Review of the Gifted Education Programme

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry is reviewing the Gifted Education Programme (GEP) and, if so, what are the areas that the Ministry is looking into with respect to this review.

Page: 24

Ms Sim Ann (for the Minister for Education): Sir, the GEP, like other MOE curricula and programmes, is reviewed on a regular basis. This is to ensure that it remains responsive to changing needs, and continues to meet quality standards based on research and sound professional practice.

As part of the recommendations of the Review of Upper Secondary and Pre-University Education in 2001, the Integrated Programme was introduced. As a result, the secondary GEP organised by MOE was integrated into school-based programmes in the Integrated Programme (IP) schools which were hosting the GEP.

In 2007, refinements were made to the implementation of the GEP at Primary level. Primary GEP centres adopted different models to increase interaction between GEP and non-GEP students on a daily basis by placing them in mixed classes for non-academic subjects.

The MOE also redoubled efforts to train more teachers to support high-ability students in all Primary schools. In the last five years since 2007, the Gifted Education Branch has provided over 2,000 places for teachers to be trained in curriculum differentiation and pedagogy.

We will continue to seek improvements to all programmes in our schools, including the GEP, so that they continue to be relevant and are aligned to the Ministry's emphasis on holistic education.

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. We know that students mature at different rates and there are some bright students who peak a little later after Primary 3. Will the Ministry consider allowing such students to join the GEP in Primary 4 or Primary 5? In addition, GEP students are taught quite differently from non-GEP students, and the GEP curriculum focuses more on higher order thinking and problem-solving skills. But increasingly, we hear parents and students lament that PSLE questions are getting trickier, and seem to favour GEP students. My question is: will this disadvantage non-GEP students who are taking the same PSLE examination as GEP students?

Ms Sim Ann: Sir, Dr Intan has asked two supplementary questions. I will take the second one first. She asked whether undergoing the GEP programme would give an edge, an advantage to students at the PSLE. Sir, GEP students do, in fact, do very well at PSLE on the whole. Why is that so? The GEP draws from the top 1% to 2% of each Primary 3 cohort. These would be students who, at that age, already exhibit rather strong academic abilities. This would be then reflected in their PSLE performance. However, Sir, the GEP itself is not a programme that is intended to prepare children for exceptional performance at the PSLE. Its goals are to develop intellectual depth, higher level thinking and also to nurture productive creativity, amongst others, whereas the PSLE itself is a national examination that is based on the Primary school syllabus which all students undergo. So, I hope this addresses Dr Intan's concerns that there may be any one group that is given an advantage over others. This is not so.

As for students peaking later and considering accepting them into the GEP at Primary 4 or 5, I thank Dr Intan for her suggestion. We will study this, but I think we will have to balance the need to ensure adequate access and entry points for students against the need to ensure minimal disruption to their studies.

Page: 25

Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, may I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether MOE thinks that Primary 4 or age 10 is the right age to categorise students into Gifted or non-Gifted? Why not classify them after PSLE when most of the students are slightly more mature after going through their first major examination?

Ms Sim Ann: I thank Mr Lim Biow Chuan for his question. In fact, the programme is intended to allow a group of students who demonstrate very strong learning ability in order to be stretched to develop, as I have mentioned, intellectual depth and higher level thinking. The intention is not to classify students into any particular group. Given our commitment to holistic education and to bring our students up to their fullest potential, as Mr Lim well knows, we have many pathways and ladders within the education system for students of all learning profiles, and including students who, as Dr Intan has mentioned, peaked at different times during their journey through our school system.

Mr Laurence Lien (Nominated Member): May I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary how does MOE evaluate the success of the GEP programme, in particular, how do GEP students benefit later on in their working lives?

Ms Sim Ann: Sir, I have mentioned earlier some of the goals of the GEP. Alongside the ones that I have mentioned, they also include enhancing aspirations for individual excellence and fulfilment to develop a strong social conscience and commitment to serve society and nation, as well as to develop moral values and qualities for responsible leadership. These are dimensions that we think go beyond quantifiable KPIs and this is something which the Ministry will study alongside with feedback from our schools, educators and students.