ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1999 TO 31ST MARCH 2000

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [6th Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head J (cont.) -

Resumption of Debate on Question [16th March, 1999],

"That the total sum be allocated for Head J of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100." - [Dr S. Vasoo].

Question again proposed.

The Chairman: Head J - Ministry of Community Development. Amendment No. (1), Mr Abdullah Tarmugi.

The Minister for Community Development (Mr Abdullah Tarmugi): Sir, allow me to reply to the rest of the Members' amendments raised yesterday.

Dr Michael Lim observed that a significant number of BASCs have had to be closed down and, according to him, part of the problem was that the facilities are planned centrally by MCD. I wish to assure Members of this House that MCD works closely with community and grassroots organisations in planning social services in HDB estates, including the BASCs. While MCD does the overall planning to ensure a good distribution of facilities, grassroots leaders and the CDCs are briefed on its social services development master plan to share with them the planning considerations and criteria, the location of these social services and obtain feedback to refine our planning process. We can fine-tune this process further.

Let me turn to the Member's comment that a number of BASCs have closed down. To-date, we know that three BASCs have closed down, out of about 200 BASCs in Singapore. Two were due to poor demand and the other was affected by upgrading works. BASCs are, like other facilities, developed through the process of consultation which I mentioned earlier. While the number of BASCs to be developed is centrally planned, MCD works closely with theVWOs and grassroots organisations and advisors concerned when determining their location. BASCs run by private operators or those by VWOs that do not require Government funding, do not require any prior endorsement by my Ministry. In such cases, the decisions are made by the organisations concerned based on their commercial consideration. They make their own choices and decisions and therefore they may have to close if they get their sums wrong.

Let me now turn to Mr Sin Boon Ann's amendment. There are 54 voluntary welfare organisations supported by the Community Chest. MOH, MCD and the Ministry of Education also fund voluntary welfare organisations. Programmes of the organisations that receive public funds are assessed vigorously before they are funded to ensure viability and efficient use of resources. All public funds and donations are audited. VWOs are also registered under the Societies Act or with the Registry of Companies and Businesses, which require them to keep proper accounts and records of their income and expenditure. Their accounts are audited and submitted to the relevant authorities and donors can see these accounts which are also published in their annual reports. Organisations that raise money directly from the public are required to apply to, and follow the guidelines on fund-raising drawn up by, the Licensing Unit of CID, the Registry of Societies and the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore. These are adequate and MCD need not add to the bureaucracy. Nevertheless, we will monitor the situation and put in place measures to improve the situation, if needed.

Let me now turn to Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon. I share the concerns of the hon. Member on the importance of family values and social cohesion. She has stated her case passionately and comprehensively. I think I have addressed her concerns on the need to strengthen family ties and values in my speech yesterday. With increasing and competing pressures on the family, the inculcation of family values is crucial for the preservation of the family as the basic building block of our society. We have Dr Ngiam Tee Liang from the NUS to chair a committee to promote Singapore's family values. It works in close collaboration with social service agencies, civic groups, schools, the private sector and the unions. Dr Ngiam is also a member of the Committee on the Family chaired by Mr Noel Hon, which is being appointed this month, to look into strategic issues affecting the well-being of the family.

I turn now to questions from Dr Lily Neo and Mr Ang Mong Seng. I will take the questions by both Members together. They asked on MCD's strategy to prepare for an aging population, which I have already informed the House in broad terms in my opening speech yesterday. I would like to thank both Members for sharing their comments, especially to Dr Neo for sharing her vision on elder care. We want our senior citizens to be healthy, active and secure. We must formulate the right elderly policies, develop elderly friendly infrastructure and change the mindset of the elderly as well as that of the younger Singaporeans towards the elderly.

A key strategy of MCD is therefore to strengthen public education programmes on aging. We want Singaporeans to value the elderly as a resource and to see growing older as a time for further development, learning and continuing contribution to society. I agree with Dr Neo's point that building a home environment that is safe and elderly friendly should be encouraged. Mr Ang Mong Seng has also noted that not all senior citizens can afford studio apartments. The IMC's review of housing for the elderly will address concerns of both Members.

Members might like to know that MCD and HDB started a number of projects to provide elderly friendly features in one-room rental apartment blocks for the elderly. The Senior Activity Centres in these projects provide services to the elderly and serve as focal points for mutual help. They are run by VWOs and are very much like the Centre of Activity for Retired Elderly (CARE) that Dr Lily Neo mentioned. MCD will look into how our present concept of Senior Activity Centres can be improved or even expanded to better meet the needs of the well elderly. MCD will ensure a coordinated effort amongst voluntary care groups in the delivery of services. Three regional Community Care Networks and a National Geriatric Coordinating Committee, spearheaded by the NCSS and MOH respectively, are working towards a network of comprehensive and coordinated services at the local level, as well as to share best practices.

