Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)

Education for the Future

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates be reduced by $100".

Sir, I want to first thank the educators, families and students who have given me input on what they think are important to the future of education in Singapore.

On changes gone right, the most significant move that the Ministry of Education (MOE) has made in recent years is its bold decision to rope in SkillsFuture and adopt developing the capabilities of adult learners under its belt. Institutions of Higher Learning (IHLs) are now chartered to embark on aggressive continued education and skills training for the adult workforce. The messaging and measures by the two Education Ministers on skills mastery, applied learning and broader school and IHL admission criteria are necessary in a landscape that has over-indulged in the academic paper chase.

However, Sir, the relentless changes to the education and employment landscapes remain. Technology and product and service lifecycles and shelf lives get shorter. Anything that can be repeated and learnt by machines will be replaced by machines. Futurists, such as Ray Kurzweil, predict that soon, a computer that cost US$1,000 will possess the cognitive capability of a human being by 2029.

On key education trends: the writing is on the wall. Just as in business, rapid changes are sweeping through the education landscape. Google "key education trends" and you will find at least 90% of the search results reflect key trends in the realm of technology − virtual reality, augmented reality, even mixed reality, cloud technology, learning analytics, coding and the Internet of Things (IoT). Other trends include the move from Pedagogy (child-focused teaching approaches), to Andragogy (the study of teaching adults), to Heutagogy (self-directed learning); and from STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Math) to develop critical thinking and more creative approaches to problem solving. I would like to seek the Ministers' responses to my following questions.

How has MOE kept pace with these new education trends that are the outcome of rapid technological and economic disruptions? How has the work of the Council for the Future Economy (CFE) and Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) affected the shape of education for students and educators?

The 21st Century Competency Model drawn up by MOE has been developed quite some time ago, more than a decade. When was the last time this has been reviewed and how does the prevailing work by CFE and Smart Nation change curriculum creation, development and assessment in schools and IHLs?

What is the state of the SkillsFuture movement and what else can be done to urge Singaporeans to take even greater ownership and action to be ready for further disruptions in the labour market?

As all of the IHLs aggressively embark on Continuing Education and Training (CET), directed by MOE, potential overlapping and unnecessary competition are bound to emerge. How will MOE prevent this and instead enhance the synergy that can arise? Would the Government even consider renaming MOE as the Ministry for Life-Long Learning to put the emphasis on lifelong and self-directed learning and remove barriers to learning for all citizens?

On the role of educators in the future world: the pervasiveness of mobile devices, such as smartphones, smart watches and tablets, has already overtaken desktop browsing. M-learning, instead of e-learning, enables learners to access content even more freely. Educators will need the technical and pedagogical support to integrate M-learning in their curricula. As a consultant told me, the role of educators is to think carefully now about the things that they typically do.

Can the Minister update this House on how aware and prepared are our educators in their changing role in this new world of education? What proportion of them are still in the mode of repeating lectures or rehearsing for high-stakes exams? How have we equipped our educators to take on the role of designers of quality learning experiences, curators of content available online, creators of content and coaches of their students in matters of life?

Should there be an ITM as well for the educators to build the capability and deep skills of educators to keep pace with the needs of 21st century learners? How do educators of the future address skills deficits in the workforce and, if that is getting increasingly unpredictable, how do we prepare the students to acquire more learning agility to face the future?

On equal access to opportunities for all students: much has been spoken at last week's Budget Debate on inequality and/or inequity amongst citizens from low-income households versus others who are more affluent. Whilst it is true that it is hard to ensure equality in life outcomes, it is certainly possible for the Government to do even more to ensure equal access to opportunities in learning and exposures that will further one's future readiness.

The money and meals provided in the EduSave and Meals programme in Budget 2018 are appreciated. But we need to also update and articulate the changing nature of the gaps in today's setting. Holiday and/or enrichment programmes of children from more affluent backgrounds, for instance, have now moved from speech, drama and music lessons to the 21st century's coding, robotics, 3-D printing bootcamps and the like.

A concern that has been raised globally is that of Digital Equity. As mobile devices become the gateways to learning, and Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) programmes allow students to use their own devices in a classroom, there must be found a way by which learners from all socioeconomic backgrounds have access to learning devices in schools up to IHLs. Can MOE please provide an update on what has been done in this aspect of digital equity?

On existing hot-button issues of over-emphasis on high-stakes exams and the tuition syndrome, it is not uncommon to tease parents whose children are taking the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) that they themselves are also taking the PSLE. It is not uncommon to still hear parents who are highly anxious and highly strung as they report that their children are taking the General Certificate of Education (GCE) examinations. The tuition industry is still a booming industry because doing well in high-stakes exams is still the ultimate aim of many parents and teachers of especially primary school and secondary school education.

Teachers also have learnt to "teach to test". I know of a young girl who is talented in singing and speech and drama but who is taking an Electrical Engineering Course in the Institute of Education (ITE). She achieved a score of 14 in her GCE Normal (Academic) level exams with 2As and 4Bs but only qualify for the Direct-Entry Scheme to Polytechnic Programme (DPP) which does not have any options in Performing or Creative Arts in the ITE or polytechnic. She will spend her next two years in an engineering course in the hope that she can obtain a Higher-National ITE Certificate (NITEC) so that she can apply for Laselle or the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA). She would have qualified, her mum says, if she had done better in her academics.

Her mother wrote to me, "Ms Phua, I am sharing this in the hope that it serves as an opportunity to point our education system to areas where we can do differently, to better cater to a wider spectrum of needs, as the time and tide have changed. Although MOE has acknowledged Howard Gardner's work on multiple intelligences, our school system still leans towards our traditional definition of academic excellence".

If we have improved in dealing with these hot button issues, why do many parents and students still fret incessantly over them? Could it be that it is insufficient to simply tweak the system through changes, such as PSLE banding instead of T-scores, by allowing subject combinations instead of removing the labels of Express, Normal (Academic) (NA) and Normal (Technical) (NT) and Special Schools? Are we merely rearranging the chairs on the deck and not making deep enough changes? In this age of disruptions, do we dare proactively disrupt our current education systems by slaying some of the sacred cows that we inherited from the proverbial third Industrial Revolution when we are already in the fourth?

One sacred cow is, of course, the PSLE, a practice we have inherited for decades. I have many times in this House shared on how we need to remove this structural thorn in the flesh of the system. There are highly respected education systems globally which do not sort students at the age of 12. I recall what a very dedicated MOE mainstream educator told me, and I quote, "Ms Phua, I know there are a lot of things to consider before we can abolish PSLE. But the fact of the matter is − if you ask a teacher if he or she would teach differently in a class if there is no PSLE, I am quite sure the answer is a yes. There are just not enough time and room to develop the skills they need to survive in the future world – skills like creativity, flexibility, 21st century competencies that MOE has been advocating. We need more time to look into non-examinable subjects, such as inquiry, discovering and development of strengths of our students".

Last year, at the Committee of Supply (COS), I spoke about Alibaba founder, Jack Ma, and his partner's intent to start the YunGu School – a 15-year through train system up to high school. I do not believe my reference was acknowledged or addressed. I had been stalking the online media of YunGu School and it has been inspiring so far – with a strong values base and a good balance in information technology (IT), other Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Mathematics (STEAM) subjects. I have great confidence that Singapore can design an even more superior localised model. Do we dare pilot a through-train school of the future and, if good enough, scale it?

Past designers of the Singapore education system have often prided themselves in taking an evolutionary instead of a revolutionary approach. But in a time such as this, we must have the dare to go beyond tweaking our school system or we will end up taking one step forward and two steps backward in preparing an education model that befits the future.

Question proposed.

The Chairman: Mr Zainal Sapari.

Preparing Our Students for the Future

Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Chairman, the future of our children depends on what we are willing to do for education today. We want to prepare our students to lead productive and successful lives once they leave the education system and enter the realm of working life. Given the rapid changes around us, we may not know exactly what lies ahead for our students in the future and, at best, we can only try to ascertain what skillsets they might need by looking at current trends. Our graduating students must compete in an increasingly borderless world for the best jobs and, hence, they will need to be nimble, flexible and dynamic and ready to recognise and respond swiftly to emerging trends that call for new solutions, many of which moved into attempts into technological innovation.

The students of today are adept at incorporating new technologies into their lives. I believe that we should tap into these new inclinations of our students and imbibe skills which would continue to make our labour force competitive to employers.

I would like to ask the Minister what some of the fundamental shifts in pedagogy and curriculum are that MOE is looking into to prepare our students for the future, because I believe education is the key for us to be ready for the future.

Education Model for a New Era

Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Chairman, there is much to admire about the Singapore education system. Singaporean students consistently achieve top rankings in various international benchmarking exercises, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) test in Maths, Science and Reading. Yet, it is just as common to hear dissatisfaction from many quarters about this supposedly high-achieving education system of producing stressed-out, book-smart and exam-focused students who can do with more creativity, life skills, critical thinking and interpersonal skills. Parents often feel trapped, together with their kids, in a desperate six-year race to safeguard their children's destinies by the tender age of 12.

Policymakers have acknowledged the need for change. Steps are being taken to adjust the PSLE system, provide multiple pathways and applied learning in schools, internships and aptitude-based admissions to IHLs. However, so far, steps taken are merely incremental. The question is, what more needs to be done to keep Singapore ahead of the game in a new era of global talent?

With Industry 4.0, we need to move faster and bolder and continue to make education a strategic advantage to stay ahead globally. The successful reinvention of our educational system depends on transforming pedagogy and redesigning learning tasks. How can we spend less time in high-stakes exam preparations and more time in the joy of learning? How can we spend less time memorising facts and concepts and more time applying these to solve real-life problems? How can we nurture creative thinking, manage complex problems through collaboration and expose our students to a diversity of cultures, languages and practices in order to prepare them to be truly global citizens?

I believe our education system may prove to be Singapore's greatest strategic asset. We are blessed with highly-engaged parents, well-trained educators and generously-funded education institutions. We are well-poised to take the lead and make the necessary transformations to position Singaporeans strongly in the new economy, by making education a key pillar of our economic transformation efforts.

Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister what steps MOE is taking to transform our education system to strongly position our future generations for Industry 4.0.

NIEC and the Preschool Sector

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, there are much needed and significant moves in the preschool sector which have placed greater importance on quality early childhood education for our children. More anchor operators and partner operators have been approved, MOE has come onboard preschool education with the setting up of MOE Kindergartens (MKs) and the Government is setting up the National Institute of Early Development (NIEC).

3.30 pm

With these moves, there is also a need to raise the quality of early childhood educators. While NIEC will help to set benchmarks for standards of teaching and learning in the early childhood sector, early childhood educators must also be convinced that their professions are valued.

First, salaries for early childhood educators must increase and be made comparable to that of professionals from other sectors. Second, career pathways need to be made clear and attainable for early childhood educators who seek to pursue preschool teaching as a career. Third, sufficient recognition, rewards and incentives must also be made available for preschool educators, similar to how such recognition, rewards and incentives are available to mainstream primary and secondary school teachers. In addition, there ought to be opportunities for preschool educators to be seconded to lower primary school levels, such as Primary 1 and 2, and vice versa.

We could probably pilot this with our MK teachers first. This experience will help both our preschool and lower primary school educators better understand the transition required of our students as they progress from preschool to primary school. This will facilitate the planning of programmes as well as teaching and learning strategies at both the preschool and lower primary school levels that can help make the transition easier for our children. On top of that, it will also help our educators identify children who may be facing learning challenges to be identified earlier and proper intervention can then be rendered.

I would like to propose for faculty members of NIEC to not just be academics with little or no experience in the early childhood sector or in teaching. While theoretical and academic underpinnings are important, practical and grounded experience are equally important, if not more, particularly in dealing with young children and impressionable minds. I would propose for faculty members of NIEC to be appointed from among senior and experienced early childhood practitioners as well as academics from the sector. I would also propose for NIEC to consider running programmes that can equip stay-at-home mothers or fathers and grandparents or retirees with the requisite knowledge and skills to be caregivers to young children, whether to fulfil familial responsibilities or as a career option. Sufficient support and a conducive learning environment at home are equally important in providing quality early childhood education and development for our children.

While we strive to close the gaps in the provision of early childhood education in our preschools, we also need to help parents and grandparents create the same supportive and conducive environment at home for our children that can facilitate their learning and growth.

For the stay-at-home mothers or fathers and retirees who are trained as caregivers to young children, they can also be considered as teaching assistants or edu-carers in our MKs or other preschool centres to support our preschool educators.

Applied Learning in Schools

Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Recently, my friend from the corporate sector attended a kick-off meeting, where staff was introduced to the concept of VUCA, which stands for Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous, and the importance for both staff and organisation to be aware of and thrive in a VUCA environment.

Similarly, in 2013, the then-Minister for Education envisaged what every Singapore child should achieve in 10 years of basic education, where deliberate shifts are made away from academic grades towards providing opportunities for students through diverse and real-world learning experiences to discover their interests and talents, develop life skills and find joy in learning because if the real world when they grow up is going to get more VUCA, then all the rigours in academia will not save them.

A 2015 survey done jointly by The Straits Times and research company Nexus Link found a staggering seven in 10 parents of children from preschool to secondary levels sending them to tuition classes.

All in all, they spent $1.1 billion a year on tuition, according to the national Household Expenditure Survey released in 2014. I am sure this number would be even higher now.

So, I wish to ask the Minister to, firstly, provide an update on the Ministry's efforts to set students on a holistic learning trajectory, and how they are bearing fruit, as a midpoint check; secondly, review tuition cost expenditures, which disadvantage and pressurise students of lower socioeconomic backgrounds; and finally, take the lead and provide solid data that there is no link between tuition and better performance, to dispel the herd mentality of many parents.

Psychology for Secondary School

Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, the topics on building an innovative workforce and caring society have been discussed extensively in this House over the years. Many Members have proposed and suggested measures and steps to be taken to achieve these two objectives.

Sir, in order for our society to strive towards these goals, it is vital to create a system as well as ambience that allows and, more importantly, facilitates individuals to realise and maximise their potentials.

One of the most effective ways to do so is through our education system. I would like to repeat my call to introduce the teaching of psychology in our secondary schools which I have made twice in this Chamber. Psychology, in its broadest term, is the study of the human mind and behaviour. It has many disciplines, like personality, cognitive behaviour, social perception, to name some.

Individuals who have acquired a knowledge of psychology will most likely be able to recognise their own strengths and weaknesses and also of those people around them. By knowing personal strengths and weaknesses, individuals will be better equipped to work on maximising their potential, and this will result in boosted self-esteem and confidence. Naturally, the persons who are motivated will be the ones who try to innovate and think out of the box.

Being aware of others through the learning of psychology will contribute positively towards our ongoing effort in developing a more caring and gracious society. A person who is aware of the existence of different personalities and perspectives will be able to better apply acceptance and tolerance and respect these differences. These are very important values to embrace in making our society more caring and gracious.

Sir, learning of the human mind and behaviour should be done at an appropriate learning stage of a child. According to Jean Piaget, a world-renowned French psychologist, children between the ages of 11 and older, which he termed as the formational/operational stage, are able to use logic to solve problems, view the world around them and plan for the future.

Hence, I would like to urge the Ministry to consider conducting a study to assess the feasibility of introducing psychology in secondary school as a component of the Science subject.

Diverse Perspectives in Schools

Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, Sir, from my recent exchange with the hon Senior Minister of State Dr Janil Puthucheary on Members of Parliament (MPs) speaking in schools, and from information subsequently obtained, I am not 100% sure, but it would seem that Government officeholders and grassroots advisers (GRAs) can go into MOE schools to officiate at events, hold dialogues on national issues and interact with students. But MPs in their MP capacity cannot. The Senior Minister of State did not confirm this directly. I would like to ask MOE to now confirm if this is, indeed, correct.

That exchange was headlined in some media outlets as if I was advocating partisan politics in schools whereas the Government wants to keep politics out of schools. That is incorrect. What I am arguing for is that we should balance up the exposure that students already have to People's Action Party (PAP) MPs wearing their GRA or Ministerial hats. The key phrase in what I said is "both sides". Our students should be able to hear from and talk with MPs who are not from the ruling party. Why? For two reasons.

