Elitism in Schools

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked the Minister for Education whether elitism exists in schools, in particular, the better performing ones or those with more well-to-do students.

The Minister of State for Education (Mr Lawrence Wong) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, our education system and schools operate on the belief that every child is valuable and important. We believe that each child has intrinsic worth, and that he can learn and achieve. These beliefs are articulated in the Philosophy of Education, the Desired Outcomes of Education and the Teachers' Pledge. Teachers are also guided by the Teachers' Creed which explicitly states that they should treat all students fairly and provide opportunities and resources to all students of different backgrounds.

Meanwhile, values, such as respect, care and harmony, are emphasised to our students through the Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum. Schools reinforce the values through many programmes and activities that provide valuable learning experiences for their students. These include community service and joint activities among schools with different student profiles within a cluster or zone.

Page: 1011

We have also designed our education system such that each of the different educational pathways is valued and resourced appropriately. However, occasionally, the behaviour and actions of some individuals may not always live up to the beliefs that we wish to uphold. And when this happens, the schools will take steps to correct them.

There was a recent letter by a JC student to the media comparing the facilities of ITE and JCs. The letter sparked a lively debate, with many Singaporeans coming forward to defend why ITE students deserved quality facilities. Subsequently, the JC student who wrote the letter issued an online letter expressing his sincere apologies. I think the public reaction shows that many Singaporeans share the value of respect and care for others. And in particular, this episode highlights the importance for schools and community to continue to work together to mould the character and values of our young people. Ultimately, shaping the values and attitudes of our young people is a collaborative effort and one that is always a work-in-progress. We will continue to work hard at educating our young to respect and value others.

Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): I thank the Minister of State for his reply. Through Character and Citizenship Education (CCE), we try to inculcate values that we hope students will grow up with. But how can this be further emphasised to students because, as it is, there is already segregation among the different academic streams in schools, for instance? And will the establishment of the two new specialised schools for Normal (Technical) further segregate students who are of lower academic ability from other students?

Mr Lawrence Wong: I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. This is something that MOE is always very mindful of. I talked earlier about the mindset of students and what we are doing in each and every school through Character and Citizenship Education to cultivate sound values and to instill character. But at the systems level, when MOE looks at our education system, our overall approach has always been to provide opportunities for all children to develop to their fullest potential. Enabling social mobility has been and will continue to be the hallmark of our education system.

We recognise that every child is different and that learning needs and abilities are different. And that is why we have customised progression pathways that are different. Not just one single track, but multiple pathways to cater to the different abilities and needs of students. No single pathway is superior to another. That should not be the mindset. The diverse pathways are meant to cater to different learning needs and each one customised for people with different needs. Somebody may be academically slower and they may need a longer time to study and to progress in their pathway, but they may be a slow learner initially and a faster learner later on. What we also want to do is to have many bridges and ladders across the different pathways, so that as you progress along one pathway and as you do well subsequently, you can move on to a different pathway – adapted, again, and customised to the needs of that individual.

I think we have made a lot of effort and investment to develop these different pathways, to resource these pathways appropriately and to have customised curriculum for each of these pathways. But the broader issue is a real one that we have to continuously reach out and get people to understand: that no pathway is superior to another, that these are multiple pathways for learning, catered to children with different abilities and needs, and we should embrace all of these different learning pathways. As each person, embarking on a particular pathway, achieves success, we should embrace that broader definition of success in our society.

This is a continuing challenge that MOE tries to address through our system, through our schools. But it is not a job that MOE can do alone, and we would certainly need the continuing support and engagement with parents, with community groups, certainly with Members of this House to continue to shape the mindset in society.

Page: 1012

Mr Zainudin Nordin (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Supplementary question, Sir. I am happy that the Minister of State mentioned engagement with parents. In my engagement with parents of children in the Gifted Programme, very often, my friends and colleagues expressed their concerns about the students being different, thinking differently and sometimes they even mention the word "elitist". How do we partner with parents to help them bring up their children with proper values because sometimes the parents themselves are worried? Even though they want the kids to be in the Gifted Programme, they also see the concern as something which they need to manage.

Mr Lawrence Wong: Sir, this goes back to what we can do through our schools and through our teachers. Yes, there are different pathways and there are some which are catered to students who are academically very strong. I think it is good that they are able to cope with their studies and they will do very well. Some of them go on to great achievements even in international competitions. But that is where I think within the school system, the teachers, the principals set the tone and they make sure that the students are grounded in sound values, in character building -- that is a new emphasis that we have placed through Character and Citizenship Education and through the curriculum that we are putting in place through the schools, encouraging each school leader and the teachers to think about how best to implement this curriculum, not just within the school environment but also involving parents and the community to make sure that the curriculum is something that is effective, something that will truly shape the character and nurture the right values in each and every child.

Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Moulmein-Kallang): I would like to ask the Minister of State and the Ministry if it is healthy for students to be physically separated in different schools from a young age: in SAP schools, Special schools, now specialised Normal schools. Would it not be healthier if, even if they cannot study in the same academic class, that they could – in the non-academic periods or time – eat, have recess together, play and interact from a younger age? I know it is easier said than done, and I would ask if the Ministry is open to consider piloting models that will test more effective inclusion and integration practices, so that children from different backgrounds can be educated together from a young age just like some of us – the older ones amongst us – were educated that way when we were young.

