PROMOTION OF NORMAL (ACADEMIC) STUDENTS

PROMOTION OF NORMAL (ACADEMIC) STUDENTS: 6.

Mrs Josephine Teo asked the Minister for Education (a) if he will provide the reasons for the decline in the percentage of Secondary 4 Normal (Academic) students eligible for promotion to Secondary 5; and (b) what more can be done to help Normal Stream students advance to post-secondary education.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, the Member made observations about the decline in the percentage of Secondary 4 Normal (Academic) students going to Secondary 5. I would like to say that that is not the most important parameter that MOE focuses on. But since she has asked the question, let me give figures for that first. Over the past 10 years, there has been a slight decline in the proportion of

Column: 1861

Secondary 4 Normal (Academic) students progressing to the Secondary 5. Between 2000 and 2004, the proportion eligible to progress to Secondary 5 ranged between 78% and 80%. From 2005, it dropped slightly to between 75% and 77%. So there was a 2% to 3% drop. But there was a reason for it. It was due to earlier changes which allowed weaker students into the EM2 stream in primary schools. Remember we relaxed the criteria, which allowed some previously EM3 students to enter into EM2 and by 2005 onwards they would have reached Secondary 5 level and they have subsequently entered into the Normal (Academic) course. If you took out that group of students who, in the previous regime, would have not been able to take the Normal (Academic), in fact the proportion of those eligible to progress to Secondary 5 would have increased.

For the 2009 Secondary 4 cohort, about 74% were eligible to Secondary 5. I have given the figures because the Member has asked but I mentioned at the outset, that that is not the parameter or the most important outcome we focus on. More importantly, MOE tracks the proportion of students, not Secondary 4 to Secondary 5 but who enter post-secondary educational institutions such as the Institutes of Technical Education (ITEs), polytechnics or junior colleges because this is the more important determinant. These post-secondary qualifications provide students with good employability prospects, not the 'O' Levels. The labour market has changed and that is what we look for.

So, for example, if a student progresses to Secondary 5 but then does poorly at the 'O' Levels, such that he cannot qualify for a polytechnic or junior college education or even ITE, he may not have chosen the most appropriate pathway. For these students, a more

Column: 1862

practical education at the ITE may have been more suited to their aptitude and provide them better employment prospects. For students whose chances of doing well enough at the 'O' Levels to qualify for polytechnics or junior colleges are low, opting for an ITE education after Secondary 4 may actually be a better choice than staying another year in Secondary 5 with the chances of doing well at the 'O' Levels very low.

And indeed, to better help such students choose their appropriate educational pathway, MOE introduced two changes in recent years which indeed meant that fewer students would progress to Secondary 5. We actually wanted fewer students to progress to Secondary 5. The first of these measures was the introduction in January 2008 which allowed a direct pathway to ITE's Higher NITEC courses after the 'N' Levels, to provide an alternative to progressing to Secondary 5. The first beneficiaries were in 2007 and under this option, students can start their Higher NITEC studies a year earlier instead of having to take their 'O' Levels first. And I will tell Members that the response has been encouraging.

More than 360 students enrolled in the course next year. They could have gone to Secondary Five, but they chose instead to go for this Higher NITEC course because we open it up, so that they can benefit from it, as they see the advantages.

The second measure we undertook was to revise the promotion criteria from Secondary Four Normal (Academic) to Secondary 5 in 2009 Secondary Four cohort. We wanted to ensure that those who did progress to Secondary Five would have a better chance, after taking their 'O' Levels, to enter polytechnics or junior colleges. And, indeed, we made it more stringent.

Our approach in providing different educational pathways for students with

Column: 1863

different abilities and needs has worked well. When we look at the parameter and ask ourselves how many of the Primary 1 cohort finally get into ITE, JC or polytechnic, the answer is 93% now do – 30% in the junior colleges, 40% in the polytechnics, 20% in the ITE, and 3% to 4% in private education organisations. We will continue with our efforts to encourage as many students to further their studies in these Post Secondary Education Institutions (PSEIs) as possible.