Firstly, students should not be exposed to only one set of perspectives on national issues. Students should be able to hear first-hand in their schools the perspectives of duly elected non-PAP MPs on issues of the day, be it our ageing society, public finance or social policies. It is not an adequate response to this to say that students can access views on the Internet. Exposing students to only one set of views from speakers in schools is unhealthy for the development of their critical faculties and their ability to see both sides of an issue. They should be able to pose questions and dialogue with elected public figures, both PAP and non-PAP.

Secondly, this blocks students from understanding the role played by elected MPs other than those from the PAP in our legislative process. MPs from all parties play a role in our legislative process that is enshrined in the Constitution which our students study in schools. Students should have the opportunity to hear directly from non-PAP Members of this House about their experience on the role they play in the national institution of Parliament and in the legislative work it undertakes.

Surely, it cannot be argued that Ministers and GRAs are, by definition, non-political when they talk to students, but non-PAP MPs are, by definition, political. The same strictures on speech and behaviour can be applied to both groups when they go into schools. I believe that both groups should be allowed into schools but not to canvass for a party, not to engage in partisan discussion, not to wear party symbols and so on, that is, to be consistent with Education (Schools) Regulations, section 111.

I know that non-PAP MPs can go into schools in their personal professional capacity. Indeed, I have done that before. But in that capacity, they cannot have dialogues about their role in the legislative process, whereas it would seem that PAP MPs can, wearing their Ministerial or GRA hats.

I have a second question. It appears that in the past, MPs could go into schools in their MP capacity. There are public references online to MPs having officiated at school events in the past as MPs. I am told that there are many plaques in schools recording that a certain MP opened a particular school facility. In former PAP MP Assoc Prof Ho Peng Kee's memoirs, he writes on page 18, and I quote, "I have made this call on many of the schools I spoke at during those early years as MP".

I noted that on at least two schools' websites that prior to 2011 or thereabouts schools would acknowledge MPs but, after that, the schools referred only to Grassroots Advisers. Would the MOE confirm that this change was, indeed, made in 2011 and why was this change made at that time?

In conclusion, Sir, firstly, would MOE consider allowing all MPs, including Nominated Members of Parliament (NMPs) into schools to be able to share their perspectives on public affairs in their role in the legislative process as MPs, all subject to the same strictures on speech and behaviour to keep out partisan politics? Secondly, can MOE clarify when was the apparently long-standing policy to allow MPs into schools changed and why was it changed at that time?

Mr Chairman, Sir, we can pin labels that say "PAP is by definition okay"; "non-PAP is by definition partisan and hence not". But does that serve the best interest of our students who will become the citizens of tomorrow? Let us not make this a conversation about labels. That is a circular argument. Let us make this a conversation about what is best for our students.

The Chairman: Mr Ang Wei Neng, you can take your two cuts together, please.

Value-based Education

Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Chairman, values are best taught through experiences. Thus, I applaud getting students to volunteer in a community through the Values in Action Programmes.

Many schools send their students overseas to do volunteer work and it is an eye-opener for many students when they visit the villages of neighbouring countries. However, could schools also explore with voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) in the school vicinity so as to directly serve their community? Schools could work with grassroots organisations to identify problems in the community and help to solve them. I hope MOE could dedicate more resources in this respect. Maybe even work with the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) to come up with a joint registry of VWOs which is open to volunteers from the schools.

Nurturing the Singapore Spirit

Many students cringe when they attend National Education (NE) classes which could be known as different names in different schools but have similar results. Many feel that it is propaganda. The only good thing, in the eyes of the students, is that there is no examination.

However, it is important that our students appreciate the sweat, blood and hardship of our Pioneers in the early days of nation-building and understand and feel proud of how Singapore has transformed from Third-World to First.

Some schools have tried to make NE more interesting. For example, Evergreen Secondary School has just been given facilities for NE sharing and teaching, including an NE learning centre, political leadership corridors, movers and shakers' gallery. Students can follow any trail by downloading an app. And this is an example of a school-based effort. But how do we, as a whole, make any class more interesting and relevant?

Perhaps, MOE could consider using contemporary issues to reflect the reality, constraints and limitations of being a small country. For instance, the detention of nine Terrex infantry vehicles by the Hong Kong government could be used as a case study to reflect how Singapore could react in a crisis. Another possibility is to create milestone experiences where youths can feel proud to be a Singaporean. For example, we could have activities to celebrate the issuing of the pink identity card (IC) to our 15-year-olds.

Our Mother Tongue

Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson) (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Our mother tongue languages (MTLs) form the links to our cultural heritage and are the vehicle for the transmission of our cherished traditions and values. Proficiency in our MTLs helps us to appreciate the richness of our culture and allows us to connect with our roots.

In addition to the recognition and reinforcement of our own identity, our MTLs are invaluable as a glue that gels our communities and enables us to communicate and connect with our counterparts around the region and other parts of the world. For Singapore to continue to embrace this diversity as a strength in our multilingual and multicultural city, a strong command of our MTLs would be critical in helping our students to thrive in a rapidly changing global society.

How will MOE engage our students and community to make the learning of our MTL come alive? What are the steps that MOE will take to ensure that our students develop a deep appreciation and love of our MTLs not just in school, but also outside of school and beyond their schooling years?

3.45 pm

National Language Proficiency

Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Sir, the Budget speaks of plans for economic development to focus on regional cooperation in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Many Members have spoken of the importance of our region to our future. I agree with them. Actually, our region is not only important to our future, but also to our past, to our sense of who we are and where we are rooted in the world.

Can we take the opportunity to complement these efforts in economic development with an increased focus in our school curriculum on teaching Bahasa Melayu? It is our National Language and a regional language. Could we help those students who do not otherwise learn Malay in school attain some basic level of proficiency?

I know our children who do not otherwise learn Malay have a lot to do already in school, including learning English, Chinese or Tamil to ever higher levels of proficiency. Many Members have spoken of the importance of that, and they are right. But Bahasa Melayu is our National Language. I believe it would be to the good if all our children could learn it to some basic level of conversational fluency. Such learning will be good for the cognitive and intellectual development of our children. It will also protect and preserve our multiculturalism and promote national integration and a sense of identity.

We currently have conversational third language programmes for Malay at the primary school level as enrichment, but not part of the regular curriculum. As learning languages is best done when young, could the Ministry look into making the conversational third language programme part of the syllabus for our primary school students who do not otherwise learn our National Language, perhaps included as part of the regular curriculum for every primary school student, but without the pressure of examinations?

Supporting Students with Special Needs

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Sir, the attention given to students with special needs in schools has grown from strength to strength, thanks to the MOE team. However, with the backdrop of the rapidly disruptive economy and employment market, I am concerned that this special population would still be left behind unless we put in more strategic focus and priority.

Many students with special needs fall off the cliff after completing their formal schooling at age 18 or 21. Unlike their typical peers, SkillsFuture does not quite cater to them yet. But advances like artificial intelligence (AI) will not only replace low-skilled jobs but also some tasks performed in higher-skilled jobs. How can MOE ensure that persons with special needs can continue to learn and upgrade their academic, vocational and life skills throughout their lives? How have the Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) and the Smart Nation Initiative specifically supported the special needs community in terms of curriculum development, delivery and assessment and nurture both students and staff?

I propose a Lifelong Learning Masterplan be developed and implemented to empower and equip young and adult learners with special needs to be future-ready.

Recently, I was told of the story of Mary, and this is about enhanced support for those in mainstream schools. I was told the story of Mary, not her real name, who is now 17 years old. Her mother wrote, "We discovered Mary was musical from Primary 3. She was in the school choir and competed in international choir competitions, winning awards with the school. Also, a strong member of the speech and drama group. She was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and struggled in school with inconsistent learning support for her education needs.

From the Express stream, she switched to the Normal Academic (NA) and, finding difficulty coping socially, she then also developed clinical depression. Despite that, she pressed on with the family, spent much less time in music, passed her GCE N(A) examinations and scored an aggregate of 14 ‒ not good enough to qualify for LaSalle or NAFA because she did not have a GCE "O" level certificate. Mary is now in the ITE’s DPP Electrical Engineering programme for eligible GCE "N" level students because the programme does not have options in performing or creative arts. She will spend the next two years in an engineering course of no interest to her, in the hope that she can get a NITEC certification in two years so that she can apply for LaSalle or NAFA."

Sir, her mother wrote to me, not to complain, but to share to ask if better support could have been given to students with diverse needs and talents like Mary, and if there are other better options for young people like her. Mary’s case is not isolated. A highly-talented visually-impaired young pianist and composer, Adelyn, also faced the same dilemma.

The stricter Mother Tongue exemption policy in mainstream schools, too, has impacted students with diverse needs. A respected psychologist consultant in the private sector who consults for the MOE actually is in grief when countless appeals that he made to exempt his child from Mother Tongue were rejected unless she fails in all subjects. This is notwithstanding the fact that she is diagnosed to have dyspraxia and other learning challenges. Learning is a big struggle and the family is waiting for the 12 years of compulsory education to be over and is seriously contemplating other options for their life after Primary 6. But what of others who are not able to afford other options?

Sir, the current support model in mainstream schools appears to be inadequate and needs a rethinking in terms of the support framework and resources. When I comb through online on what is available in Singapore and compare them to some of the other better models ‒ not all are better, but some are better ‒ there is a stark difference in the depth and quality, quantity of resources available to support learners with special needs in the mainstream classroom.

I, therefore, seek the Minister’s update on what is the existing support model, the adequacy level and the optimal support level that can be provided for students with special needs within (a) primary schools; (b) secondary schools; (c) IHLs, such as the ITEs, polytechnics and the universities.

On Special Education (SPED) schools, I am very thankful to Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary who chaired the Compulsory Education (CE) Committee and good work has been done to understand the needs and also to obtain suggestions from many focus groups, comprising students, staff and families. Many issues were raised that relate to how the quality of SPED schools can be further enhanced so that the stigma could be removed and every SPED school is and perceived as a school of choice for students who are better off in this specialist setting. The work of the CE Committee, I believe, is not over, and I ask MOE to continue to look at enhancing SPED schools in this 4th Industrial Revolution that Singapore is in.

On SPED Academy. Finally, I wish to repeat my COS request last year to set up a Special Education Academy to ensure that, one, the lifelong learning needs of Persons with Special Needs (PSNs) in our country will be addressed so that they can be contributing members to society and lead a quality of life that is not below that of other citizens; two, to also ensure that more educators and other professionals in this field develop deeper capability and skills mastery; three, to ensure that family caregivers can hone their skills and more effectively support their wards with special needs throughout life; and, four, to ensure that employers, colleagues and members of the public can enhance their awareness and skillsets to accept, work with and value PSNs in Singapore.

In conclusion, Sir, children and adults with special needs are not merely statistics and burdens who cost us money. They have potential and can contribute to society, if given a fair chance and the appropriate training and support. They say, it takes a village to raise a child. But it takes a leader to lead the village. For a first-world education system, MOE must lead and assemble the right helping hands and take its place to facilitate stronger support for learners with diverse and special needs in our country.

Special Needs

Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): I welcome the decision in Budget 2018 to increase support for education. Indeed, every Singaporean should have access to quality education, regardless of their background.

I applaud the efforts over the years to assimilate special needs children into mainstream schools. We have the Early Intervention Programme for Infants and Children (EIPIC), Focused Language Assistance in Reading (FLAiR) programme for those who need additional help in English and Development Support Programme (DSP) to help mild to moderate special needs children to have a smoother transition to primary school.

DSP educators gave feedback that once a week with the children is insufficient for those who need more intervention. Another teacher said that she has three special needs kids out of 24 in her preschool class. It would be good if preschools which are willing to take in kids with special needs can have additional funding and training. Can we expect future enhancements to existing schemes and also for these programmes to be available in MKs, if there is not any now?

There are allied educators in primary school. Is it time to work out something so that some of these children can have a seamless transition from preschool to primary as well?

Stressed Students and Parents

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, Sir, I understand that MOE has been retooling the education system to shift the unhealthy focus on academic competition to emphasise holistic education and the love of learning.

But a culture of "academic results focus" has already set in among the parents. We cannot blame the parents because they want to give the best to their children. They learned the culture from the old focus on academic competition, believing in the old paradigm of good grades and a linear path from elite primary schools to the top universities.

When they are faced with globalisation and technological disruptions, they become even more anxious about making sure their children get the best start in life. When MOE rightly sought to improve preschool education by setting up MKs, some parents saw this as a new first stop to academic success.

It was reported that a study conducted by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to look at the connection between well-being and PISA test achievement found that Singapore students have higher levels of anxiety, compared to the OECD average. For example, 76% of Singapore students reported feeling very anxious for a test even if they were well-prepared, compared to the OECD average of 55%. The students involved in the study were mostly Secondary 4 students. I hope MOE could do a study to see whether this kind of anxiety is also affecting primary school children and even children in preschool, so that we can learn how to mitigate the problem.

MOE should not stop to complete the transformation of the system despite these diehard habits. It will take time to change such an entrenched culture. Meanwhile, MOE could also look into communicating and educating parents on the many pathways to success in the new economy, so as to lessen their anxiety and, thus, lessen the transfer of the anxiety to their children.

Sports in Schools

Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai (Marine Parade): Mr Chairman, Sir, there are a few fundamental tenets of a child's education which I believe most of us, if not all, will subscribe to.

First, always be prepared to try something new ‒ push the envelope, break new ground, do something we have never done. Who knows, it might turn out that you will enjoy the new adventure, arise to a fresh challenge?

Second, fail at something. Being always or even often successful is no good to a young child. Learn to lose and be gracious in defeat. But also learn from losing. Pick up, dust off, try again, be stronger and better the next time round. This also teaches resilience.

Third, we have to work as a team. No man is an island, and no one functions in silos. Our children have to be able to work and play with one another and to support, complement, encourage and cheer one another on. They have to learn to come together to make a cohesive team, a team which would be stronger than the sum of its parts.

Fourth, hard work. Nothing ever comes without hard work. It takes a lot of hard work to become good at anything, and even more hard work to remain good and stay ahead of the competition. There are no short cuts.

These are all simple basic values, but the foundation and cornerstone for bringing up the women and men of tomorrow, the leaders of our next generation. I believe, Sir, that all of these are best taught, not in the classroom, but on the playing field. And I am quite sure most in this House would, I hope, agree with that. Very often, a child's first encounter with sports, especially team sports, would be in school when they first enrolled for their primary education.

Schools, therefore, play a crucial role in being the first mover in introducing sports into our children's lives. And should there be sufficient interest and sufficient talent demonstrated, the school invariably would also take the additional active role of identifying and eventually nurturing that talent. Sports, therefore, offer an educational platform for our children which cannot be easily replicated.

On that score, I would like to raise a few queries and have some suggestions for the Minister's consideration.

Do schools in Singapore have sufficient breadth, in terms of the variety and range of sports offered? This is important because not every child can afford or have an opportunity to be exposed to sports outside of school. How is anyone going to know if he or she can be good at sports if they have no opportunity to try that sport? So, the initial formative years in their primary school would be crucial. For instance, not offering, say, hockey or badminton as a school co-curricular activity (CCA) option would quite likely mean that the child might never be exposed to that sport. This, in turn, then limits the selection base from which a young budding talent might be identified and, in turn, then subsequently limits the base from which national athletes could be selected.

From a resourcing perspective, I understand that it would, of course, not be possible for every school to offer every sport. But could more be done to enhance the range of options available? Could, for example, a central body be set up, like the Co-Curricular Activities Branch (CCAB), which can then administer and offer sporting options which may not be quite so popular, quite so mainstream, and, therefore, not available in many of the schools?

4.00 pm

Alternatively, is MOE working with Sport SG or Active SG in promoting sporting options to our school children and make sports more accessible? The MOE website indicates that students who are keen on an activity which may not be offered by the school could seek the school's approval to set up that activity. How often has this been done and, in any event, is it realistic?

Nutritional Health

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, Sir, in recent years, the Ministry of Health (MOH) and MOE have been concerned about the nutritional health of school children in two aspects, namely, healthier food and a balanced diet, to fight obesity and to get young people to adopt better eating habits. This is all good. I would like to ask the Minister what percentage of schools have adopted the Healthy Meals in Schools Programme since 2011 to date. Also, how much more are students paying for these healthy meals on average and are we making sure students from low-income households can afford the meals?