Mr Ang Mong Seng suggested that the Elderly Development Division of my Ministry should work closely with the grassroots organisations in implementing services and programmes for the elderly which are practical and close to the ground. I share his view. The Division will indeed work closely with PA and CDCs to explore how the grassroots organisations can play a bigger role in these areas. I agree with Mr Ang's comment on the need to reskill older workers in order to keep up with the pace of technological change. We will have to look into this issue more closely.

On the issue of elderly abuse which was raised by Dr Neo yesterday, I wish to assure the Member that the Ministry does not condone all forms of family violence, including abuse of the elderly. Legislative and non-legislative measures have been put in place to manage and curb family violence and we will monitor the situation and will continue to improve on these measures, if necessary. 12.45 pm

The amendments to the Women's Charter in 1996 both enhanced and extended protection to elderly victims of family violence. We also implemented a national networking system for managing family violence on 1st July 1996. This system is a coordinated multi-disciplinary approach for the management of family violence cases involving the MCD, the Police, hospitals, the Family Court, social service agencies and the crisis shelters. Any victim who seeks assistance will be informed of all the other services available to him or her. And he or she will be advised on how to receive protection, counselling and shelter. Public education materials have been distributed to polyclinics, hospitals, NPPs, FSCs and other social service agencies to increase awareness of family violence and to inform them of what they can do about it.

Sir, the issue of elderly abuse is complex. There are cases where children may not intentionally abuse their parents but neglect their basic needs. Many families may also not know how to cope with the elderly who are suffering from medical problems such as senile dementia. My Ministry produced two video tapes on elderly care entitled "Caring by Elderly Spouses" - this was last year - and "Caring by the Sandwich Generation" also produced last year. Certainly, more can be done to support and educate care givers on the elderly.

My Ministry will develop a protocol on the reporting and management of elder abuse this year. This project is also intended to educate the general public and persons who are likely to come into frequent contact with elderly persons on how to identify signs of elder abuse and to help such abused persons obtain assistance and protection.

I now come to the amendment by Dr Ho Tat Kin asking for further developments on the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) on the aging population. In my statement yesterday, I had briefly touched on the role of the IMC on the aged. The IMC has been meeting monthly. It has been briefed by various Ministries, statutory boards, non-Government organisations and the voluntary welfare organisations as well, to familiarise itself with the various policies, programmes and issues associated with an aging population. Work groups are now being formed to conduct in-depth reviews in the various areas of concern, eg, employment, employability, financial security, housing and social integration.

I agree with Dr Ho that we must encourage the habit and create opportunities for continuing education and life-long learning for older Singaporeans. This is key to employability, financial security as well as personal enrichment in later years. He suggested setting up a dedicated university for senior citizens. Presently, senior citizens who wish to pursue higher education already have the opportunity to do so at some existing institutions of higher learning, such as our Open University. One way is for the university to tailor its programmes to meet the needs and aspirations of older people. In any case, I will pass on this suggestion to the IMC to consider.

Sir, my Parliamentary Secretary will now reply to two questions related to the People's Association.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Community Development (Mr Chan Soo Sen): Sir, on behalf of my Minister, allow me to address two of the amendments related to the People's Association. One is by Mr Low Thia Khiang on voluntary organisations and social workers, and the other is by Mr Ang Mong Seng on community bonding. Since both amendments were raised in Mandarin, allow me to reply in Mandarin as well.

(In Mandarin):

Mr Ang Mong Seng said that grassroots organisations have made great efforts in uniting our nation, and have contributed greatly to our nation building and national unity. I fully agree with him. Mr Ang has also mooted the idea of a "Unity Circle". The 12 Cs that he mentioned yesterday are actually related to unity cycle. We look forward to hearing more specific recommendations from him on how to put this idea into practice.

He suggested that there should be National Day Observance ceremonies at every community club or community centre. I agree with him and I will urge all the CCs to take this into consideration. He has also recommended that at the National Day Parade, we should have some display of our defence facilities to show our people our defence readiness. The People's Association will bring up this matter with the National Day Parade Committee for its consideration.

Mr Low Thia Khiang mentioned that the voluntary social workers are not enjoying due recognition in our society, and that they have no status. He commented that our grassroots organisations have a lot of benefits, and he asked whether these grassroots organisations enjoy all these benefits because they are actually serving the PAP, and not the community. .