Mr Lawrence Wong: I thank the Member for the question. I am not so old but I remember growing up, going to school in Tanjong Katong Technical and that was the situation, too – an integrated environment – and we had students from all sorts of diverse backgrounds. Certainly, we want to do that, and the majority of our schools are like that. I think we have a few specialised schools catering to a select group of students where we think that, from an educational point of view, they may be better served because it is a more homogeneous group and their needs are very different, and so more special attention, a customised curriculum can be developed to reach out to this group. It is a balance. We cannot take that approach and take it to an extreme. Then certainly every school will be specialised and then you would really have very separate and distinct groups of people rather than integration as we would like it to be.

We do it in a very controlled and deliberate environment, and we are monitoring the results of what we are doing. For example, in the new specialised schools for students who did not qualify for Normal (Technical), at least, the initial evidence shows that they are doing quite well. Academically, they are coping better in this new environment. As we monitor, we will feel our way forward, in terms of evolving new models. But, certainly, I agree with the Member that we will be very open to looking at different models, new ways of promoting better integration. We have a school system the way it is with the mainstream schools across the board, but a few very specialised institutions catering to specific needs.

Page: 1013

I accept the point and I agree with the Member that we should as far as possible avoid that sense of separation at an early age when our children are growing up, and for these schools to come up with more programmes. And we would be quite happy to work with the community, in terms of thinking of new programmes that would help students in these specific institutions integrate better with peers of different backgrounds. That is something we would explore developing even more of. But I think our fundamental approach is to look at the students' needs, to look at the students' abilities and to try as far as possible to make sure that we have a programme and a curriculum that addresses each child's needs and maximises his or her potential. That is what we have done. It is an education system that is student-centric. It is meant to be focused on the students so that the different pathways can cater to each and every child.

Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister of State for his reply on elitism in schools. Many schools typically channel good teachers to the better classes and sometimes parents also expect the school to channel better teachers to better classes. Does MOE provide guidelines to schools so that they would spread good teachers to different classes? For that matter, does MOE consciously deploy good teachers to different schools?

Mr Lawrence Wong: I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Indeed, MOE's policy is to resource all our schools well, not just a few schools. And this is what we have done and we will continue to do so. We provide the same base funding to all schools which have significantly increased over the past decade to benefit all students. At the teacher level, we maintain a balance of the quality of MOE teachers allocated across all schools, and we would continue to do that. We continue to expand our teaching force so that schools can afford to have more targeted programmes catering to the different needs of all students. This is what MOE does at the headquarters level, in terms of our allocation of resources, whether it is financial or teaching resource, across the school system.

Within the school system, I think we have capable school leaders and they have guidelines and I am sure, from the school principals' point of view, they want to make sure that their teachers cater to their different student profiles and different student needs. Given the diversity of students, it is not possible to have a single ruler to measure success. The principals know how to allocate or make sure that there are teachers with the right inclination, with the right skill sets to teach students of different profiles. That is what the principals do. MOE has constant dialogue with the principals, with the school leaders, to make sure that this is done appropriately at the school level.

Mr Speaker: Mr Yee Jenn Jong. Last question.

Mr Yee Jenn Jong: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to join in this interesting discussion. I would like to follow up on the specialised Normal (Technical) school. I can understand the rationale is that we want to have more resources to be channelled to this group of students, because at the current moment, each school has maybe just one or two Normal (Technical) classes and it is difficult to find the resources. Is there going to be a trend that there is going to be more of these specialised Normal (Technical) schools spread across Singapore? And whether MOE will instead consider perhaps clustering resources together so that, perhaps, within the cluster, they can help to set examination papers across the Normal (Technical) classes in the schools? Or maybe MOE can do that, so that we can still let these Normal (Technical) students stay in a normal school rather than separate them?

Mr Lawrence Wong: I thank the Member for the supplementary question. In fact, the second part of what he said is already happening. Within the clusters in the zone, the teachers who are involved in teaching Normal (Technical) do share notes, do come together and share experiences and resources. But the specialised schools are really a step forward in terms of thinking about perhaps a different way of doing things. So it is, to some extent, an experiment in terms of trying out something different where we have a specialised institution catered to this group of people, appropriately resourced, with a different curriculum catered to them.

Page: 1014

There will be pros and cons, and we have to strike a balance. There is no plan for us now to expand these specialised schools because this is something new. As I mentioned earlier, we are developing these programmes and we are looking very hard and monitoring the results of what is happening through these schools. The initial findings are positive. We think these children are coming out better and they are coping better in their studies, and they are learning better, more effectively. That does not mean that we should proliferate and expand them. I do not think there are any plans now. But what we would want to do, as I mentioned, is to focus on these institutions to see how they can do better, in terms of developing their children in these schools. At the same time, we will take up Ms Denise Phua's suggestion of programmes that can better integrate students across different institutions. We are working on multiple approaches. These are things that we will continue to evolve and develop. If we think there are indications that a particular programme offers success and is useful, then we would look at ways to expand it in the most effective manner.