Recently, there has been some public discussions about mealtimes as more schools move to single sessions. Parents are concerned that the children are eating late lunches in the mid-afternoon and not having enough time to eat snacks during recess time due to the scheduling of classes. While nutritionists say that there are no set hours for children to have their meals, they also advise that children should have three main meals and two to three snacks at regular hours. They should be eating every three hours.

I understand that MOE leaves it to the schools to decide on their daily schedules. Nevertheless, MOE could reassure the public by conducting a survey of all schools on their meal and snack scheduling and provide an advisory for regular recess and lunch breaks to ensure students would never go hungry during the school day.

Financial Support for Students

Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Chairman, Sir, inflation is an inevitable and intractable global issue. I am concerned about the rising living costs, how they will impact our students from low socioeconomic families. In spite of the subsidies, bursaries, scholarships and grants, there are some students who will still fall through the cracks. The distractions of part-time work and social problems at home may prevent them from focusing on their studies. This results in a vicious cycle where the poor cannot do well in school and they are unable to break out of the poverty cycle.

I would like to request the Minister to further enhance the current schemes available to support the aspirations of students from lower socioeconomic families. How are they given equal access to opportunities for all students regardless of their family and income backgrounds? How much resources are allocated to these schemes and how many beneficiaries are there per year?

Social Mobility Indicators

Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Chairman, Sir, in reply to a 2013 Parliamentary Question (PQ) on measuring social mobility, the Government highlighted only two types of metrics: percentages of Singaporeans who did not complete secondary education as well as post-secondary education, and growth in the median gross monthly income from work.

Some governments, notably the United Kingdom (UK), have developed a dashboard of social mobility indicators based on a lifecycle framework. The objective is to make life chances more equal at the critical points for social mobility, such as early childhood development, school readiness at age five, secondary school attainment, opportunities for tertiary education and getting into and on in the labour market.

I would like to ask the Minister for Education whether the Government monitors indicators at critical points in a person’s development that contribute to mobility, such as early childhood development, and how do our current indicators compare with countries with comprehensive dashboards, such as the UK?

Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS)

Miss Cheng Li Hui: Sir, Budget 2018 enhances the MOE FAS by raising the annual bursary quantum for pre-university student from $750 to $900 as well as updating the income eligibility criteria.

I would like to know what are the determinants used by the Ministry to decide the bursary quantum and the increase. I am glad to see the announcement in Budget 2018 to cover more meals for secondary school students under the School Meals Programme. Under the current scheme, primary school pupils receive subsidies of $2 per meal for seven times a week while secondary school students will receive subsidies of $2.50 a meal; $2.50 would seem insufficient for secondary school students.

I would like to ask what the considerations behind the decision are to increase the school meals fund and are the current subsidy amounts sufficient.

Increasing Edusave Contributions

Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Chairman, Sir, the Edusave awards and bursaries scheme has provided an excellent opportunity to our students to incentivise them, motivate them and give them a platform on which they can celebrate their achievements. The extension of the Edusave awards to non-academic achievements has also been very well-received.

The news that this already very popular scheme has been given additional resourcing, particularly targeted for the lower- to middle-income, has been very well-received. The programme has proven useful not only to defray some of the costs of education for the family but also provides an opportunity for students to use this to tap on school-based enrichment programmes to enhance holistic learning beyond the boundaries of the classroom or the textbook.

Can the Minister please elaborate further on what enrichment options there might be?

The Chairman: Minister Ng Chee Meng.

The Minister for Education (Schools) (Mr Ng Chee Meng): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their cuts.

MOE is committed to giving every child the best start in life – not just in school, but for the future. Ms Denise Phua, Mr Seah Kian Peng, Ms Foo Mee Har and Mr Zainal Sapari highlighted the driving trends of today and asked how we will prepare our children for the future economy.

I agree with them that given the trends, tomorrow's jobs will require innovation. We will prepare our children from young and we start from a position of strength. Over the years, we have developed an education system that is effective in inculcating students with sound values and equipping them with a strong academic foundation. We have built upon this base in the last few years.

One, we have strengthened our focus on the holistic development of every child. We have dialled back from an over-emphasis on academic grades. Teachers today coordinate to manage the assessment and homework load. We took steps to reduce the competitive pressures in our system, so that students can focus on their learning. For example, from 2021, the new PSLE scoring system will measure how well a student has learnt and not how he has done in comparison to his peers.

Ms Denise Phua asked if we can pilot no-PSLE through-train schools. I understand her good intentions, as well as the stresses that parents and students face. Stress arises from a complex mix of factors – policies, expectations, perceptions, mindsets and ground realities.

The PSLE changes we have made are important changes at the policy level. However, it will take time for the effects to be felt on the ground, including other policy measures like Subject-Based Banding, to increase the porosity in our schools. However, we do not think that removing PSLE is the way to go. PSLE remains a useful checkpoint at the end of primary school to help us determine where each child’s academic strengths lie. This guides the child to a suitable academic programme in secondary school, one that would best fit his learning needs.

PSLE does not, however, cast in stone what students can achieve in school in life or anytime in the future. Removing PSLE and having a through-train will only transfer the stress on parents and students elsewhere, such as to the Primary 1 registration, where if I can paraphrase Ms Foo Mee Har in her words, it would then be a 10- to 15-year race to safeguard the child's interest. The anxieties at Primary 1 then would be tremendous.

Also, the GCE "O" and "N" levels at the end of this through-train will really be most stressful. A single examination in the whole career of a child's life.

Mr Faisal Manap suggested for MOE to introduce psychology in the secondary school curriculum. Psychology, however, is an abstract discipline, not an age-appropriate subject at secondary school. A better broader approach to fulfil the same intent is to focus on 21st century competencies in our curriculum, create more space for informal learning, learning through play, and encourage opportunities for character building in the classroom, outside the classroom, in the CCAs, including our enhanced Outdoor Education. These support the socio-emotional development in our children.

Ms Denise Phua asked about the 21st century Competencies Framework and when it was last reviewed. It was last reviewed in 2014 and also during the time when I entered MOE when I took a fresh look at the Framework. Our teachers in tandem are provided many professional development opportunities and resources to support their learning and keep them updated on all the different "gogies" that Ms Denise Phua has mentioned. We have also initiated the Singapore Teaching Practice where the best teaching practices are shared online amongst teachers.

Two, we are creating multiple pathways to success, something that Mr Low Thia Khiang mentioned. We introduced Subject-based Banding to allow upper primary and secondary school students to take subjects they are strong in, at a higher level. Beyond academic strengths and interests, we are providing many opportunities for discovery and talent development in the sports and the arts.

Mr Edwin Tong made good points about sports in schools and developing sporting talent. Today, primary school students learn fundamental movement skills in different sports in their Physical Education (PE) lessons, a wide range. Primary 4 and 5 students who are interested in sports CCAs not offered by the school can consider joining MOE’s centrally-run Junior Sports Academies, which offer a variety of sports modules.

In secondary school, students learn at least six sports and take part in at least three inter-class sports competitions. A third of our students enroll in sports CCAs. Of these, 60% are non-school team players. Our schools understand that the value of sports cannot be measured by performance merely in the inter-school games.

MOE also promotes programmes organised by ActiveSG to encourage our students when they are not in school to participate in sports in the community.

Three, we are developing positive attitudes and dispositions for lifelong learning. I have highlighted repeatedly in this House and outside, the need to nurture the joy of learning and entrepreneurial dare. These are important because they sustain self-directed, lifelong learning and instill an innovative, entrepreneurial spirit in our children. These may not be measurable but are certainly observable. They are of utmost importance to shift us away from simply studying for exams to learning for life.

Mr Low Thia Khiang asked that MOE complete our transformation by changing the "entrenched" culture of an over-emphasis on academic results. He understands it will take time. I agree. I thank Mr Low for his cut and will consider his suggestion for the study proposal.

The many changes I have mentioned are meant to take pressure off parents and students, reducing the chasing after the last mark in our school system. Ultimately, I hope to partner parents and students themselves to reduce their anxieties and stress. Many parents I have spoken to tell me they agree with the directions that we have taken. They also asked, like Ms Foo Mee Har, what will all these mean for their children’s learning experiences in school? As I mentioned earlier, our education system today equips our students with a strong academic foundation and sound values. These are significant strengths.

Mr Pritam Singh mentioned education systems in Israel and Finland in the Budget Debate. Indeed, there are strengths in these systems which we can learn from. But we are circumspect when we study other systems. We do not blindly seek to replicate other systems in Singapore nor simply adopt new trends.

In fact, these countries are also looking towards Singapore and wanting to learn from us. Consider Israel: I visited Israel and looked at their talent development and innovation ecosystem. It has a strong disposition in this area but, overall, it has big averages. If we use PISA as one indicator, Israeli students underperform the OECD average.

There is also a significant education outcomes gap between the average and the top Israeli students. We do not want this in Singapore. Here, we have high averages, where our students, regardless of socio-economic status, outperform most of their peers in different countries. Rather, we will improve our education system by building on our existing strengths, even as we explore new possibilities. Let us not throw out the baby with the bath water. As such, on top of strong academic foundations and sound values, we want to get our students to move beyond the classroom and apply their knowledge in the real world. This will help nurture our next generation of "change-makers".

4.15 pm

Our students must be able to connect their "Head" knowledge to their "Hands" and create value. And their "Hands" must also be connected to their "Hearts" so that they contribute their knowledge and skills to the betterment of society. Education must go beyond the classroom and academic grades. This is key.

I will focus the rest of my speech on how we will anchor this within our education system, through the lived experiences of our students.

But, first, let me tell Members a "Story of Two Cars". I met two 10-year-old boys at a community event some time ago. They wanted to show me their toy car. I thought to myself initially what was this about? But when I saw the car, I got interested. You see, the car was not any sexy toy. It was very plain, made up of cardboard. The boys took some of their mother's shoe boxes, cut off the top and bottom and fashioned a flat chassis. They then got a set of wheels, mounted them on together with some rudimentary drive train and wired the system up. Then, they applied what they had learnt about energy in their Science class. They put on top of the chassis miniature solar panels and made their own solar-powered car. And it worked brilliantly. Their eyes sparkled when they talked to me on that Saturday morning as they showed me their solar toy car. This car is made out of pure fun, pure curiosity. These boys, all of 10 years old, applied what they had learnt in Science class to build their own toy. Impressive!

The second car is also a solar-powered car but, this time, it is a racing car. This car was built by a team of Singapore Polytechnic students taking part in the 2017 World Solar Challenge. They competed against 39 other teams from all over the world, including Cambridge University and Stanford University. They took 20 months to make that car using a high-tech carbon fibre-reinforced composite body. The top speed of this solar car is 100 kilometres per hour (km/h), built by 18- to 20-year-old boys. The team had a difficult race. They met with rough weather, an accident and, unfortunately, did not finish within the deadline. However, I want to celebrate their success and include them in my speech. This car was built out of passion, deep skills and resilience. Though they may not have won, the learning in their journey is invaluable.

These two cars may be miles apart in technology and horsepower but, educationally, they are part of the same journey – from curiosity to mastery; from knowledge to application. We want all our students to be able to make this type of learning journey. And our vehicle is Applied Learning.

What is Applied Learning? It is a mode of learning for all students, not just a separate track for vocational students. Students learn by applying and by doing. They learn beyond the classroom. They see for themselves how they can apply what they have learnt to the real world. And from all the interactions I had with students, I see them enjoying learning. They are self-motivated or become self-motivated. These are powerful learning experiences. They stick for life, driving lifelong learning.

Since 2013, we have encouraged schools to develop their own Applied Learning Programmes (ALPs). All our secondary schools now have ALPs. It is a diverse, colourful and exciting landscape, catering to a wide range of interests: STEM, Languages, Humanities, Business, Entrepreneurship, Aesthetics, Inter-disciplinary Fields, and I will now include STEAM, as Ms Denise mentioned, to add "arts" to STEM.

All the ALPs, importantly, encourage exploration, ideation and creativity. There are no tests or examinations. I have emphasised this to MOE. Students learn through experimentation – they try, fail, try, learn from it and try again.

Let me share with Members some of my experiences with students. I recently met some Fuchun secondary students and they tell me their school has an ALP called "Innovations in Science and Technology for Sustainability". They all learnt basic coding and programming and apply their coding skills to programme robots. They do it in Secondary 1.

I met one Secondary 4 boy. His name is Zee Cheen. Together with his team, Zee Cheen designed and built from scratch a robot that could move on different terrains, even on water, to retrieve and transport objects. Zee Cheen told me that when they started, and I quote, "Everything was in a mess." They had to learn to work as a team, put in place a plan, work each bolt, gear and wire step-by-step to fulfil their design. They went through many interactions.

Surprisingly, Zee Cheen told me that his biggest lesson through this ALP was not just in creating the robot. His team has to bring their robot to the Science Centre's Maker Faire. And he had to practise public speaking and he says it is not his forte. He had to explain his robot to each visitor interested in his robot! In his words, he said, "These are things I cannot learn in a classroom". This is the value of applied learning in real life.

Some of our primary schools have also developed ALPs. I have visited Teck Whye Primary which runs an ALP called "Media Whiz Kids!" I met Maisarah, a cute petite Primary 5 student. She wanted to help her schoolmates tell fake news apart from real news. So, she worked with her friends and teachers to make a short three-minute video. In the video, Maisarah explains what fake news is, why people create it, and she also suggests how to tackle it.

We all debate about fake news in this very Chamber. Through Applied Learning Programmes, our 10-year-old students are teaching it in their own way in school. It is a refreshing take on a very real concern.

Maisarah and her friends narrate and present with great confidence and clarity. Importantly, Maisarah's teachers not only use the video to raise information literacy among their students but also inculcate values. The video has been uploaded onto the school's Facebook and I encourage all of us to take a look.

I am very proud of the confident and creative students our schools have nurtured through ALPs. But I am even prouder of our teachers, who have committed their time and effort to develop Applied Learning experiences for their students.

Ms Elaine Koh, a teacher I met from Fuchun Secondary, told me the difference she saw in her Secondary 4 Normal (Technical) students, Viknesh and Kumaran, after they have participated in the Maker Faire. She shared that they were very engaged and focused when they tinkered and built things. And when I met Viknesh and Kumaran, they told me they are interested to study aeronautical and mechanical engineering at ITE. They want to design and build aeroplanes and racing cars. ALP has ignited a passion in them, to want to continue their learning and their maker journey.

ALPs are intentional ways to spur innovation in our students. MOE will build on the good work done on ALPs. I have directed all primary schools to set up ALPs by 2023. We will also support schools with ALPs to further enhance and strengthen their capabilities and programmes. This is an investment worth making – nurture innovation and creativity and, importantly, prepare our children for our future.

MOE will make another major investment to prepare our children for the future. We will put aside a significant budget to develop the new Science Centre. The new Science Centre will play a key role in providing such Applied Learning experiences for all students when it is completed by the mid-2020s. It will bring science to life through immersive and interactive exhibits and experiences. It will partner homegrown and international companies to provide a wide range of programmes to students and youth: hands-on maker workshops, experiments in specialised laboratories, opportunities for mentorship and research. And I will remember to add, the artistic element into it as well.

It is not just in the applied fields where Applied Learning is relevant. Our teachers are making a big effort to infuse Applied Learning experiences into their day-to-day teaching. For example, we are using Applied Learning to make our MTLs come alive for our students. This will help foster their appreciation for languages and strengthen their proficiency, which Ms Tin Pei Ling spoke about, and which Mr Azmoon Ahmad and Mr Low Thia Khiang also mentioned in the Budget Debate. Mr Chairman, in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Although our education system is well-regarded by the international community, many people are still concerned that in a future where automation is the norm, will our next generation be replaced by machines?

I can understand their concerns. But I am confident that as long as our education system can empower our children to be creative and acquire good values, our next generation will be able to grasp the opportunities in the future.

In order to cultivate creativity from young, MOE is now promoting Applied Learning in our schools. Our students already have a solid academic foundation; but we do not want them to be only able to "talk about strategies on paper" and become nerds who only know how to talk but not how to do. They must know how to convert knowledge into power and use it in real life. Only by applying intelligently what you have learnt can you create infinite possibilities with finite knowledge.