Let us talk about the last point that he raised. In fact, this is not the first time that he has brought up the matter. I must reiterate that the grassroots organisations serve the community and not the PAP. In fact, we make it a point that activities of the PAP are kept clearly distinct from community activities. For example, the PAP is not allowed to carry out any activities in the community centres, because the community centres are run by community organisations. If he feels that the grassroots leaders are getting the benefits because they serve the PAP, he is wrong. As Mr Ang Mong Seng has said, the grassroots organisations have contributed greatly in uniting our nation and in enhancing our social cohesiveness. Over the past 30 years, they have observed the main objectives of uniting our nation and enhancing cohesiveness among our people. Our society has undergone great changes in the past 30 years. The grassroots organisations are able to adjust themselves and to continue being relevant to our nation. Therefore, we feel that the grassroots organisations deserve the rewards or recognition that they are getting today. In some grassroots organisations, the volunteer workers have dedicated the best time of their lives to community service. I think this is indeed very praiseworthy.

Mr Low Thia Khiang also mentioned that our voluntary social workers need to be given better rewards and recognition in our society, and he is concerned about the welfare of the social workers. I fully agree with him on this point. I think all of us in this House will also agree with him on this. Yesterday, my Minister mentioned that MCD will set up an inter-Ministry agency to facilitate volunteerism. One of the main objectives of this agency is to do a comprehensive overall review on how to provide better rewards and recognition for these voluntary social workers. If anyone has any suggestion, please let me know and I will commit it to this agency for consideration. I think we should also attach more importance to volunteerism. I hope that by the 21st century we will have more volunteer social workers coming forward to serve our nation.

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang): (In Mandarin): Sir, a clarification from the Parliamentary Secretary. When doing voluntary work, sometimes our VWOs exceed the time of their parking coupons and they were summoned for that. Why can we not provide VWOs who drive the convenience of free parking in our HDB or URA car parks?

Just now, the Parliamentary Secretary said that the work of the PAP and the grassroots organisations is not related. I would like him to state categorically how do the PAP workers and the grassroots workers disassociate themselves during the general elections.

Mr Chan Soo Sen: (In Mandarin): Sir, regarding the parking problem, as I have said just now, we can let the proposed agency look into it. Not all volunteer workers drive. So we will see whether something can be done about it. Let the agency look into the matter and see what is the outcome.

As for the general elections, grassroots organisations do not participate in PAP's election work. If they have participated, that is because they themselves are PAP members. We do not deny that there are some members of grassroots organisations who are PAP members. If they help the PAP in the election work, they are working in their capacity as PAP members. They are not helping the PAP in their capacity as grassroots workers. There is no association in the first place, so, therefore there is no question of dissociation.

Dr S. Vasoo (Tanjong Pagar): Sir, I would like to speak on the need for a review of public assistance rates. I have two issues of concern to raise. First, public assistance rates for the poor have not been revised for the past few years. The cost of living has been very tight for the unsupported poor. Their source of assistance has thinned out, because of the current economic problems. There are less people providing the necessary support. In the light of this, there is a need to see what the Ministry of Community Development would be able to do in revising the public assistance rates.

The other issue that I would like to raise is a more pressing problem. This is in connection with the unskilled and unsupported retrenched workers. There are quite a number of them that I have been noticing this trend in the meet-the-people sessions and other community organisations. I feel that this group, for the first time, have run into difficulties. For many years since the last recession or even close to the 1950s, this phenomenon has not come about. The problems of older, unskilled retrenched workers probably need closer attention, because many of them have families. Some of them are in their late 40s and below 50, who have found great difficulty in getting employment over a period. Because, in the first place, they are unskilled and that many of the companies that they are working with are relocating to other economies.

1.00 pm

Sir, in the short term, there is a need for PA rules to be made flexible to provide temporary financial assistance for this group of retrenched older workers. Would MCD be prepared to look into helping these unemployed retrenched workers and their families? Perhaps may I suggest that a social support fund be made available to provide temporary assistance to them for a period of time so that they would be able to get through their difficulties until they find alternative employment through further training. This would be one solution to a problem like this.

Sir, on a longer term measure, this issue is likely to recur when we run into another economic problem in future. It is therefore necessary for MCD, the Ministry of Manpower and Singapore Employers' Federation to work out a scheme to follow through retrenched workers, particularly older retrenched workers, who are unlikely to find employment, or would have difficulty in finding employment. This group of people would perhaps require closer attention of the various Ministries concerned, including NTUC, which together with its members could work on a concerted effort to tackle the problems of these older workers. I would like to find out from the Minister what are the plans it has to deal with these special problems.

