar amounts, or sometimes less, compared to others. And we often hear calls for MOE to include more in our curriculum, including from many Members today in your speeches, to have more life skills, future skills, soft skills, to prepare our students better for life.

So, Chair, maybe I should explain. Today, we do not have fixed teaching class sizes in all our schools. We allocate our finite teaching resources according to the needs of our students, complemented by technology. Most form classes have two form teachers to guide the socio-emotional development of our children, compared to one in the past when we were in school. Students with higher needs have smaller teaching class size. Classes that benefit from students' interaction have bigger class sizes. For classes that we can use technology to scale, we have even "bigger class sizes" in the hundreds and yet achieve mass customisation.

So, Chair, indeed, we want to refocus our teachers' energies to not over protect students or over support training. Instead, we want our students to exercise agency in organising activities and take more responsibilities for their learning. And in this way, they learn more for life.

Chair, we share the goals for more personalised teaching, more personal attention for every student and more focused work for our teachers. I think we can all agree on that. Indeed, I am one for aspiring to organise our teaching resources to achieve the effective class size of one, where we need but not regardless of need. An effective class size of one, where we need, but not regardless of need.

Let us focus the discussion on how we can achieve this through the following ways: (a) the way we focus our teachers' effort in doing what is necessary for our students and not overdoing things; (b) the way we use technology to complement our teachers' capabilities to scale up quality resources at affordable cost; (c) the way we equip our teachers to do their best for our students; (d) the way we teach our students to exercise agency and responsibility in their learning journeys; and (e) the way we partner our teachers to set the right expectations for ourselves and our teachers.

For Members who are interested, Members may also wish to refer to independent studies by OECD on the various factors that are perhaps more important than class size in determining the quality of our teaching and learning.

Ms Gan Siow Huang: Mr Patrick Tay asked how he can nudge more employers to take on skills-based hiring and employment practices. I think we need to understand the "why" and the "how" for the employers. Why would they want to do it? We know that Singapore has a very tight labour market. It is quite common to hear the feedback that employers are unable to find suitably skilled or the number of workers to fill the jobs' needs.

We are working with the trade associations and also with employers to help them see how, by going for skills-based hiring, by breaking down the skills, analysing the skills that they really need, instead of just broadly stating, "Oh, I need a university degree. I need a diploma in that", which are very broad and maybe not very sharp in defining the skills that they really need. By taking on skills-based hiring, employers can better find employees that meet their business needs and make the business more competitive. So, the "why" is something that we are working on.

The Career Health SG that I mentioned earlier on, something that WSG and SSG are working on to get more employers on board, is an exciting development. It is not going to be an easy feat. Indeed, a lot of effort needs to be put in to help employers see the benefits of this programme.

The other thing that I want to bring up would be leveraging Queen Bees, for example, and also the skills development partners. An example is the Singapore Computer Society. Singapore Computer Society, together with SSG, launched the skills pathway for cybersecurity last year. And this presented a clearer pathway for individuals to enter the cybersecurity field and also for existing cybersecurity professionals to understand what kind of skills and training that they have to go for if they want to advance further in their careers. And individuals who go for such training are being recognised by employers.

I think this type of collaboration is helpful to get employers to see the benefits of skills-based hiring. Not to forget, of course, HR. HR is another group that we need to develop for them to be able to support the employers and co-workers in understanding the benefits and operationalising skills-based hiring. So, there are lots of work that we need to do in addition to the very long list of things I mentioned in my speech earlier on on how we can support employers to take on skills-based hiring.

The Chairman: We do not have much time left. Ms Denise Phua, make it short, so that I can squeeze one or two more in, if possible.

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Sir, through-train school models from primary to secondary school levels are not new concepts and if run well, can be successful. So, I accept that Singapore's starting point and our culture are different. And I know MOE had mulled over my suggestion. But with due respect to the Minister, what is it about Singapore that a through-train school model, without PSLE – we have such good features like Full Subject-Based Banding and regular assessments already – cannot be adapted or adopted and scaled in Singapore? What is so special about us that we cannot do this so that we can free up more time for the development of the 21st century skills that MOE proposes?

Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, we thank Ms Denise Phua and various Members for your well-intentioned suggestions. Let me assure Members that MOE is open to considering new ideas. In fact, we constantly challenge ourselves to relook our own assumptions and come up with and consider new ideas, whether they are from our fraternity of educators, Members of this House, members of the public or experiences of other countries. But our approach must first correctly define the problem before we go into solutioning.

5.15 pm

The through-train proposal from primary to secondary school idea, as Ms Denise Phua said, is not new. Other countries have variations of it, with varying outcomes depending on their goals. And one can even make the argument that the affiliated schools in Singapore are a variant of this idea.