I will share an example. Students of Yuan Qing Secondary School are learning to write xinyao (新谣) in the Chinese classes. Through song writing, their language ability will improve and they can also appreciate the beauty of the language better. One student, Guo Zifeng, wrote a song, "My Mother". The lyrics are very touching and the melody beautiful, expressing his love and gratitude to his mother. The song won an award in the 2017 Xinyao Singing and Writing Competition.

The work of Zifeng makes us understand the importance of right values. However good a person’s knowledge base and creative capability may be, if his values are flawed, he will bring greater harm to society. Hence, we introduced various programmes in our schools to instill good values in our students. We teach them to be centred on the right morals. This has been our education principle all along.

Applied learning should not be confined to a particular subject and the classroom. We hope parents can do the same in daily life to give our children more space and time for applied learning and instill right values in them. Parents can work together with the school and create a better future for our children.

(In English): I will now move on to connecting the "Hands" and the "Heart". It is critical that we equip our children with the right values and develop in them a heart for others. Without the right moral compass, talented individuals can do more harm to society than good, and that will be tragic. Just like knowledge, values cannot remain simply in the "head". They must be acted out, applied to the real world.

Mr Ang Wei Neng encouraged schools and students to work with their local communities. I mentioned my visit to Teck Whye Primary earlier. During my visit, I met a Primary 6 student. Her name is Zer Jynn. She showed me a pair of chopsticks that she and her team designed for people with weaker muscular control, such as our elderly. Zer Jynn explained that she and her team had first thought of a catch-and-release mechanism to allow users to use the chopsticks with minimal strength. And she built this model, nothing fancy, using simple materials – chopsticks, a straw, a spring and a masking tape. And in this model, she designed something to help the elderly grab food. She experimented several times until she was satisfied with the catch-and-release function. With this design, she went on to 3D-print a plastic prototype, with the help of her teachers.

These are the 3D-print chopsticks. However, she is not satisfied with the plastic prototype as it did not work as well as her initial prototype. You see, she has probably reversed the hinge. But I have given her some possibilities and she told me she will work to improve her prototype. She is a Primary 6 girl.

4.30 pm

And Zer Jynn is not alone. Her schoolmates in the Teck Whye Primary iDesign Club have built learning aids for their peers with dyslexia, and other prototypes to improve the quality of life for the physically disabled or the elderly. Through the iDesign Club, they not only learn about design principles but, equally important, they are tacitly learning to care, empathise and serve others in the community.

Zer Jynn and her schoolmates may only be in primary school but, under the guidance of their school and teachers, they exemplify what we want to nurture in our young the connection among the head, the heart and the hands, innovating to improve the lives of others, developing leadership, empathy, care and, importantly, resilience. Applied learning in real life is so much more effective than just doing it in the classroom.

Besides developing solutions for the community, our schools and students have also partnered the community to strengthen culture and heritage. A good example is Bulan Bahasa – the Malay Language Month. I worked with Minister Masagos on this. The community hosts activities, such as writing workshops and storytelling, that broaden students' exposure to language and culture. Students, in turn, contribute to the community. They set up activity booths for the public. They also take on the roles of Rakan Bahasa, or Friends of the Language, to serve as museum guides at the Malay Heritage Centre.

The two-way partnership between schools and community not only enhances the learning of students but allows them to put values into action and serve the community.

In a separate event at Fiesta Bahasa, this time round at the National Library, I was very happy to see a batch of Hwa Chong Institution boys participating. You see, they were learning Malay, trying to learn to speak it fluently. These Chinese boys from a Special Assistance Plan (SAP) school were interacting with our Malay students and parents naturally, without a hint of any language barrier!

Mr Chairman, this is applied learning in action, in languages, to promote our Singapore's unique cultures and heritage.

As we strive to build a caring and inclusive society, we must make sure no child is left behind. Last year, the Government announced major plans to strengthen the preschool sector to give every child a good start and the best chance to succeed in life. This included upgrading the preschool profession to attract good teachers and careers.

I welcome Dr Intan Mokhtar's suggestions. I am happy to update that we are on track for the NIEC to be fully operational by January 2019. NIEC will offer a range of quality programmes to prepare those who aspire to join the Early Childhood (EC) sector with a good foundation for a career as an EC professional. I would like to reassure Dr Intan Mokhtar that EC training today is already delivered with a heavy emphasis on practical skills. Most faculty are experienced practitioners in the preschool sector. It will be no different in NIEC.

Separately, MOE has facilitated professional exchanges between MK educators and also primary school teachers. They help develop mutual understanding, which smoothens the transition from kindergarten to Primary 1.

MOE is also committed to providing quality and affordable education to all Singapore Citizens, regardless of their financial circumstances. Our education today is heavily subsidised at all levels. Ms Denise Phua mentioned Digital Equity, as learning is done more online.

This year, we will be rolling out the Student Learning Space (SLS) to all students. SLS will provide high-quality, curriculum-aligned learning resources and online learning tools for students. This will drive self-directed learning which can take place anytime, anywhere and, hopefully, reduce the reliance contribution as well. MOE has provided funding to schools, which can be used to subsidise students from less advantaged backgrounds, for them to purchase mobile learning devices.

Mr Edwin Tong and quite a few others in the Budget Debate asked about Edusave contributions. We will increase the annual Edusave contributions from 2019. With this increase, students can participate in more activities, such as creative writing programmes and learning journeys, to broaden their learning experiences. The Government also provides a range of financial assistance schemes to assist those who are in need. Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Ms Cheng Li Hui asked about this.

At the primary to pre-university levels, Singaporean students who need assistance can tap on the MOE FAS. We will do more for students from lower-income families by enhancing the MOE FAS. We will raise the income criteria for the Gross Household Income per month from $2,500 to $2,750, as well as the per capita household income per month from $625 to $690. We will increase the annual bursary quantum for pre-university students from $750 to $900. We will provide 10 meals for secondary school students under the School Meals Programme, an increase from the seven we provide currently. This is in answer to Assoc Prof Daniel Goh. We will also increase the income eligibility criteria for the Edusave Merit Bursary and Independent School Bursary.

Overall, with these enhancements, the various financial assistance schemes will cost the Government close to $100 million per year, and benefit around 90,000 students in total.

Mr Chairman, I have said what MOE, our schools and teachers are committed to doing. But let me emphasise that we cannot do this alone. We need the whole nation to move with us towards holistic education, and parents play a most important role.

I strongly urge all parents to give our children the time for their minds to imagine; space for them to experiment and learn to embrace and take risks; opportunities to learn from failing, trying, relearning and trying until they succeed.

Mr Chairman, let me conclude with a story. I visited Assumption English School last July to open their upgraded school site. The opening ceremony was a most unusual one, hinged on robots programmed by their students part of an ALP. I was invited to participate in a robot race on stage, to move the robots, in order to switch on a ray of bright-coloured lights to mark the official opening of the school. The robots were powered solely by wind and controlled by an iPad. My engineering mind straightaway went into a thinking mode and I thought these robots could fail easily and, when they fail to function, the bulbs will not light up, and the failure will be significant, in front of the whole school, a hall full of parents, students, MOE senior officials.

After the ceremony, I congratulated the then principal, Mrs Mabel Leong, and I quietly asked her "What would you have done if the robots did not work? What was the backup?" She told me quietly, too, "Minister, there is no back up." She said that if the robots did not work despite all their planning and efforts, she would have simply stood up, apologised to me and sought my understanding to skip the segment. In spite of the risks, she decided to keep the robot segment. I suspect because she is proud of her students and it showcased her students' pride in their learning. I must tell you, I smiled the widest smile in an entire week, knowing what Mable was doing.

Our principals and schools are moving in the right direction. More of them are taking calculated risks for their students to have the time and space for experimentation, to try, fail, try again, even in front of a Minister! Seeing how the schools and educators are changing, I sincerely urge all parents to join us in creating similar opportunities for our children.

The results of such opportunities may not be immediately apparent. But the true test for all of us is not any single examination. It is the test of life. It is such opportunities that will benefit our children for a lifetime, much more than cramping their free time with excessive tuition.

I hope all parents will encourage their children when they participate in their schools' ALPs, Outdoor Education Programme, Values-in-Action activities. Engage them in conversation over their Applied Learning experiences, share in their successes and setbacks. Share in their joys, empathise with their failings. Create more of such learning experiences for them in the classroom and outside the classroom.

With the full support from educators and, most importantly, parents, our children will get the best start in life, whatever the future may bring. They will acquire the skills and values to thrive in the future. A brighter future of greater fulfilment awaits them. [Applause.]

The Senior Minister of State for Education (Dr Janil Puthucheary): Sir, our education system is evolving. To prepare each of our students for the future, MOE has to be prepared to do different things, and to do things differently.

I thank Ms Denise Phua and Miss Cheng Li Hui for their encouragement as we continue with our efforts to support our students with Special Educational Needs (SEN). Some of this expertise did not traditionally reside with MOE. Decades ago, we tried something different. We partnered VWOs which had deep expertise in SEN support. And as both sides learnt from each other, these partnerships evolved to strengthen support for our students. One good example of this is our relationship with AWWA, with whom we work on different service models. The partnership extends to mainstream schools, where Asian Women Welfare Association (AWWA) provides training and consultation services to our educators, supporting students with physical and visual impairments.

Today, 80% of our students with SEN are enrolled in mainstream schools. I say that again to make sure we are all clear – 80% of our students with SEN are enrolled in mainstream schools. They are supported not just by allied educators, but also by educational psychologists and suitable intervention programmes, including those provided by organisations, such as AWWA.

As our students move on to the post-secondary space, they are supported by SEN Support Offices in each of our IHLs. To prepare for entry into the workforce, students with SEN can participate in SG Enable's IHL Internship Programme, as well as the RISE Mentoring scheme.

We are also looking ahead and constantly seeking ways to better support our students to realise their potential. There are different ways to do this, including the suggestion of an academy for those with special needs and all who support them. For now, MOE takes a targeted approach. We are enhancing the professional development for our staff and are also looking at how to better support students with SEN at key transition points, like when they enter schools.

Strong partnership between MOE and the community has also enabled the sector to make significant improvements. Over the past year, MOE has worked with our Government-funded SPED schools to ensure the smooth implementation of compulsory education for children with moderate to severe special needs. We are confident that students who can benefit from such specialised support will receive quality education in these schools.

Yet, as Ms Denise Phua has pointed out, our efforts must go beyond legislation. MOE and our partners must continue to look for ways to do better, to deliver affordable, quality Specialised Education for our students.

Grace Orchard School, an early participant of the School-to-Work Transition Programme (S2W) did several new things to ensure that their students benefited from the opportunity. They reached out to the private sector for job opportunities; they updated their curriculum, so that the students could start their job training in their last years within the school. The S2W programme has seen positive outcomes, and we are working with MSF and SG Enable to scale it up.

We are also looking into lifelong learning opportunities for those with special needs. Our SkillsFuture Credit course directory is continually updated with new courses. We also have a SkillsFuture Study Award for Persons with Disabilities to recognise those who demonstrate resilience and perseverance in pursuing lifelong learning.

I can address a few of the specific queries that Miss Cheng Li Hui and Ms Denise Phua brought up. The DSP programme, together with EIPIC, is organised by MSF and I need to defer to them to talk about those interventions. But there are three MKs that offer the DSP programme and we will study how we can do that better.

To Ms Denise Phua's questions, all teachers since 2005 have been equipped with SEN training during their pre-service training at the National Institute of Education (NIE). Each school also has a group of teachers who have undergone certificate level training in special needs at NIE. These are known teachers trained in special needs.

4.45 pm

[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]

On top of that, there is at least one Allied Educator (AED) for Learning and Behavioural Support (LBS) looking at the behavioural needs rather than educational needs in every primary school. We are recruiting more of these AED (LBS) and our target is to ensure all primary schools will have a baseline provision of two, and 95% of secondary schools will be given a baseline provision of at least one AED (LBS).

Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about National Education (NE). There are people who feel that the storyline is worn and tired, or, as Mr Ang Wei Neng expressed it, that NE is propaganda.

Sir, MOE recognises that we have to be open to doing NE differently. We must empower our students to discover what being Singaporean means to them personally − not because the syllabus or a textbook says so, but because they themselves know so through a process of discovery and the creation of a strong sense of their own identity.

This was the basis for the work of the NE Review Committee, where my MOE colleagues and I, together with colleagues from community organisations and the private sector, had the chance to hear from over 2,000 students and educators. Our recommendations centre on nurturing a sense of belonging to our country and community, a sense of Singapore's realities and challenges, and a sense of shared hope and aspirations as a nation.

Our efforts to refresh and improve NE will then be driven by three groups of interventions.

First, just as learning must evolve to remain relevant, NE discussions must take on contemporary issues, as well as the perspectives of different Singaporeans, including our students themselves. This will enable our students' shared appreciation for the ever-evolving Singapore story.

Mr Leon Perera asked about how we expose our students to diverse perspectives. This is already happening, is already done in subjects like Social Studies, History and Geography. Students undertake learning journeys, they come to Parliament to visit and witness Parliamentary debates. Their learning is well-supported by educators.

Our students examine evidence and different viewpoints before arriving at informed and reasoned conclusions. This includes exploring the rationale behind policy decisions, and the pros and cons of alternatives. In General Paper (GP) lessons, students consider different perspectives and learn to differentiate between fact and opinion. One of the NE Review Committee's recommendations is for students to discuss contemporary issues on a more regular basis and not just during the subject periods that I have just mentioned.

Bendemeer Secondary School is a school which already makes a conscious effort to do so and provides an example of how we can develop the process further. When I visited the school, I saw students have lively discussions on their own on issues relevant to Singapore, such as the environment, a car-lite society, technology and future jobs. The school is looking to deepen this practice in their Character and Citizenship Education periods, so that students have the time and space to explore their convictions and reflect upon such issues.

Our students may not always agree with one another, Indeed, in Bendeemer Secondary School, the session that I witnessed, there was a lively debate. They may not even agree with their teachers, but we do want to ensure that there is space for respectful conversations and that we nurture in our students open-mindedness, respect for one another and that they develop the skills for critical thinking.

The second group of interventions is that we will facilitate citizenship experiences which empower our students, allowing them to find their own meaning as citizens. There are already milestone experiences throughout a student’s journey in our schools, such as the NE Show for all primary students, subsequently, things like the Outward Bound School.

Schools like Ping Yi Secondary School decided to try something different. Their 15-year-old students receive their National Registration Identity Cards (NRICs) in a special school ceremony that emphasises that despite their different backgrounds, these 15-year-olds must stand together and understand the shared privileges and responsibilities of being Singaporean. We look forward to making more of such cohort or school-based experiences meaningful and available for our students.

Educators are critical to any learning experience. So, a third thrust of our efforts supports teachers. They have been doing well and, going forward, we will include more professional development opportunities and involve experienced educators in spearheading pedagogical innovation.

If I may return to some of the questions that Mr Leon Perera asked, he took a particular view about labels and perhaps my labelling of his comments has partisan politics. Sir, I provided those words not as a label but as an explanation of what he was asking for. Perhaps, I may need to expand upon why I believe that is an apt explanation for what he is asking for.

The Member himself has acknowledged that he has attended schools in a non-partisan, non-political capacity. There is no obstruction to him doing so. What he is asking for, is for him to be allowed to attend in any partisan political capacity. There is a difference. He seems to believe that he has previously attended in a non-partisan political capacity, but I am assuming that the reason he is asking to attend in a partisan capacity, because he is assuming that everybody else attends only in a political partisan capacity. This is a level of hubris that is really quite remarkable. If he can attend in a non-partisan, non-political way, I think the assumption should be, in good faith that other people can do as well.

What he is asking for, what he is implying, is for him to attend in a partisan political way somehow provides balance within our existing framework. That is not so. What he is asking for is a fundamental shift that we bring partisan political debates by elected MPs into the schools. That is not what we do currently, and so it would be inappropriate for an invitation to be extended to him in his capacity as a member of a political party and as an MP.

It is not a label, Mr Chairman. It is an explanation that what he is asking for is inappropriate.

Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked about our students' nutritional health. MOE had worked with the Health Promotion Board (HPB) to survey our students' nutritional habits, and also in the rollout of the Healthy Meals in Schools Programme. Under this programme, canteen stalls prepare food with healthier ingredients and use healthier cooking methods. Since January 2017, all mainstream schools have come on board this programme.