Dr Ho Tat Kin (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, MCD reviews the public assistance given to the poor and needy once every two years. I believe, this year, public assistance will be up for review also. I would like to ask what adjustments will be made to increase the amount given out under the Public Assistance Scheme.

With more than 28,000 being retrenched last year, I understand not all those who lost their jobs received retrenchment benefits. The criteria for Public Assistance Scheme which till now still help only the very poor need to be relaxed. Older retrenched workers, particularly those with outdated skills and with families to support will need temporary help to tide them over prolonged unemployment, especially during this economic crisis.

Sir, may I ask what schemes will be put in place to provide temporary assistance to those who have been out of the job market for some time, especially those who have exhausted their savings?

Mr Sin Boon Ann (Tampines): Sir, in the course of my constituency work, I have come across many families who are in need of financial assistance. Very often, these people are in a desperate situation, either because they have lost their jobs, their loved ones have passed away or they have been deserted by their spouses. Invariably, where these families have children, it is often the children who suffer as a consequence. These residents have the gumption to come to my assistance or the assistance of my CCC. Invariably, in the course of the interview, I learn that besides getting in touch with the grassroots organisations, many of these people who need financial assistance or public assistance are not aware of the many schemes that are available which can be of help during these difficult times. These public assistance schemes may include, for example, the Small Families Improvement Scheme, the CCC Welfare and Education Committee's Scholarships and Bursaries, the CDC Assistance Scheme, to name a few.

What about those who never thought of seeking assistance from the MP or the grassroots organisations? How can we effectively reach out to them and extend the assistance provided by these public assistance schemes? For them, they operate in a world of ignorance, and unless we reach out to them, it may be that they would never be able to take advantage of these public assistance schemes that are available. Additionally, it could also be that many of these people are just too shy to come forward to seek the assistance of the Government, or the voluntary welfare organisations in respect of these public assistance schemes. The fact that for many of these people in need of financial assistance, they need to be told of the public assistance schemes, either through the grassroots organisations or through the voluntary welfare organisations, tells us that these schemes are not very widely known or well publicised. If we want to do more for the less fortunate Singaporeans, we should be more proactive rather than reactive. We should, in the first place, take steps to educate Singaporeans on what they can do or who they can turn to in times of need.

I have seen public information campaign run by the various Ministries, such as the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Health. However, I have yet to see a concerted effort by the Ministry of Community Development in running mass education campaigns through the public media to inform Singaporeans of the public assistance schemes. I am not sure whether MCD's choice in not using the public media to publicise these schemes arises from a reluctance to encourage a perception of Singapore as a welfare state. Personally, I do not think using the media to publicise the schemes that are available is a step in the direction. On the other hand, using the public media maximises our effort in reaching out to those who are genuinely in need of assistance and thus helps us to care for them in a way which we, as Singaporeans, should. Such effort by the Ministry of Community Development is important, particularly during this difficult time when more people are unemployed than before. I would like to ask the Minister whether more effort can be made by the Ministry to promote awareness among Singaporeans on the various programmes and assistance that Singaporeans can turn to for help, if necessary.

Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay (Chua Chu Kang): (In Mandarin): Sir, in the past, some 29,000 workers were retrenched or facing retrenchment. According to a survey, the situation today is that out of every ten job seekers, only four jobs are available. Another survey shows that 50% of the retrenched workers have to wait for nine months before they can get another job. This shows that it is not easy to find alternative jobs nowadays.

32% of the workers will be unemployed for more than nine months. Being unemployed for nine months is a long period. These people depend on their past savings to tide them over the difficult times. After the nine months, I believe their savings would have been exhausted. These people would probably have to look to the Government agencies and other charitable organisations for help. We know that the Singapore Government's Public Assistance Scheme is quite stringent in its allocation of funds. The amount allocated is barely enough to meet the basic living expenses. Those who are in receipt of this assistance cannot have other sources of income. I would like the Minister to tell us whether there is an increase in the number of people who have applied for public assistance during the past one year. For those who have been unemployed for more than nine months, will the Government be more liberal and sympathetic towards them so that they can receive public assistance? I am making these suggestions because those who are receiving public assistance cannot depend on it for a living for long. As soon as they find a job, they would not ask for public assistance.

On the other hand, the amount they receive in the form of public assistance is barely enough to meet the basic living expenses, and therefore the recipients' standard of living and quality of life have been affected Their family members may be very young. Therefore, a drop in the quality of life would affect their health. Can the Government consider allowing a public assistance recipient's family members to work part time to help make ends meet?

Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh (Nominated Member): According to the economic crisis monitoring report of a number of clients from Family Service Centres, the people most affected by the current economic downturn were female single parents aged between 36-49 years old and living in 2-room flats. Their problems were primarily difficulties in securing employment after retrenchment, in meeting basic household needs and children's school related expenses. Other familial problems were also apparent like marital conflict and mental health problems.

I would like to ask the Minister: how does the public assistance scheme help such families? What is the means test being applied and does the Minister think this is an adequate formula to follow?

Between June and December 1998, there were 1,504 applications for public assistance compared to 814 applications between January and May earlier. We are seeing an 85% increase in petitions. During the last six months of the past year, there were 136 applications for the Small Families Improvement Scheme and 524 applications for assistance under RUAS. Yet the Interim Financial Scheme only gave out $91,924. This seems to me a small amount and my immediate reason is: is our means test for eligibility for financial assistance too mean? Or is it because there is just that small number of applications in the first place? Or perhaps the procedures are so onerous that ordinary folks give up applying for them?

The Minister said yesterday that the safety net was adequate. Yet, at the ground level, hotlines and social service centres have registered a rise in the number of calls related to financial difficulties. There is less money for VWOs to hand out to distressed families due to shrinking funds and priorities are given to developing credible programmes for long term benefit, a strategy which I do agree with.

Could the Minister help me understand whether the spending of $91,924 in the last six months of 1998 was constrained by the limited availability of funds? How many applications were rejected and on what reasons? I am glad to learn from Dr Ho Tat Kin earlier that the Public Assistance Scheme is up for review this year. The question I would then put to the Minister is: has the Ministry developed a misery index to redefine and categorise the broad range of the poor and near-poor who may be long term unemployed or unemployable?

I have made the call for identifying a misery index in August last year during the motion presented by Mr Lim Swee Say and Mr Seng Han Thong. Please allow me to make that plea again here.

Can we set up a cross-agency fact finding task force comprising Government statisticians, academics, social workers and others to identify the distressed and design a Singapore specific misery index with indices which are socio-economic in nature? Some countries consider inflation and unemployment as the significant measures. If one includes other measures like retrenchment and bankruptcies, the misery index in Singapore actually would indicate that Singapore was quite unhappy in 1998, to quote a Business Times report by Anna Teo in January this year.

Bankruptcies increased by 44.3% in the first eight months of 1998 over the same period in 1997, according to a report by Lianhe Zaobao. If we were to add more indicators like the decline in wages, the number of mortgage sales, companies winding up, CPF default rate, rise in crime rate, etc., the misery index evidently will point to a rising gloom level.

Sir, an index can be configured out of any combination of appropriate indicators. I am not clear at this point what our statisticians use as indicators to assess the socio-economic health of our society during this economic downturn. Could the Minister clarify this?

Without such information, we will never be certain in ascertaining the citizens' well-being and even less clear about who we should help, how much and for how long. It cannot be left to social institutions like the NCSS to carry out this survey either because it does not have the resources nor the mechanism to process such comprehensive data.

Public assistance as a specific instrument to help the destitute may need a fresh perspective to redefine its execution in line with how we determine the misery index during this downturn. Public assistance as a broad policy of assistance to the needy will also require new points about what kind of help is more critical at this point. It does not mean new development projects or social institutions. But, more critically, it would mean direct and duration specific support programmes to distressed families. I hope the energies spent in an exercise will help the Ministry make a stronger and more forceful request for a supplementary budget this year, if necessary, and a bigger budget next year. 1.15 pm

Mr Shriniwas Rai (Nominated Member): Sir, before I move on to my amendment, let me declare my interest. I sit as a resource panel member for the GPC and I am also a member of the Maintenance of Parents Tribunal.

Sir, we all are grateful to the MCD for the fine work it has done. It not only looks after the needy and the community, but I think it carries two very important aspects of software without which I think we will be at a loss. I speak of the work of the People's Association (PA), which comes under the Minister, as well as the Feedback Unit. It is a very important instrument. And I think over the years, both these institutions have grown.

Yesterday's plea by the Members has made the writer of the Gallery column in the Straits Times, Miss Chua, to say that we all have been very socialist. We are socialists, Sir. Even the Opposition, the Government Party and the NMPs believe in social causes. That is why we are urging the Minister. Unfortunately, the Finance Minister is not here after the Budget. I would urge him to give just less than half a billion dollars to MCD. No money, no work.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: No talk.

Mr Shriniwas Rai: No talk, also. So I think it is very important to urge the Cabinet that this is an area which we cannot afford to be less than generous. We have to be generous.