The question is, what goals do we want to achieve in making this change? Is it to reduce stress? Is it to remove high-stakes examinations for young children? Is it to free up space and time for students to pursue other dimensions of growth as Ms Denise Phua mentioned? Is it inclusiveness, so that our students experience the richness of the Singaporean community? Is it to promote more social mixing in our schools? Or is it all the above and more?

Then, we should ask ourselves: will a through-train achieve all this and what are the more fundamental issues that we have to grapple with?

For example, stress. Are we stressed because we cannot meet the standards we set for ourselves and our children, or are we stressed because we want to keep up with others in a rat race? And will the proposal solve this problem? Would we end up shifting the competition for our preferred secondary school earlier to a preferred primary school through, say, a Primary 1 registration contest or even a preschool leaving examination?

And if we continue to see examinations as a competition for preferred schools instead of right-siting our students for the next segment of their learning journey, then will removing PSLE alone solve the problem or will it concentrate the stakes at a even higher level, at the "O" level and "A" level stages?

And if we do not post students to schools appropriate for their learning needs, how will we make better use of our finite resources to achieve the best holistic outcomes for different students? And if we remove one major examination but our mindsets do not change, will we gain more time and space for the diverse skill sets that we wish for our children, as I have shared in my story earlier during my speech?

On the other hand, if we can truly change our mindsets to respect and pursue diverse strengths, then do we still need to focus narrowly on having or removing a single examination? In fact, today, we have already assured all of our children that regardless of the outcome in any particular examination, the pathways are porous enough for you to pivot into areas that you find your passion in subsequently in life. This goes even beyond our school system. If our society recognises and reward diverse skill sets, will we still pursue a narrow definition of success indicated by a PSLE or "O" level score?

As previously mentioned, the operational issues that we need to step through are not trivial. Who gets to go into a through-train programme? Who gets to decide whether a person can stay in a through-train programme? Who gets to go in, who gets to go out? So, there are things that we need to step through and I thank Members for their support for the Ministry's work.

But let me say this. No system is perfect in meeting everyone's desires and needs, but we try our best to provide every child with education options that meets his or her needs. Today, I would like to share a slogan that is close to my heart, and this is called, "For every child, a good school. At every age, a good learner."

"For every child, a good school", means that we do not need to go and chase after what other people desire as a popular school, but instead we put our children at the centre of all that we do and consider our children's needs and what is most appropriate for his or her learning needs. That is why to me, "For every child, a good school."

"At every age, a good learner", to go beyond just the first 15 years. This is why we have embarked on multiple pathways of success. This is why we have gone on a porous and continuous meritocracy, where everyone can pivot and pursue different options as they progress in life without being defined by the stakes of one high-stake examination.

This is why we are reducing examination load with "Learn More, Test Less". This is why we have just announced what we did for the L1R5 to L1R4. This is also why we group students according to their abilities and interest in different domains at different stages of their learning journey, like Full SBB, so that we do not teach to a child's average ability or a class' average abilities.

This is why we continue to have social mixing to bring together children from different backgrounds in the same class, so that they learn to work with people from different backgrounds. This is also why we have a more open Primary 1 registration process, where we balance the building of a school culture and tradition with the egalitarian ethos and culture of being non-exclusive that we so cherish as Singaporeans.

This is why we are adopting edtech to customise teaching and learning, so that we can transcend "teaching to the average" and achieve the effective class size of one, overcoming the conventional public education trilemma of achieving quality, scale and affordability at the same time. And I think we can do that because today, with the science of learning, the technology and the data that we have, we have the best chance in the history of the education profession to break this trilemma.

So, Chair, we appreciate the Members' concerns for and have our children's interest at heart. And we will continue to review our policies and programmes to better equip our students. And I call on Members of this House to join us in this journey to change our mindsets as we evolve our policies and programmes.

I do not believe that we cannot change our mindsets. Read my speech at the MOE x NIE x IPS seminar. Our society's mindset and our culture has evolved. We can do it and we need these two to move in tandem, changing structures and processes with the changing of cultures and mindsets —

The Chairman: Minister Chan, you may want to round up your closing.

Mr Chan Chun Sing: Okay, I am done.

The Chairman: Great. I am sorry, Mr Darryl David. I know you raised four cuts. I was going to give you some time but we have run out of time. So, can I invite Mr Patrick Tay, if you would like to withdraw the amendment.

5.22 pm

Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Sir, I would like to thank Minister Chan Chun Sing, Minister Maliki, Minister of State Gan Siow Huang and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Shawn Huang as well as the MOE team, Permanent Secretaries Lim Wan Yong and Augustin Lee, as well as Director-General of Education Liew Wei Li and the entire team, as well as our staff, teachers, educators and our entire training, CET and education ecosystem for helping us navigate through the past many decades and moving forward to the next bound of education. With that, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $14,647,939,200 for Head K stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $852,000,000 for Head K stand part of the Development Estimates.