Our schools also recognise that students benefit from meal breaks so that they can sustain their energy and focus. Students have two meal breaks a day, with a longer lunch break if there are afternoon programmes.

We also help our students understand the importance of a healthy and balanced diet. Primary school students are taught to read food labels, to plan healthy meals and the importance of eating enough and eating right. As MOE and HPB continue to work to build up their knowledge and their habits, I must stress the vital role that parents play in reinforcing these healthy habits at home.

Sir, MOE's efforts are, ultimately, part of our Government's commitment to a society where people have the opportunity to do better and progress, regardless of their starting point in life.

Ms Sylvia Lim asked about MOE's tracking of social mobility. Last week, the Minister for Finance updated the House on the Government's efforts to study social mobility as measured by the incomes of adult Singaporeans as compared to their parents'.

On MOE's part, we track closely the progress of all students in our education system. Like other countries, we do pay close attention to those from more disadvantaged family backgrounds. We monitor how they fare in school, including at key milestones of education attainment, their progression to post-secondary institutions, including the polytechnics and universities. More importantly, we put in place programmes to give extra support to those who need it right from early childhood prior to Primary 1, and many different interventions, including meals, career counselling and learning support programmes.

As a result of these interventions, we have made significant progress. Today, nine in 10 students from the bottom 20% of socio-economic stratification progress to post-secondary education. Fifteen years ago, only five in 10 did. Today, more than half of our students who live in 1-room to 3-room flats progress on to publicly-funded degree or diploma programmes.

Internationally, as I updated this House last month, our 15-year-old students from the most disadvantaged families performed significantly better in PISA than OECD students of a similar socio-economic background.

Sir, social mobility has always been, and will continue to be, a priority of education. We start early on, we ensure access to quality education for all students and, on top of that, levelling-up programmes for the disadvantaged to give them every opportunity for success. In our IHLs, our students are prepared well for the workforce, with nine in 10 of them able to get a job within six months of graduation.

With MKs and NIEC, we are also seeking to improve access to quality preschool education. Our efforts to provide space for exploration and applied learning in schools will benefit all students, regardless of their background.

In the higher education space, as well as in our future economy, it is about the diversity of pathways that recognise and reward different strengths, as well as investments in continuous learning and relearning that will ultimately serve our mission of ensuring that social mobility is maintained in this nation of ours.

Sir, as we look forward to a new future, with many paths and many possibilities, our education system continues to evolve, trying different things and trying to do things differently. What has remained unchanged is the belief that all of us together – MOE, schools, parents and the community – must continue to provide all our students with opportunities and experiences that bring out the best in them so that we can all realise our collective potential as a nation.

Aptitude-based Admission in ITE

Mr Zainal Sapari: Sir, as a former educator, I was heartened by MOE's move to further incorporate aptitude-based admission into our universities, polytechnics and ITEs. I believe that it is important to help students be curious and engaged in what they are learning. Such is what is needed to encourage lifelong learning, a necessary skill for success in the real world.

Aptitude-based admission presents another approach to evaluate the students' strengths and weaknesses. Such an awareness may allow the education system to equip them with the skills that are best suited for their abilities and interests. Personally, I see aptitude-based evaluation as a means to uncover hidden gems amongst our students, ensuring that the education system is able to recognise these latent abilities and offer them the best possible chance for their career development.

Studies by MOE have shown that among students with similar national examinations aggregate scores, those admitted based on aptitude tend to do better in their studies and are more likely to continue in careers in the sectors they were trained for. Hence, can MOE share its plans to offer more courses based on Aptitude-Based Admission to our ITEs?

Polytechnic Foundation Programme (PFP)

Dr Lim Wee Kiak: Sir, The Polytechnic Foundation Programme (PFP) is a good way to help students from the Secondary 4 Normal (Academic) stream to gain direct entry to our polytechnics. It gives hope and confidence to the students whose academic grades may otherwise be inadequate and inspires them to keep on pushing on with their dreams and aspirations.

The exemplary performance of students from the pioneer batch who have graduated last year is an indication of the success of this programme. As such, I hope the Ministry will consider further expanding PFP beyond 800 students. I note from a Straits Times report that PFP has been beneficial in helping students adjust to life at polytechnic, with some graduates outperforming their "O" level peers as well. Perhaps the polytechnics may wish to offer the option to other students who may have qualified for admission to polytechnic but need extra help.

Considering the overall performance of PFP's Pioneer Batch, I wish to ask what further plans does the Minister have to support the aspirations of the students who opt for this pathway.

Common Entry Programmes at Polytechnics

Mr Seah Kian Peng: Sir, there are foundational engineering courses under the Common Entry Programme (CEP), where they will receive their Engineering diploma.

CEP would enable students to be exposed to different specialisations within engineering, before deciding on a specific engineering diploma. I understand that these are for students who are interested to pursue this broad subject but would like more time to discover their areas of interests before selecting a diploma of their choice in the second semester or second year. Many of us have been in that position before – not sure what to do, what we would like to do, what to pursue for our studies and for our career.

So, I think having such a CEP is a good move. With this exposure, the students will have opportunities to tread on shallow water before taking the plunge, thus minimising bad career decisions at the end of the road.

It is also a way for us to embed the required DNA, core of the discipline into each subject, while giving students free rein to explore their specialisation later on.

At the broader level, can the Minister provide an update on its efforts to provide more options for polytechnic students to explore their interests and strengths before choosing their specific course of study?

I have two other specific questions for the Minister as follows: (a) are there now more engineering graduates with the inception of CEP; and (b) secondly, does the Minister intend to expand CEP to non-engineering subjects?

5.00 pm

Experiential Learning at Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs)

Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Mr Chairman, in order to better prepare our students to be skilled and competent and to be able to hit the ground running when they enter the workforce, it is important that they receive hands-on training in skillsets which dovetail into and complement the industry sectors they are trained for. This not only provides our industries with well-trained and upskilled employees but also gives the new trainees an opportunity to master the trade from an early stage.

In this light, the Work-Learn Technical Diploma (WLTD) programme, which is about to commence shortly for ITE graduates, is very much to be welcomed. This programme provides graduates with first-hand experience to learn, practise and do at the same time. Could the Minister provide an update on the WLTD programme, including how many have applied for this programme, which industry sectors have seen the greatest interest, and whether there are plans to expand this programme and in what direction?

In addition, could the Minister also provide an update on the SkillsFuture Work Study degree programme: what has been the take-up rate for this programme? What has been the feedback so far from students' and participating employers? Can this programme also be enhanced? And are there plans to grow the number of applicable industries and participating partnering employers?

The Chairman: Mr Ang Wei Neng, you have two cuts. Please take them together.

Mr Ang Wei Neng: Chairman, many ITE students and graduates are good with their hands and less brilliant in paper-and-pen examinations. Singapore is far behind some parts of the world in nurturing technical skills. For example, in the UK, apprenticeship programmes offer work-based learning which can lead to a bachelor's or master's degree.

In Germany, its vocational training programmes cater to 60% of the country's young people. These dual-training programmes are a mix of theory and hands-on training in areas like advanced Manufacturing, IT, Banking and Hospitality. Trainees do not pay for the training. In fact, they are paid for the time they take for the training. As a result of this programme, the youth jobless rate in Germany is very low.

Similarly, in Finland, more than 50% of the Finnish youths apply for technical and vocational education in training. So, like Mr Edwin Tong, I would like MOE to give an update on WLTD, as well as the Work-Study Degree programme.

IHLs to Better Support Lifelong Learning

The rapid development of technology has benefited lives and also disrupted lives at the same time. Many skillsets learnt during an undergraduate course a decade ago can turn obsolete in just one year. Gone are the days where a graduate degree can last for life. We need to relearn, retool, re-energise throughout our working lives. What roles do our oldest public universities like the National University of Singapore (NUS) and the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) play in promoting lifelong learning? Are these IHLs adequately funded to provide courses for lifelong learning?

Currently, NUS has a School of Continuing and Lifelong Learning offering Bachelor of Technology programmes, specialised certificate courses and courses for Executives and Professionals. NUS Alumni can study up to a maximum of two modules over a three-year period until 2020, and the first year of study is free.

Similarly, NTU runs a College of Professional and Continuing Education, where alumni are entitled to 20% discount on courses. What has the take-up rate been like? How do IHLs ensure the courses offered are relevant to emerging trends and future needs? How are they working with industrial players to ensure that courses are useful and future-ready?

SkillsFuture and Impact on Singaporeans

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: Since the launch of the SkillsFuture movement, there are numerous initiatives implemented to help Singaporeans upskill, reskill, deep-skill and cross-skill. Nonetheless, amidst the plethora of SkillsFuture offerings, how successful have we been in helping Singaporeans not just improve or expand their repertoire of skills, but also helping them remain employed or even become more employable?

How extensive are efforts to increase awareness amongst students and employees on the opportunities that SkillsFuture offers? How aware are Singaporeans about the various SkillsFuture courses that they have for them? How many Singaporeans have taken up SkillsFuture programmes, such as Earn and Learn and the SkillsFuture Study Award since they were first launched? How extensively are our universities and IHLs working with employers to implement such SkillsFuture initiatives and programmes?

May I propose that employers who are keen to be part of the SkillsFuture movement actively advertise the positions within their organisations in which they are able to support programmes, such as the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn or the SkillsFuture Study Award? Probably, a separate category can be set up to help Singaporeans navigate MySkillsFuture or SkillsConnect portals and identify employers who are keen to support them in such SkillsFuture programmes, beyond just the usual job vacancies that employers have within their respective organisations. This will facilitate job searches by Singaporeans and help them identify employers who are supportive of skills training among their employees.

It would also be good to link employers to support SkillsFuture programmes with the educational institutions that provide such SkillsFuture programmes within these online platforms to make it easier for Singaporeans planning their career and training and development.

SkillsFuture and Job Readiness

Ms Foo Mee Har: Chairman, I would like to declare my interest as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Wealth Management Institute, a SkillsFuture training provider.

SkillsFuture was launched four years ago at a cost of about $1 billion a year. It was driven by the imperative to have Singaporeans develop new capabilities for the future and embrace a culture of lifelong learning in order to ride the waves of change brought about by rapid technological disruptions and economic restructuring.

It is unclear to me how successful we have been on this journey. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman said in a recent interview with The Straits Times that we are no more than one-third of the way. For the movement to gather more traction with both employers and employees, there must be clear linkages between training courses to skills acquisition and improving career prospects.

We can be justifiably proud of the capabilities of public sector IHLs in producing graduates with strong employment prospects, as evidenced by employment surveys and low youth unemployment rates. But the ecosystem for continuing education and training is not endowed with the same scale, resources and infrastructure.

As more and more learning is expected to take place after one joins the workforce, adult learning will become an increasingly important part of our education system. I would like to ask the Minister what plans are in place to nurture a vibrant and scalable continuing education ecosystem capable of responding rapidly to the evolving needs of industry.

Let me give an example. In the areas where there are significant job opportunities, I would like to suggest to the Government to invest and develop such training infrastructure to provide the economies of scale needed to develop strong capabilities. We know there are 42,000 new information and communications technology (ICT) professionals needed over the next three years in industries like finance, healthcare and logistics. We should really consider setting up a national institute of ICT for professionals to provide a comprehensive set of training programmes that facilitate aspiring professionals’ entry to the industry, while offering seasoned professionals skills for them to master and apply in this particularly attractive industry.

Sir, companies also have a critical role to play in the SkillsFuture movement and the workplace is undoubtedly the best place for job-specific training. I would like to ask the Minister what strategies will be deployed to get companies engaged in SkillsFuture, and how SkillsFuture can support trade associations to accelerate the implementation of ITMs.

Addressing Skills Deficiency

Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Sir, international comparisons, such as those in the PISA and PIAAC studies, provide valuable opportunities for improving our understanding of the gaps in education and in training.

We are all familiar with PISA, and PIAAC stands for the Programme for International Assessment of Adult Competencies. Singapore’s inclusion in such studies would not have been possible without the Ministry's progressive efforts and support.

By highlighting potential gaps in policy, the findings from such surveys are useful in guiding early intervention strategies. In addition, the information they provide can improve the efficiency with which intervention is applied. In particular, the survey on adult skills conducted under the PIAAC study had found that among the 34 economies surveyed, Singapore ranked first for the use of ICT skills at work. Singapore’s corresponding rankings for numeracy skills and reading skills are also high, at 6th and 7th respectively.

Sir, at the same time, Singapore workers also have some of the strongest relationships between proficiency in literacy, numeracy and wages among the countries in the study. What this implies is that workers who have skills deficiencies could be expected to perform significantly poorer in the labour market.

This raises some specific areas of concern. My interpretation of the results of the PIAAC survey is that the proportion of workers in Singapore who may be at risk of skills deficiency is not insignificant. While the results of surveys must be looked at in perspective, the areas of concern they point to in Singapore’s case suggest that lack of basic literacy and ICT skills appears to affect skills performance in other areas. So, there is a significant knock-on effect. This could imply those without foundation in literacy and ICT skills will not be able to make further progress in the labour market.

I would like to ask the Minister how this challenge is addressed in the national skills training framework. In particular, the same study shows much more variability in skills among Singapore workers than those in the other countries in the survey, with our older workers clearly performing poorer compared to their younger counterparts. This higher variance in skills proficiency suggests that training has to be much more carefully tailored to individual needs. How is this dealt with?

Developing High Quality Human Resources

Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng (Nominated Member): Sir, in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Government has increased its spending in education and lifelong learning in this year's Budget. Singapore's ageing population and declining birth rate will directly affect the structure of our workforce in the future. In view of the constraints of our small population, we have always championed the idea of everyone contributing towards one's best, and that everyone could get to use one's value and talent fully. Therefore, I fully support increasing our investments into education, and giving greater attention to raise the quality of our human resources so that our economy will continue to develop and prosper.

Trade associations are willing to play an active part in this long-term plan to develop human resources. Our IHLs provide one of the key sources of business talents. The training and curriculum in IHLs should match the actual needs of the business community. In view of this, if trade associations could collaborate closely with IHLs to educate our students in accordance with the practical needs of the businesses, it would be an arrangement that produces many benefits.

From what I know, in the aspect of curriculum planning, some institutions would seek views and feedback from the business community or the relevant trade associations. Such beneficial interaction is meaningful. Moving forward, we hope that the interaction between IHLs and trade associations will not be confined to merely consultation. In operationalising and implementing these training programmes, trade associations should also be invited to participate, particularly those which are willing and with the capabilities to do so.

I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Minister, in the event when there are gaps between the needs of businesses and the training received in the IHLs, how could the two parties come together to address these gaps?

The ability of our economy to sustain its growth is due partly to the business community and the Government-linked companies having sufficient top-rated talents. Taking this year's Budget as an example, the Government introduced the Net Investment Returns (NIR) framework in 2008. NIR contributed $15.9 billion to the Government's revenues this year, far exceeding the $7 billion it contributed in financial year (FY) 2009. It has become the Government's largest revenue source, outstripping corporate income tax, personal income tax and Goods and Services Tax (GST).

Much of the NIR, which is based on the national Reserves, has come from the Government Investment Corporation (GIC) and Temasek Holdings. The country's investment depends on high-quality talent, they possess global perspectives, rich industry experiences, and understand deeply global economic developments. The fact that the NIR exceeds other tax revenues reflects the importance of high-end talent to our economy. In this regard, the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SCCCI) has implemented many initiatives to study market developments in China and encouraging businesses across all sectors to broaden their vision. High-end talent can help businesses and industries to innovate and grow. In the long term, this will help contribute more towards our corporate income taxes.

Therefore, I suggest we undertake education with a broader perspective, and give more emphasis to the development of high-quality human resources, so as to promote the future development of our economy and businesses.

Funding for Postgraduate Programmes

5.15 pm

Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Nee Soon): Chairman, the Government is encouraging our workforce and students to focus on short-term skills-based courses, instead of longer-term broad programmes. This is the appropriate move. However, for some sectors, there is still considerable work needed to get the SkillsFuture and Continuing Education short-term skills-based courses up and running. This is because the industry in those sectors may need more time to determine on the industry's future requirements. As such, would the Government consider delaying the decision to cut funding for post-graduate programmes until the ecosystem of short-term skills-based courses is more mature in those sectors?