I will move on to the amendment now, Sir. I wholeheartedly agree with my Chairman, Dr Vasoo, and Mdm Claire Chiang earlier that the public assistance scheme must be re-examined. The time when it was first laid down had changed. I would ask the Minister: would he consider in the near future to raise the ceiling? I also urge the Minister to go one step further. We have Edusave. We have Medisave. Can we save a substantial sum of money and set aside for a Community Fund? I see no harm in being a bit of welfare state when there is a need, after all, the citizens have worked out. Give them something in return, and this is the time now when we should consider those of our citizens who are jobless, sick and disabled. They are not asking for public assistance as it is done in other countries, which becomes a social norm. Here they do out of necessity, Sir. I, therefore, urge the Minister to consider setting aside a fund.

Sir, voluntary organisations and others are affected by this economic downturn. They are getting less funds. I disagree with the political leadership that we should not dip into the reserves. There is no need to dip on the past reserves. The present Government has got enough surpluses, and part of the surpluses could be set aside for this community project.

Sir, as time is running short, I would touch on another aspect of it. The Ministry should also strengthen family values, as earlier Members have spoken. I am glad that both the Ministry of Health and MCD have come out with a package for the elderly. I think the people who have worked behind it have done a good job, and I hope and pray the Minister will adopt all the proposals. I would like the Minister's comment.

The Chairman: I would like to remind Members that "guillotine" time on this Head is 1.45 pm.

Dr Vasoo: Sir, the problem of juvenile delinquency has been recently highlighted, and there are concerns in the community about the increasing number of young juvenile delinquents. The problem has to be tackled from various fronts: the family's participation, the Police will have to play a role; the schools, the community and the rehabilitation agencies. If all these frontiers could work together, then there will be a possibility to reduce the problem.

In view of that, many young delinquents are placed in institutions for rehabilitation, how are they prevented from being polluted by hardened delinquents? I note that some of them who are very young are sent for rehabilitation. There is a need to implement rehabilitation measures which take into consideration how to deal with these younger persons who are sent for rehabilitation.

The other area of concern is recidivism. It is common after these juvenile delinquents have been discharged from institutions. The success of rehabilitation depends on follow-up measures carried out. What I would like to find out from the Minister is: what is the recidivism rate like and what measures are taken to deal with the problem?

Dr Ho Tat Kin: Sir, many people think of juveniles as kids who are left to themselves and cause trouble in the shopping malls. They stare at each other, they get into fights. Many of the juveniles are beyond parental control. Some 339 children were brought before the Subordinate Courts because they were beyond parental control. More juvenile crimes are being reported and more juveniles are being sent to reform homes. Statistics also show that young juveniles are committing more serious crimes. Juveniles are no longer limited to boys. Girls also form gangs which are just as violent. I was told of a case in a reputable girls' school where they actually set fire to the school toilet to express dissatisfaction with the teachers.

Sir, today, with the Internet, children are not just left to wander by themselves in the shopping mall but also in the whole wide world. They can now be exposed to all the bad elements that are found on the Internet, without having to step out of the home. Children must therefore be trained to be smart, especially on the Internet. The old grandmother teaching the children not to talk to strangers is just as true today for the Internet age.

There are some views that certain groups of incorrigible juveniles will not be suitable for treatment under the current juvenile justice system because of their attitude and character and their presence may make rehabilitation of other juvenile offenders in the juvenile justice system difficult. May I ask the Minister how true is this view, and what statistics are available to support this allegation?

An Inter-Ministry Committee to review the Children and Young Persons Act has been formed, with the objective of looking at the adequacy of treatment options to deal with juveniles who commit serious crimes. May I ask what progress has been made by this Inter-Ministry Committee?

Sir, in dealing with juvenile crimes, we should focus on the child and to see how best to reintegrate the kids back into society. The family is the primary institution of care for the young and good parenting is probably the single most important factor in determining the quality of the upbringing of the children. Good parenting skills today, among many others, should include capability to detect signs early to guide troubled children and developing strategies to help them. What programmes would the MCD provide to help parents to develop good parenting skills? What measures will be taken to involve the parents more in the rehabilitation of the juveniles?

Mr Shriniwas Rai: Sir, child abuse is on the increase and public education requires to inculcate both parents and those who are in care of their children to be more fair to their children. I am not against the idea of using the rod. But I think it should be used sparingly. By all means, instill fear in the child, but do not go to the extent of abusing the child. Many of the children, unfortunately, those who are abused, do not receive medical attention. The reason is that the parents or the guardians fear that they will be brought to book. Besides education, may I ask the Minister whether he will consider having a legislative measure in the long term to see that those who abuse their children are brought to book, if wise counsel fails. A recent newspaper report was very, very shocking when it reported that adopted children were abused and, if not for the timely intervention of the teacher, God alone knows what will happen! So I urge the Minister to consider this position.