Miss Cheng Li Hui: Chairman, with the changing economy and technological disruptions, it is important for adult learners to continue to reskill and upskill themselves to face the needs of our future economy. IHLs have been ramping up their delivery of CET, by providing short training courses for adults to acquire the right skills that can be applied in their respective jobs.

More industry-relevant modular courses have also been introduced to provide both undergraduates and postgraduates to learn new skills and develop deeper skills.

Beyond clearly skills-based and industry relevant courses, it is also important to continue support for postgraduate programmes like Masters programmes since they cater to a different group of Singaporeans who might prefer a more structured approach to training. Minister Ong Ye Kung had mentioned that MOE was going to review the funding for such postgraduate programmes. I would like to ask for the outcome of the review.

Micro-credentials at Universities

Dr Lim Wee Kiak: Sir, more universities around the world from the United States (US) to Australia and New Zealand are offering micro-credentials, which are like mini-degrees or certifications in a specific field. I am glad our autonomous universities (AUs) are following suit to keep up with the demand. These bite-sized courses are good for our busy individuals who are keen to upgrade and upskill themselves but do not have the time or resources for full-time postgraduate courses. The prestige and reputation of the AUs will give students further assurance of the effectiveness and legitimacy of the course materials and assessment methods.

Nevertheless, while the main goal of these micro-credentials is to encourage and recognise the mastery of specific skills, many individuals still aspire to attain formal postgraduate qualifications.

Will the Ministry expand the scheme and allow employees to eventually attain full qualifications from various micro-courses? For example, students who achieve sufficient micro-credentials in business administration topics could convert them into full credits and transfer them into a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration. According to Converge, a digital magazine by the Centre for Digital Education, which is a national research and advisory institute specialising in higher education technology trends, policy and funding, these are what universities in America are working on.

We are gearing away from over-emphasis on academic accomplishments, but formal qualifications are still greatly valued and can be a powerful source of motivation for Singaporeans to pursue skills upgrading and lifelong learning.

Local Academic Core in Universities

Mr Seah Kian Peng: Chairman, we are living in an increasingly interconnected world, and it is right and appropriate that our workforce reflect this global diversity.

However, back in 2013, I was surprised that Singaporean academics formed the minority in context-sensitive fields in political science, public policy and the communications departments in local universities.

About a third of university academics in the UK are from outside the UK. This is according to figures published by the Higher Education Statistics Agency. Saudi Arabia has gone down the localisation route, by hiring foreigners for academic positions at government universities as a last resort.

Last year, the Minister in an earlier reply to me, mentioned that the percentage of foreign academics have declined from 47% 10 years ago to 40% today. The Minister had recognised the importance of academic staff diversity, in tandem with having our universities imbued with local character and identity.

With an eye on the latter, how confident is the Minister that the various talent and research schemes and platforms will result in a more equal footing in some key departments? What are some of the reasons this has happened and what is the impact that the Minister has noticed?

Do we know why some Singaporean academics find it hard to get to teach in local universities or why so few are tenured in local universities? Can the Minister provide more clarity on these issues?

The Chairman: Dr Intan Mokhtar, you can do the last cut for MOE.

Private Universities

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: Mr Chairman, I declare my interest as an Academic Board member of the Singapore Productivity and Standards Board (PSB) Academy.

In November last year, the findings of the first private education institution (PEI) graduate employment survey that was conducted by the Council for Private Education (CPE) and SkillsFuture SG was released. The survey found that six in 10 PEI graduates found jobs within six months of graduation, drawing an average starting salary of $2,550. This was found to be significantly lower than similar graduates from the AUs, such as NUS, NTU, the Singapore Management University (SMU), the Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) or the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT), where, on average, eight in 10 found jobs within six months of graduation, drawing an average starting salary of $3,325.

Understandably, those from the PEIs have offered caution in simply accepting these findings. However, they cannot be ignored either. There are still students who have spent large amounts of money on certificate, diploma or degree programmes offered by PEIs but have later on found that their employment options or career progression are limited due to a lack of recognition of their qualifications attained.

How does CPE plan to engage our students who are considering their post-secondary educational options to ensure they are aware of the expectations related to the different educational pathways and options available to them? How does CPE plan to ensure that our PEIs remain responsible in offering quality and niche educational programmes for our students which have good employment outcomes, other than through the graduate employment survey or the EduTrust certification? Would CPE consider carrying out surprise audits on the lecturers teaching in the PEIs to check on the quality of teaching and the qualifications of the lecturers? How does CPE plan to keep in check the fees of degree programmes offered by these PEIs to ensure they are not over-inflated?

The Chairman: Minister Ong Ye Kung.

The Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Chairman, Sir, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling and myself will try to answer all the cuts.

We have heard a lot about how the future will be different. The questions from Ms Denise Phua, Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Zainal Sapari and Mr Thomas Chua boil down to one central question that should really preoccupy every Education Minister in the world, and the question is: is our education system preparing young people for a fast-changing future, or is the model, as we know it, outdated?

Our system has a solid foundation. This is reflected in good PISA scores, good university rankings and good employment outcomes. By no means they will guarantee success, but they are indicative of how we have gotten the evergreen basics right.

We must build on, not sit on, this foundation. Indeed, this has been the mission of every single Education Minister in Singapore over the years.

Forty years ago, our schools suffered from very high dropout rates. The uniform curriculum also did not cater for students’ varied pace of learning. The then-Minister for Education, Dr Goh Keng Swee, said that the starting point is to identify the "causes of things", before putting in solutions to fix them. His solution then was to allow students to study at different paces that suited them. School dropout rates dropped dramatically. Subsequent Education Ministers continued to tackle the problems of their times. It is due to all of them, and all our educators, that we have the strong foundation we have today.

Ms Denise Phua asked for the worldwide trends we are grappling with now. The fact is that today, the Education Ministers face a challenge that is entirely different in nature compared to 40 years ago.

Things are changing so fast, and the future so dynamic, so volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA), that it is harder to identify the "causes of things" and come up with solutions before another future unfolds. However, we can anticipate the shape of things to come and build a system that can respond to and embrace the changes. We can already identify some features of the future system.

For one, education needs to wear lighter academic colours. Hence, we revamped the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) scoring system.

Education also needs to recognise the diversity of strengths and talents amongst our young. Hence, we brought the Direct School Admission (DSA) system back to its original objectives, placed students into IHLs based on aptitudes and demonstrated interests rather than just grades alone, we started new applied and design universities, and we opened up work-learn pathways.

We also need a new kind of IHL, where success is not measured merely by pass rates, employment outcomes or international rankings, but the long-term resilience of students, and their willingness to take risks, innovate and create.

By reshaping the education system, we can ensure the long-term prosperity of Singapore and continued social mobility across generations, an imperative of the education system that Ms Sylvia Lim raised. In this system, you learn to learn, and you never really graduate. That is the essence of SkillsFuture, and the most important feature we need to build into our system today.

How do we do so? Ms Denise Phua once told me – and she just repeated it again in her opening speech – that of all the changes made to the education system in recent years, the one that got her most excited was the integration of SkillsFuture Singapore into MOE. I remember in her words two years ago, she said it was "the game changer".

She is right. I agree with her. This change started IHLs breaking out of their traditional mould, from educating only students to becoming centres for lifelong learning.

The immediate impact is this: IHLs have started ramping up their courses for adult workers. In 2017 alone, 54,000 adult learners passed through our IHLs, slightly over 10% of the entire adult learning market. But the more profound impact is what is going to come next, which is their new approach to teaching.

Why is there a new approach? Because, previously, IHLs all had the mindset that we only have three to four years to prepare students before they embark on their careers. So, from the word go, IHLs are in a race against time to pack in foundational knowledge, industry-related training, interdisciplinary skills and work attachments, all within those three to four years.

The result is a hectic and technically very intensive curriculum. Employers often comment that Singapore graduates know a lot of "stuff" – technical stuff. But we can do better in terms of soft skills, be genuinely interested in the industries we chose and the careers we chose, have some fire in our bellies.

The current approach will change when IHLs realise that they do not have three to four years to work with students. They have 20 or 30 years to work with students, because they will keep returning for more knowledge and skills after graduation. So, there is really no hurry to pack so much stuff into the formal curriculum in those three to four years.

Instead, there can be a greater focus on laying a strong foundation, giving them more time and space to seek counsel and decide on their career and their area of interest. Only an interest-driven choice will motivate students to want to learn their whole life, to master their professions and their crafts, and to build deep expertise.

This paradigm shift will deeply affect the way education is delivered in IHLs. I will talk about three aspects today – Develop, Discover and Deepen.

Let me first talk about changing the way we develop students.

Ms Foo Mee Har and Mr Zainal Sapari said that the education model and techniques must be updated to reflect the changing needs of industry and the real world. That is why what our children are going through today at IHLs is vastly different from what we, as parents, went through when we were students. Vastly different.

IHLs can no longer merely be places to listen to lectures. Schools and IHLs must also be places where students make friends, build networks, seek mentorship, gain exposure to different cultures, discover what they want to do, and even find lifelong partners – but only at IHLs, not the schools.

5.30 pm

In short, as Mr Edwin Tong pointed out, learning must become experiential. Knowledge no longer carries the same premium it used to because technology has made knowledge very accessible. What is highly valued today is how someone applies knowledge in real life. In other words, what is valued is skills. That comes with experience and practice. That is why all of our IHLs are introducing more experiential learning into their curriculum.

Today, industry attachments have become the norm, and practically all polytechnic students are required to go through them. At SIT, industry attachments are, in fact, an integral part of education, and last for up to a year.

Internship is at one end of the spectrum of industry experience in IHLs. At the other end of the spectrum, which Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about, are various work-study programmes. For example, we have 76 Earn and Learn Programmes training over 1,700 students so far.

The AUs have also started offering SkillsFuture Work-Study Degree Programmes in areas, such as information security, business and analytics, software engineering, and finance. So far, close to 90 students have enrolled in such programmes. The number is not big, but the number will grow, and the number of courses being offered will also grow.

We also announced the launch of the ITE Work-Learn Technical Diploma in four sectors late last year. A couple of Members asked for an update. Interest in the programme is strong. ITE received more than 300 applications for the 180 places available. Each course is at least 1.3 times, or 30%, oversubscribed. The technical courses are particularly popular, such as Marine and Offshore Engineering and Mechanical and Electrical Services Supervision.

ITE is engaging various industries and plans to roll out another 10 new ITE Technical Diploma programmes in the next two years.

So, to Mr Thomas Chua's question on how do we bridge the gap between industry need and education, I call upon industries to participate directly in education. Our new programmes are bringing industries into the IHLs, and IHLs into the industries. Whether it is IHLs or industry, both can initiate the discussion.

There is also greater recognition of the importance of overseas exposure, because our young will very likely grow up to have to work in global industries and international environments.

Today, around two-thirds of all AU students do at least one overseas stint, in the form of academic exchanges, overseas internships or entrepreneurship experiences, or short project-based trips. SMU and SUTD are also focusing on exposing students to Southeast Asian countries which form Singapore's immediate economic hinterland.

In particular, overseas entrepreneurship programmes, where students are attached to startups in the US, Europe and Asia, are being ramped up rapidly in our AUs. Startup incubators, such as BLOCK71 and the Hangar at NUS, NTUitive at NTU, as well as Pollinate, jointly set up by Ngee Ann Polytechnic, Singapore Polytechnic and Temasek Polytechnic, are all buzzing with activities.

Experiential learning also involves learning knowledge and skills that are contemporary, relevant and hands-on. At NUS, there is a strong emphasis on data science and IT. All students, whether you are learning Literature, Arts, History, Science or Engineering, must take compulsory modules on either quantitative reasoning or computational thinking. These are the foundational skills to coding and data analytics. NTU, too, has announced that it will make courses in digital literacy compulsory for all students. SUTD made a similar move last week. This is a significant shift in IHL curriculum, and it has taken off across the board.

I visited our local engineering company, HOPE Technik, recently. Members will know them for building the Red Rhinos for our Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF). They are also building robots, autonomous vehicles and exoskeletons for many international customers. When I asked how we can improve the education of engineers, one of the founders, Mr Peter Ho, an NUS alumnus, said that engineering students should learn how to weld. He said knowing welding means you can do prototyping, and that makes you a better engineer.

I think there is a lot of wisdom in that comment. It reflects a growing need to incorporate innovation and creativity into our curriculum. That is Applied Learning right there, as Minister Ng Chee Meng spoke about. I am not sure if, in time, our engineering students will all learn welding, but they do learn 3D printing today. And perhaps all engineering students should learn prototyping.

Let me now talk about how we can better support our students to discover their interests and aptitudes. The practice of IHLs today frontloading education and packing a lot of stuff into the first few years is most stark in our polytechnics, where students are funnelled into occupation-specific courses right from the start. Over time, courses also proliferated as employers wanted graduates with specialised skills and wanted them fast.

But it is daunting and confusing for our young students, who, at the age 16 or 17, have to choose amongst 230 courses. Most of them hardly know what work life is like, much less the work nature in these specific jobs. As IHLs transform into centres for lifelong learning, this approach will change.

First, we will have more Common Entry Programmes (CEPs) at the polytechnics, which Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about. While there is always a small group of students who are very clear about what they want to do from a very young age, the majority of students will be in a self-discovery mode when entering polytechnics. They may have an idea that they like engineering, IT or social science, but find it too early to pick a course that is specific to an occupation.

For these students, therefore, I agree with Mr Seah Kian Peng that giving them more time to explore their interests will help. Even an extra six months or one year is going to help. Thus, from 2019, polytechnics will offer more CEPs. CEPs comprise foundational modules common to a particular cluster of discipline, and students get to sample all of them and explore their interests.

Today, all polytechnics already offer an Engineering CEP, and they will introduce two more CEPs – one in Business, and the second one in Information and Digital Technologies – two clusters. From next year, we expect the two new CEPs to account for 30% of these cluster intakes.

To illustrate, for a student in the Information and Digital Technologies cluster, he will take foundational courses in Computing Mathematics, Introduction to Programming and Networking Fundamentals in his first year. From his second year, he then decides on his specialisation. That will give them more time.

Second, we will also streamline polytechnic courses. Over-specificity puts students at greater risk of being displaced when the industry changes. It can also stifle the versatility of students. By streamlining the course choices for students, we increase the career options for graduates.

Polytechnics will, therefore, reduce the number of courses by about 20% over the next two to three years, largely by streamlining and merging courses. We are consciously trading depth for more breadth and versatility. Let me emphasise, we are streamlining and reducing the number of courses to give students broader exposure. There is no fall in polytechnic intake due to this change.

Third, strengthen Education and Career Guidance (ECG). The two changes I just spoke about need to be supplemented with a stronger and more systemic effort to guide students. This has to start in secondary schools to help students get a broad sense of where their interests and strengths lie. This is where Applied Learning will really help. Typically, this falls into one of the following four domains – science and technology, ICT, social sciences and humanities, or the creative arts.

In the IHLs, the process will continue to, first, expose students to knowledge and skills within their chosen cluster of disciplines, and then to help them identity their specialisation later on. Towards the tail end of their IHL education, they will undergo industry attachment – like a capstone – to reaffirm their interest in their chosen career. This is a systemic, self-discovery approach for students, which we will roll out to all the IHLs in the coming year.

Stronger ECG ensures that more students can navigate the multiple education pathways available and choose the one most suitable for them. One such pathway is the Polytechnic Foundation Programme (PFP) which Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about.

To give Members some background, today, polytechnics mostly admit students who graduated with the GCE "O" level certificate. They also take in a small group of students who graduated with Normal (Academic), or N(A), certificates.

These students from the N(A) stream did well for their GCE "N" level examinations and are given a chance to go directly to the polytechnics. We started PFP in 2013 and the first batch just graduated in 2017.

The outcomes have been very encouraging, and maybe even surprising to some. Typically, 25% of every cohort scores a Grade Point Average (GPA) of 3.5 and above. But for PFP students, 35% achieved it – 35% compared to 25% on average. The norm is that 55% of each cohort score GPA 3 and above, but 70% of PFP students achieved it. Dropout rates for PFP students are also much lower than average.

How did they do so well? I asked the polytechnic principals. They said being offered PFP greatly motivated the N(A) students. I also believe that it has something to do with the students' strong interest in the polytechnic path that they chose.

There is an important lesson in education policy here. Given the right encouragement and a chance to prove themselves, especially in an area that they enjoy doing, the students will do their best and will have a good chance of doing well. This inner drive outweighs all the tuition and all the close supervision that are given to the students.

Today, PFP is open to students from the GCE "N" level stream who score an aggregate of 11 points and below. Given the success of the programme, we will expand it and extend it to students from the GCE "N" level stream with an aggregate score of 12 points and below. With this change, the number of students accepted every year will increase from about 1,200 today to 1,500.

Mr Zainal Sapari asked about aptitude-based admissions. Today, our IHLs' admission processes consider factors beyond academic accomplishments to recognise students who have already discovered their interests and aptitudes. NUS just announced that it will give bonus points for first choice applications to encourage students to pursue their interests and I really commend them for that.

However, this approach is not without problems. Polytechnic principals told me that since I announced and implemented that, they have been receiving many more appeals from students and parents. This is expected, and I thank the IHLs for looking at every single appeal carefully.

What students and parents need to understand is that passion and aptitude need to be demonstrated and is not declared, and that has to come through during the admission process.

For example, during my time, if a child likes airplanes, he would know every model of airplanes. He would go to Changi Airport as a past-time to see airplanes take off and land. And he would have the digital video disc (DVD) of "Top Gun" and would have watched it 20 times. This interest is demonstrated, and you cannot hide it. For example, since young, I have loved art and I spent all my time doodling – and I meant really "all my time" and I used to have a lot of work to show for it.

So, last year, we set the aptitude-based admissions target for IHLs at 15% of their intake cohorts. The institutions have made good strides but they have not fully used the quota, so I will leave the target at 15% for now.

However, there is scope for us to do more at ITE. Ideally, admission to vocational training pathways should predominantly be aptitude-based. There are practical constraints, such as course capacity or the industries' ability to absorb these graduates, but where possible, we want every student to enter a vocation of his liking.

ITE will embark on a review of its admission system, to rely more on assessing students’ aptitude through interviews and review of portfolios. The revised system will be implemented in stages from the 2019 admissions cycle, starting with selected courses in the Business, Hospitality and ICT sectors.

5.45 pm

I also note Ms Denise Phua's two examples of students from the GCE "N" level stream who like art but were unable to get into LaSalle or NAFA, and that is because they require a minimum of GCE "O" level certificates. We will review that. After all, we have PFP programmes that allow students from the "N" level stream to go to a Diploma programme in polytechnics. So, we will review that, and I thank the Member for the feedback.

Next, let me talk about deepening what we learn through lifelong learning. Ms Foo Mee Har asked about the status and future plans of SkillsFuture. It is a long-term movement. I thank Deputy Prime Minister Tharman for his assessment that we are a third there; actually, I think it is more like a quarter.

SkillsFuture is not just the SkillsFuture Credit as we all know. Neither is it just about getting IHLs to deliver training programmes for adults. It requires a transformation of the education system as we know it; it requires our young to uncover their interests and passions and commit to learning their whole life; it requires employers, private training providers and IHLs to all do their part for lifelong learning; it requires society to celebrate and recognise a broad range of achievements and success.

IHLs can play a bigger role in our future plans for SkillsFuture. They have studied the ITMs, gotten feedback from industry partners, and have launched around 800 industry-relevant modular courses since October last year.

They are collectively known as the SkillsFuture Series and cover a wide range of disciplines. ICT is a key focus of the IHLs. It is a rich area. There is value for each IHL to contribute. There will be some overlap, but I do not think it is a problem so long as the demand is strong. And over time, each IHL will find its niche and the landscape will settle.

These courses are funded at up to 70% upfront, so that fees are significantly lower. Many will be structured as Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs), where funding will be even more generous.

As of February this year, more than 4,900 adult learners have enrolled in SkillsFuture Series courses. So, it is not too bad. The IHLs will develop more modular courses in the coming year and sharpen their focus to meet industry's evolving needs.

By 2020, we expect to have increased the annual funding of IHL lifelong learning programmes by $100 million, up from about $210 million per year today.

As the IHLs roll out more modular courses, the AUs will repackage certain courses to create pathways that lead to smaller qualifications, often referred to as "micro-credentials". These micro-credentials comprise only modules targeted at developing expertise for work and, as Dr Lim Wee Kiak said, can be useful in providing a milestone for adult learners to aim towards and which employers can recognise.

However, we should be careful not to let such micro-credentials become a new arms race to collect credentials. IHLs should instead focus on imparting skills and knowledge needed by industry and package them into a nice bundle that represents a meaningful upgrading of skills and know-how. Learners, too, should focus on picking up what is necessary for their work and for their careers. Our AUs will progressively roll out more of such micro-credentials in the coming years and subject them to the market test.

As we step up support for SkillsFuture Series courses, we also reviewed the way we fund Postgraduate by Coursework programmes at our universities, namely, Master's by Coursework and Postgraduate Diplomas. Mr Henry Kwek and Miss Cheng Li Hui asked for an update on the review.

Given our limited budget, we need to do some re-allocation of resources. Hence, from 2019, for the majority of MOE-funded Postgraduate by Coursework programmes, the subsidy level for Permanent Residents (PRs) will be adjusted slightly downwards, while that for international students will be discontinued. However, there will be no change in the subsidy level for Singaporeans. This will free up around $25 million in budget each year, which will be rechannelled to support modular courses at our IHLs for our local workforce.

Notwithstanding the reduction in subsidy for non-Singaporeans, we must continue to attract selected, deserving postgraduate international students who can make meaningful contributions to Singapore.

Besides these discrete changes, what is more important is the shift in the mindsets of all of our IHLs to embrace lifelong learning as part of their mission. Mr Ang Wei Neng is right that gone are the days where a degree can last someone a lifetime. NUS is blazing the trail in this regard.

Last year, NUS announced that all alumni can take up two modules for free over a three-year period. The response was overwhelming, and alumni started to attend classes side by side with young undergraduates. Encouraged by the good response, NUS is expanding it into a programme called NUS Lifelong Learners, or L³. Under L³, NUS will treat every student enrolment as lasting for 20 years, not just three or four years. It will help their students build their careers and learn for life during this period. This gives new meaning to the word "alumni". I am sure this change in mindset will spread to all IHLs.

Today, short courses for adults are mostly unpacked from long full-time programmes. In time, they will have to be developed independently, with a practical bent – delivered by practitioners on skills in demand by industries; or a futuristic bent – taught by researchers on cutting-edge technology.

Mr Chairman, Sir, let me conclude. Transformation of education cannot be done by MOE alone. I agree with Ms Foo Mee Har that a key partner in education are the employers. We need employers' hands on deck, too, to provide input on curriculum design, offer their experts as adjunct lecturers, place our students in meaningful internships, and participate actively in lifelong learning by providing inhouse training for their employees.

I agree with Dr Intan Mokhtar that we should give greater recognition to employers who support this, such as through the SkillsFuture Employer Award that was started last year. But the best reward for them is the outcome of their investment in their own people. As we shift the IHL system to lay a stronger foundation for students and be less prescriptive in the occupation we are preparing them for, employers need to step up even more to involve themselves in education and lifelong learning, especially for the young.

We also need to work closely with the most important people in our students' lives – their parents. Our children are often the people we love the most. It is natural for parents to want to bring them up impeccably – from the night feeds when they are babies, helping them with homework when they are in primary school, taking leave when they are taking PSLE, attending Open Houses at the IHLs with them, interviewing their boyfriends and girlfriends. We want the best for them.

But the truth is we are all parents-in-training. Just when you become an expert in taking care of babies, they go to school, and it is a totally different challenge. And when you thought that you had finally mastered parenting school-going children, they become teenagers, and that presents another area of challenge.

Our children often do a better job at keeping up with the fast-changing world than parents do. By ensuring that they are so well taken care of, does it help them or are we inadvertently blunting their abilities to adapt? Years ago, I taught my daughter how to cycle, and I learnt that a young girl cannot learn how to balance with an over-protective dad holding the back of the bicycle. I had to let go. Eventually, when my running could not keep up with her pedalling, I did, and off she went. She learnt how to cycle, and I learnt how to let go.

Perhaps one of the best things we, as parents, can do for our children is to know when to let go and what to let go of. But this does not mean that they will be left alone; they will have the love of the family, as well as support of the entire school system.

That is why parenthood is a roller coaster ride and for the lion-hearted. There is no guaranteed success. But children need the time and space to explore in order to discover their strengths and their interests, find their place in the world and ignite their joy of learning.

This is not just a matter of personal freedoms, but a pragmatic response to the fast changes in the world around us, a world where it is hard to identify the landing points that the unfolding story of the rise of China and technological advancement will lead us, a world where the young are creating their own jobs through startups and innovations and shaping their own future.

So, 40 years ago, we built systems to respond to challenges that we could identify. We must now foster human ingenuity and resilience so that our children can thrive in a future we cannot yet discern. This requires us to give students a say in what, how and when they want to learn, to help them develop, discover and deepen their knowledge and skills in the areas that they are passionate about.

This is the most precious gift for our children. But we cannot give it to them; we can only set them on a journey to discover it for themselves. [Applause.]

The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Mr Chairman, both Minister Ng Chee Meng and Minister Ong Ye Kung spoke about preparing our children for a changing future. It is our goal to provide every child with the opportunity to get a good start in life, discover his strengths and interests, and help him realise his potential. As we prepare our children to be future-ready, we want them to develop holistically. We want to cater to the diverse interests of our students with multiple pathways and different options.

This is also what parents want. I know, as a father of two children, we all share the same goal – we want the best for our children and to bring out the best in them.

That is why we must work together, as strong school-home-community partnerships will lead to better student outcomes. Over the years, we have made significant efforts and progress in building enduring partnerships with parents, the community and industry partners to support our schools and students, and we will continue to build upon these efforts.

Parents are a child's first teacher. Together with the teachers in schools, they are crucial in supporting our children in discovering their strengths and achieving their aspirations. This includes our efforts in exposing our children to a broad range of diverse sports, and developing those with sporting talent, which was raised by Mr Edwin Tong.

As Minister Ng shared, we have put in place various programmes to expose and nurture our students in this area. I am glad that many parents and community partners also recognise the value of sports being inculcated in our young and partner schools to provide our children with the opportunities to try out different games and sports.

If you were to visit Lianhua Primary School on a Saturday morning, you will see it bustling with energy, with students playing soccer in the field, while others play tennis in the sports hall. These are, however, not school-based programmes but community programmes led by professional football club, Warriors Football Club (FC), as well as SC Global and Singapore Tennis Association. Parents see to the logistics, take attendance and contribute in ways to ensure a smooth running of the programme. Such partnerships augment schools' programmes, offer our students more options and expose them to a wider range of sports.

We also recognise the importance of bringing together community and industry partners whose expertise and resources can extend the knowledge and learning in schools through authentic contexts.

This is particularly relevant in the learning of our MTLs. For instance, the teaching of the Malay Language does not just belong to the cikgu or the parents. It also involves the Malay community coming together to deepen our students' sense of their own culture and rich heritage. The Perkasa Warisan Camp designed for our Primary 4 students is one such initiative. Allow me to elaborate more about the camp in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The Perkasa Warisan Camp is a collaboration between the grassroots leaders of the Malay Activity Executive Committee (MAEC) and our experienced teachers of the Anugerah Guru Arif Budiman Work Group (AGAB), with the support of the National Parks Board (NParks) and the Malay Language Learning and Promotion Committee (MLLPC). Themed Malay Gastronomy, our students will learn about indigenous herbs and spices in the outdoors before applying that knowledge to create their own unique nutritious salad dish and share their ideas with their peers and parents in a creative way.

One of our teachers whose expertise was tapped on to design the learning experiences of the camp is Mr Azhar Bin Abdul Rashid. Mr Azhar explained that the Perkasa Warisan camp is where language truly comes alive for our students as they explore the application of the Malay language in the wider community.

This camp will be piloted in Nee Soon Group Representation Constituency (GRC) and Tampines GRC this month. We hope to extend this initiative to more schools in other GRCs in the future.

6.00 pm

(In English): For our younger children at the preschool level, we want to spark their interest in learning Malay through play. Following the successful partnership between the Committee to Promote Chinese Language Learning and Wildlife Reserve Singapore, I am glad to share that the Wow Wild Learn Programme, which turned the River Safari into a mega living classroom for our preschoolers, will be offered in Malay from August this year.

Such collaborations are made possible as the Malay Language Learning and Promotion Committee has established a good system to facilitate networking and partnerships among schools, preschools, community organisations, such as the Malay Youth Literary Association (4PM) and ASAS '50 (The Singapore Writers' Movement ’50), and Government agencies, including the People's Association (PA), National Library Board (NLB), NParks, National Heritage Board (NHB) and the National Arts Council (NAC).

Mr Chen Show Mao asked if we can also extend the learning of Malay language to other students at the primary level, by including conversational Malay language skills as part of schools' formal curriculum.

The Conversational Malay Programme was introduced since 2005, where non-Malay students learn to conduct simple conversations in the Malay language and gain appreciation of the Malay culture. Today, 91% of our primary schools offer the Conversational Malay Programme or similar school-based programmes. This equips our students with some grounding of the Malay language so that they can pick up the language more easily should they need it for economic or other reasons in their adult lives. Making it compulsory for all primary students may not be feasible with a number of competing demands on our students’ attention. The current model, where the learning of a third language is encouraged but remains optional, is a balanced approach.

Lastly, let us talk about the industry, how we can partner them to complement and supplement our students’ learning in schools. Let me illustrate it using the example of Juying Primary School. The school’s Learning for Life Programme is Environmental Education, and they partner an industry partner, Greenpac, which is a big advocate for green practices, to teach the students grow and harvest their own vegetables using a hydroponics system. The students benefited tremendously from this partnership as lifecycles of plants, a topic in the Primary 3 Science syllabus, came to life. This is what Applied Learning is all about, where our students learn by doing and experience the real-world application of sustainable farming.

As their Values-In-Action project, the students further collaborated with the Residents’ Committee to share their harvest with the community. They also got the canteen vendors to cook the vegetables for the whole school to savour the vegetables of their labour during recess. These are small but important steps in guiding our students to care for others and contribute to the community within their means.

Sir, we are all preparing our students for a future that is fast changing with many unknowns. It is not an easy journey. However, as the Malay saying goes, "Sedikit-sedikit, lama-lama jadi bukit, sehari selembar benang, lama-lama menjadi kain", meaning a little effort in time makes a hill, and a thread woven becomes a cloth. I believe we can go a lot further and do a lot more for our students when we do it hand in hand with our parents, community and industry. Together, we play a collaborative role in preparing our next generation to be ready for the new world.

The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling): Mr Chairman, Minister Ng Chee Meng, Minister Ong Ye Kung, Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim have expounded on the shifts we are making in our education landscape to better equip Singaporeans for the future economy.

As we build up our people’s skills, competency in our MTLs is an important area that will stand Singaporeans in good stead. Mr Chairman, please allow me to continue in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Bilingualism has always been an integral part of our education policy. With the increasingly interconnected global landscape, proficiency in our MTLs and cultural heritage will also help us to connect with our global partners more effectively.

Ms Tin Pei Ling asked about our efforts to enhance our students' proficiency in MTLs. First, our schools are instrumental in providing a nurturing environment for students to learn and explore their MTLs. With the support of the three MTL Promotion Committees and Lee Kuan Yew Fund for Bilingualism, local arts and cultural groups, media as well as grassroots organisations, our schools have been incorporating various creative ways to express the languages, including xinyao, comic writing, radio drama writing, community tours and even games, in their teaching of MTLs.

For example, teachers in Jing Shan Primary School developed a platform called "Story Village" that lets students improve their Chinese through interactive games and interesting stories. The more proficient learners can even help their friends learn the language by creating new game software in Chinese.

Through such innovative MTL teaching, we hope that the learning of MTLs becomes a part of the students' everyday life. MTL is not just a subject, it is a live language. As Minister Ng Chee Meng has mentioned, real-life applications can help make the MTLs come alive. Hence, we seek to cultivate students’ interest to continue learning and using their MTLs by ensuring that MTL learning is engaging and relevant.