Mr Zulkifli Bin Baharudin (Nominated Member): Sir, first, I would like to withdraw my cut on National Language and concentrate on multi-culturalism.

Despite years of racial harmony and peaceful co-existence among the various races, racial, cultural and religious diversity in Singapore will continue to present a number of important and potentially divisive questions.

The establishment of self-help groups has been one of the key strategies in our approach to solve these dilemmas faced by us and the community. Despite the success of these self-help groups, and for which they deserve much praise, I would say that finding a morally defensible and politically viable answer to some of these questions will remain a challenge facing us. In many other countries, minorities and majorities continue to clash on issues such as language, rights, political representation and education curriculum.

Of recent, there has been talk within the community of the potentially divisive issues with regard to racial discrimination faced by job seekers, of Malays in the Singapore Armed Forces, and of the emphasis given to the development of Chinese cultural elites and the establishment of the SAP schools. We have seen recently how the announcement of a certain training programme initiative by the CDAC and the condition that it excludes other ethnic groups from participating in this programme can cause unease. Fortunately, in this instance, it turned out that all self-help groups will run similar programmes. I am glad that we are now able to talk on these issues openly and objectively. While the answers and assurances given by the various Ministers have helped people to view these issues in its proper perspective, it is quite natural for different ethnic communities to view these issues and others differently, and they see it from the "outside". Perhaps those who have experienced greater racial and cultural integration in their workplace, in schools, in the SAF, and in the communities may be better able to understand these issues from a broader perspective.

Let me first say that I agree with the Government's approach of having self-help groups on racial and ethnic line because in order to get beyond race, we must first take into account race. There is no other way. In order to treat some people equally, we must perhaps treat them differently.

We must realise that deep in our conscience, in our least political moments, when relaxing in the privacy of our homes, we are very much more likely than not to gravitate towards those whom we perceive as our own kind.

It is because of this recognition that we have groups that have been able, through the various initiatives, to increase their ethnic identity and consciousness and contribute to the self-esteem of ethnic minority. They have been very successful in reaching out to the community, attracting dedicated volunteers and introducing programmes tailored to the specific cultural and ethnic needs. They have provided opportunities for unified and cohesive approach in dealing with the issues of the community and containing potential problems within the group.

But I would like to caution that the very success of these self-help groups, based on powerful forces of race and religion and ethnic identity, can bring about a number of unintended consequences. I am particularly troubled by the fact that unleashing of these ethnic energies, while successful in developing the social infrastructure of the ethnic community, can potentially develop to become an alternative to other secular programmes, instead of being in support of the broader national objectives. 1.30 pm

Take the case of education, for example. We have seen how ethnic communities are now able to provide education in an entirely ethnic environment, beginning from the young to adulthood. While this may be a big step forward from the point of view of the community, it can be regressive and a step backwards for the ethnic community and for all of us in Singapore. Experiences in North America have shown that a separate ethnic based education system has not succeeded in providing lifelong meaningful employment opportunities. In fact, they may become a catalyst of isolationist tendencies, ie, extremism and hate.

What hope can we have if a section of our community grows up into adulthood in an entirely different ethnic based education? What hope have we got if we allow them to erect walls between us and making it less possible to reach out and embrace and understand other communities in our society? We have seen how countries that have practised racial assimilation for years completely broken and fractured into divisive ethnic communities when the social and economic environment deteriorates. Can our society survive such a challenge?

It is not surprising that many of these ethnic issues surfaced during the current economic crisis because they can blame racial discrimination for unemployment. They can blame on the education policy and the lack of a level playing field for poor scholastic achievement.

I am also concerned that these rules and practices within some of these self-help groups which contain an exclusive element in the Articles of Association will prevent them from providing some of these services to other racial groups. Why cannot the reverse happen? Why should we deny someone from another race who may have very good reasons to participate in the programmes of some other ethnic communities? We need to adopt a more inclusive approach to make it easier for other members of the community to take part in these activities. We now have colour-blind policies but not necessarily colour-blind programmes. But this must be our ultimate goal and we can do this by making our programmes more accessible to other communities and seize every available opportunity for inter-racial collaboration.

The Chairman: Can you allow some time for the other Members?

Mr Zulkifli bin Baharudin: I will take another minute or so, Sir.

The Chairman: All right, finish your speech, please.