Second, we hope to create a vibrant and supportive environment for MTL learning beyond schools. We encourage parents to use MTL with their children. This can involve day-to-day activities, such as watching a show or movie, listening to songs or reading a book in their MTL with the children. We will also provide parents with various resources to support their teaching of MTL to their children.

One example is the Annual MTL Symposium (MTLS), which brings together many experts and specialists to share tips and resources with parents on the teaching of MTLs. Last year, more than 15,000 parents, educators and students participated in and benefited from this symposium. In addition, parents can use the interactive iMTL portal with their children at home to help and guide their children to learn and practise MTLs at their own pace. This is our iMTL portal.

(In English): Mr Chairman, in English. Our local arts and cultural groups, media as well as grassroots organisations can also provide rich contexts to excite our students to use their MTLs. For example, the Indian Heritage Centre worked with the Tamil Language Learning and Promotion Committee to develop a Discovery Kit that lets students practise the language as they explore the centre.

Like the learning of many skills today, Members have heard from the Ministers, the Senior Minister of State, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary the learning of our MTLs does not stop after we leave school. As adults, we can also build on the foundation we received in school and continue to build on our language proficiency later in life and throughout life. There are now 190 MTL-related SkillsFuture Credit courses supporting lifelong MTL learning. The Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce Institute of Business will also be introducing Business Chinese programmes in Community Centres for easy access by adult learners.

Besides strengthening our proficiency in MTLs, what are the other work-relevant skills that we need to develop to face and thrive in the future economy? This is really what the SkillsFuture is all about. And Members have heard Minister Ong Ye Kung talking about it earlier.

I agree with Assoc Prof Randolph Tan that literacy and ICT skills are critical skills for our workforce. This is why our Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) framework includes Workplace Literacy and Numeracy as well as International Computing Driving Licence courses. ICT is also the top area of training that is supported by SkillsFuture Credit. Over 6,000 Singaporeans have picked up useful IT skills under the SkillsFuture for Digital Workplace initiative, such as using e-payment platforms, using social media and even starting an e-business.

Dr Intan Mokhtar asked about the impact of the SkillsFuture movement. Awareness of the SkillsFuture movement among Singaporeans has improved from 45% in January 2016 to 70% in December last year. According to the WSQ Outcomes Evaluation Survey 2016, 90% of respondents indicated that their WSQ training has helped them work more effectively and more efficiently, and 72% found that it had facilitated their job search. More than 1,700 polytechnic and ITE graduates have participated in the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme and more than 2,400 Singaporeans have been awarded the SkillsFuture Study Awards.

Nonetheless, some Singaporeans may need help to navigate the training landscape, as Dr Intan Mokhtar has pointed out. Our schools and IHLs have strengthened their Education and Career Guidance efforts to help students better appreciate the strengths and passions that they possess, and also better understand the available education and career opportunities. To help Singaporeans make informed decisions, SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) publishes key information, such as the PEI Graduate Employment Survey and trainees' ratings on the course quality and outcomes of SSG-supported courses. This information transparency spurs the PEIs to keep their programmes industry-relevant and graduates' skills employable.

To encourage and facilitate our people's training journey, we have tailored and personalised the MySkillsFuture portal to meet individual training needs. This portal allows users to access industry information and search for jobs and training opportunities according to their interests. On this website, we also highlight exemplary employers who are avid supporters of staff training. In the two months following its launch, the portal has attracted more than 1.9 million page views, with more than 270,000 users having logged in. Come the later part of this year, Singaporeans can look forward to a customised SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme portal that shows available places and participating employers.

To broaden our public outreach, we have partnered our five Community Development Councils to introduce SkillsFuture Advice workshops to help Singaporeans understand work trends and workplace skills needed. Ms Evangeline Boo is one of the 4,600 Singaporeans who have benefited from this move. Through the SkillsFuture Advice workshop, she became more aware of her own training needs. She now actively uses the MySkillsFuture portal to search for leadership and management courses to improve her work as a director.

As Minister Ong Ye Kung had mentioned, we will continue to expand the learning options for Singaporeans and that includes working with IHLs to introduce more courses for adult learners. Part of this will involve resourcing IHLs with the best talents, local and foreign, for teaching and research.

Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about the local representation in our AUs. Our AUs are national institutions and it is certainly important that they continue to have a strong Singaporean Core who understand our local issues well. We have introduced the Singapore Teaching and Academic Research Talent Scheme in 2015 and awarded 77 scholarships to aspiring Singaporean academics so far.

6.15 pm

Together with our parents and partners, we will continue to strive to equip and empower Singaporeans in their lifelong learning journey ahead so that we can all gear up to seize the opportunities in the future.

The Chairman: We have some time for clarifications. Ms Denise Phua.

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: I have some questions. To the Senior Minister of State, who could have been distracted by Member Leon Perera's suggestion to have MPs help conduct political education in schools, but this is not about that. The Senior Minister of State did not respond specifically to my recommendation to strengthen and further resource the existing support model for students with special needs in mainstream schools from primary to secondary to IHLs. The feedback is that the resources are insufficient and the model is quite inadequate. So, I seek the Senior Minister of State's consideration for that.

The second clarification is also my second time request for a SPED Academy to place more strategic priority and focus so that we can create lifelong learners as well out of the special needs population, just like NUS adopting its alumni now and looking at their graduates over a 20-year timeframe. I wonder if we could do the same for SPED.

The next clarification is addressed to the two Ministers. It sounds like MOE has got its act altogether and that you have covered all grounds. I was just wondering, in a future that is constantly disrupted and at most times unpredictable, how do you navigate a space like this to ensure more learner agility amongst our students and even more self-directed learning from a very young age?

Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms Denise Phua for the follow-up questions. Indeed, we want to strengthen support, but the question is how. I think Ms Denise Phua and many others will appreciate that the SPED space is not homogenous, with very varied challenges, very varied needs. When I describe things like the structures that we have or the 80% of students with SENs in our mainstream schools, that is not a model. That is not a target. That is an outcome of the approach that we are taking. We currently have a space with a wide variety of service delivery models and a wide variety of structures. So, we have to take a little bit of a step back and have a sense that there really is no clear single answer about a single best model.

But there are some common challenges that we need to address in terms of strengthening our support. The biggest single challenge actually is professional capability. So, when we look at what we are doing now in our schools, the mainstream schools, the MOE-funded SPED schools, our VWO partners, the biggest single challenge is to not just have enough of the professionals but actually deepen the capabilities of those professionals. That is the biggest single focus of the work that we are doing. So, the answer to the Member's first question is yes.

As to the SPED Academy, it is something that we will seriously study, we are quite open to improving and updating and refreshing how we do the different models of SPED delivery. There is no single model of SPED delivery and we are quite open to studying further models.

Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank Ms Denise Phua for her questions. As a system, we remain open-minded, as open-minded as possible, not to be blindsided by different trends that may surface. Some trends would be relevant, some trends may fade. But we examine it in totality. Structurally, we do reviews in MOE periodically across all different subjects and we do benchmarking with renowned institutions around the world and we also go on study visits.

For example, I went to Australia. My staff actually asked me, "What would you like to learn in Australia?" I wanted to look at outdoor education and how it would strengthen a perceived weakness in our own system. So, we look at different systems to learn new things. We also have research and development (R&D) arms set up in NIE and MOE. These research entities plug into the world institutions where they do research on pedagogical, heutagogical or andragogical updates. We are always trying to keep at the forefront of developments. But always, as I said earlier, remembering to customise it to our Singapore context.

Mr Ong Ye Kung: Chairman, a short reply to Ms Denise Phua because she asked the Ministers. The short answer is help the students find what they love to do. If it is something they love to do, they will be self-directed and they will learn their whole life. That is what we are focusing on.

The Chairman: Mr Seah Kian Peng.

Mr Seah Kian Peng: Chairman, just two short clarifications. The first is addressed to Minister Ng Chee Meng. In my cut, I talked about the Ministry's views or actions over the burgeoning expenditure on tuition and how I feel this disadvantages students of lower socio-economic background. So, I would like the Minister's response to that. What can we do to address that?

The second clarification is directed to Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling on the composition of local academics in context-sensitive faculties in our local universities. What are the Ministry's views towards this? Is there a need, is there a deliberate attempt to increase this composition or number?

The Chairman: Minister Ng Chee Meng.

Mr Ng Chee Meng: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the clarification. To assist our students from lower socio-economic backgrounds, this is always a work-in-progress. We will do our best, but it will never be an ending where we will be happy with it.

You can see from the different programmes that we have started. MK is a key example. When we started the kindergartens, we wanted to address these disadvantages and bring disadvantaged students to as equal a starting line as possible. In the MKs, we reserve one-third of our places for children from the lower socio-economic backgrounds. We provide the different financial schemes. I have said in my speech the different levelling up of criteria, including for Edusave.

We also, in our schools, pay very, very high attention to learning support programmes for students coming into our primary schools at Primary 1. If they are slower, whether in the languages, in English or in Mathematics, we have different programmes to support them in Primary 1 and Primary 2, and we extend it all the way to Primary 6 if required. Most of the kids do well and they graduate from these support programmes by the time they are at Primary 3.

We have also designed after-school areas. It is almost like a relax area where a VWO person or teacher stays back to supervise them. They get to hang out in a cool room where there is play but only after they have done their homework part.

I have my own experience through the family support services where we also partner Family Service Centres (FSCs). Children from lower socio-economic backgrounds may not have a conducive home environment. We partner the community services to make sure that they are well looked after and well-supervised so that they are not distracted. But there are ground realities that we have to cope with, such as family circumstances, even family abuse. All these are difficult entrenched problems that we face. Our teachers even tell me sometimes that they wake up earlier in the morning and go to the flat of the students to bring them to school.

The Chairman: May I request that the Ministers keep their replies short as well.

Mr Ong Ye Kung: Yes, I will. Today, for faculty, both tenured and non-tenured, the split between local and foreign faculties is about 50-50. If you look at university leaders – Deans and above – it is about 70% Singaporeans, 30% foreigners, quite in line with Minister Lim Swee Say's "two-thirds plus one-third, more than one".

But on the Member's question, I fully agree with him that all our universities are national universities. They must understand local issues, Singapore's and our region's challenges and they must understand the context of Singapore. Faculty who understand the context of Singapore can be locals and can be foreigners. So long as they understand the context and they do research and teaching that are within that context, we welcome them. Having said that, we do want to develop local scholars who will rise up through the ranks. And they are Singaporeans, and they do meaningful local research. That is why we have the Singapore Teaching and Academic Research Talent (START) programme.

The Chairman: Mr Leon Perera.

Mr Leon Perera: Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State Dr Janil Puthucheary for responding to my cut. I just have four clarification questions.

Firstly, can the hon Senior Minister of State confirm that Ministers and GRAs can actually officially attend events in schools and interact with students? He did not directly reply to me; so, again, I would just like to ask him if he could directly reply to confirm that point.

Secondly, is it the case that in the past, MPs could attend events in schools in their MP capacity? I cited some facts that would seem to suggest that that is the case, but I am not sure. So, I am not making any assertion, I am just posing a question. Was it the case in the past that MPs could attend events in schools in their MP capacity and, if so, why was that then not deemed to be partisan politics?

The third question is linked to the first two: if that was the case, then when was this policy changed, and why was it changed at the time it was changed?

Lastly, I am just going to take another crack at this. If Ministers and GRAs can attend events in schools and interact with students as Ministers and GRAs, following a certain set of rules and that is not deemed to be partisan, why cannot Members of this House from other parties and also NMPs similarly interact with students following exactly the same rules? Why would the one set of interactions be deemed to be inherently and by definition non-partisan, the other inherently and by definition partisan?

The Chairman: Senior Minister of State.

Dr Janil Puthucheary: May I begin by asking Mr Perera for a little bit of clarity from his initial cut. Has he attended a school and interacted with students? If so, in what capacity?

Mr Leon Perera: Yes, I did. I alluded to that in my cut speech. I attended one event in my private sector capacity. And in that capacity, I only spoke about one aspect of my private sector work, did not touch on anything to do with my role as an MP or perspectives on current affairs, public matters and so on.

Dr Janil Puthucheary: Mr Perera is clear that he is able to separate out his partisan political views from attending and interacting with people in other capacities. So, that is the answer to Question 4. Anybody can attend the school; it has got to be a question of what capacity you attend in and that drives your behaviour in the school.

All kinds of people can have political views. People who drive buses, people who prepare our food, our teachers. But you have to be very clear about the role in which one attends and interacts with students. So, that answers your fourth question. And that is the basis for the first question. People do attend, and they do so in a very clear capacity that is non-partisan in nature.

In the past, the policy was the same. So, the specific instance that the Member referred to, I believe, does not actually specify the capacity in which the person was speaking at the school or meeting the school. It was those years in his capacity as an MP. So, my reading of the exact same text that he has quoted is that what was referenced was the time in years that he had spent as an MP, not that he was attending the school in his capacity as an MP. I think that point is really quite clear if one reads the text properly and is not seeking a derived meaning from it. Have I answered Mr Perera's question?

The Chairman: Mr Perera, I have to call Miss Cheng Li Hui first.

Miss Cheng Li Hui: Question for the Minister. Will MK be taking in and have more progress for mild to moderate special needs children? It is sometimes hard for parents of special needs children to find preschools that are willing to take in their children. For example, we have some special needs children in my PAP Community Foundation (PCF) centres in Tampines, but they are no longer Tampines residents. They have moved out but when they moved to a new estate, they have problems finding another preschool which is willing to take in their children. Since MK is extending to more estates, can MK play a bigger role in this?

6.30 pm

After checking with some teachers, they say that MK does not have enough special needs programmes as well. So, can the Minister just clarify on this?

I also have another question that is a bit more for the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), but it is about preschools. Can there be more funding and training for teachers who care for and teach special needs children? Because they have some problems in terms of the timing as the core curriculum is only four hours, but the DSP programme comes in during the four hours and takes the children out for one hour. The teachers feel that they can actually do that after-hours.

Mr Ng Chee Meng: Mr Chairman, the short answer is yes, we have some capability to support special needs children in MK, but these are very nascent. We will develop more support programmes and we will be building towards that.

The Chairman: Mr Leon Perera, do you want to clarify?

Mr Leon Perera: Yes.

The Chairman: Okay. He has already answered. So, unless it is a new point. We do not want to go into a debate on this issue.

Mr Leon Perera: Absolutely, yes. Just to clarify the answer that the hon Senior Minister of State gave. I have come across websites of schools which have chronologies of past events where the events describe an MP attending in their MP capacity before 2011 or thereabouts, and the grassroots adviser attending after 2011 or so. So, in the context of this sort of information, I would just like to confirm again ‒ and this is really my last point ‒ is it the case that that has always been the policy that MPs cannot attend in their MP capacity and only in their grassroots adviser capacity?

Dr Janil Puthucheary: That is correct. There is no change. When I go to visit the Singapore Armed Forces Reservists Association (SAFRA), which I have done recently, on the banner, it said that "Visit by Dr Janil Puthucheary". I was not there in my medical capacity.

The Chairman: Dr Intan Mokhtar.

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: Chairman, I would like to address this to the Minister for Education (Schools). I am happy to know that ALP will be rolled out to all our primary schools. Can I clarify that, together with that, there will also be a review of the textbooks and activity books used in the primary schools because, at this point in time, as a parent, I can share with you feedback that there is too much repetitive and rote learning in our activity books and worksheets given to students? So, in order to ensure that there is applied learning done in schools, I think there should be a lot more practice where the skills are learnt in a contextual manner.

Mr Ng Chee Meng: Mr Chairman, yes, curriculum and textbooks are reviewed periodically in MOE. We will continue with this process to make sure our teaching materials are properly updated.

The Chairman: Alright, if there are no further clarifications, would Ms Denise Phua like to withdraw the amendment?

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Gladly, Sir. Mr Chairman, Nelson Mandela once said that education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world. So, on behalf of all my colleagues here, I would like to thank the entire MOE team ‒ the support staff must be somewhere around in the building ‒ for helping us to change the world for the better for all of our students, families and professionals. Thank you so much, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $12,270,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $570,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.