Mr Zulkifli bin Baharudin: OK. I would therefore like to urge the Minister to make it compulsory for some programmes to have multiracial participation if it is going to qualify for Government subsidies and incentives. We have the best community centres award each year. Why not make multiracial activity part of these assessment critieria? We have racial quotas for HDB. Why not have racial quotas for our childcare and pre-primary kindergartens? And I urge the Minister to take care of this in reviewing some of these policies.

Multiculturalism will remain an ideal we will have to protect and constantly struggle to work for, because we have no other choice, but to try to achieve.

Encik Ibrahim bin Othman (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, since time is running short, I would just like to ask the Minister to give an update on the activities of the Family Development Unit of Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura.

Mr Ang Mong Seng (Bukit Gombak): (In Mandarin): Sir, recently Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong challenged the Singapore Badminton Association to capture the Thomas Cup by the 21st century and the Football Association of Singapore to raise the standard of our football so that we may one day qualify for the final round of the World Cup.

These may seem to be tall orders, but not entirely impossible, provided we take practical steps to attain these targets. First of all, we must identify our obstacles. We should analyse the problems in a very analytical and objective manner so that we can concentrate our efforts to strive for success.

First of all, we must enhance the professional status of our athletes. The prime time of these athletes is from 20 to 35 years old, after which they will need to have some plans for their second careers. We have just a few hundred sportsmen and sportswomen who are capable of bringing glory to Singapore. I think we should help them to develop some retirement plans so that they can feel assured that life after competitions is being looked after, and they can concentrate on their present efforts to do well in the field of sports they excel in. We can perhaps arrange for them to become coaches, trainers or physical education teachers upon their retirement from active competitions.

The Chairman: Can you just ask the question?

Mr Ang Mong Seng: (In Mandarin): Secondly, it is about the funds available to our national sports associations. I think all our associations are lacking in funds. I hope that the Minister for Finance can allocate more funds to the Singapore Sports Council to help the various sports in the next financial year.

Thirdly, the lack of training venue and facilities. Perhaps, our National Stadium and the Singapore Indoor Stadium should be converted into a training village to promote more sports activities. As Prime Minister Goh has said, we want to capture the Thomas Cup by the next century, the Government should try its best to provide an environment conducive to the development of the various sports in Singapore. Every effort must be made to make it easier for our athletes and players to train and give full play to their potential, in order to be developed into world-beaters.

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: I think I have only 10 minutes to answer all the questions. Sir, I will cover the cuts on social assistance by Dr Vasoo, Dr Ho, Mr Sin Boon Ann, Prof. Low Seow Chay and NMPs, Mdm Claire Chiang and Mr Shriniwas Rai. On the help for retrenched workers, as I mentioned in my speech yesterday, there is already quite a comprehensive safety net available. We have things like the approved Interim Financial Scheme, the Rent and Utilities Assistance Scheme (RUAS) and the CDCs and grassroots organisations launching new schemes to help the retrenched, including one-off national grants, tie-ups with hawker stalls to offer hot meals and food and ration vouchers. All cases of hardship arising from retrenchment, especially when the breadwinner has difficulties finding another job, will be dealt with sympathetically by my Ministry.

My Ministry also links retrenched workers to other Government agencies and no child will be denied education because of financial difficulty in the family. For working mothers who have been retrenched, my Ministry has also extended the period of Government childcare subsidy. Low-income families can also tap on the centre-based financial assistance scheme for childcare and the back-to-work childcare scheme to supplement subsidies.

Prof. Low has asked if the Ministry allows PA recipients to take up part-time jobs to supplement their income. Sir, we encourage and assist indeed PA recipients to get a job. We will take off PA only after we are satisfied that they have a steady income to support themselves and their families.

Mr Sin asked whether we should push awareness of the target audience on PA and all other assistance available in Singapore. Sir, instead of going on a media blitz, as Mr Sin suggested, I think it is better for us to go direct to the people involved, people who care and look after the less fortunate and to the less fortunate themselves. We have, for example, briefed the CDCs, members of grassroots organisations and VWOs on the schemes and services MCD and its related agencies have to help all those in financial distress. We have a directory of services given out to the advisers to grassroots organisations, senior managers, town councils, HDB Branch Offices, PA, CDCs and VWOs.

We have also involved, and this is important, the CDCs and RCs on an outreach programme for families. This programme brings together volunteers from the CDCs, the RCs and the VWOs to go from door to door to inform families residing in 1- or 2-room flats of the schemes and services they can tap on. A booklet of all major schemes is given to the families.

Mdm Claire Chiang asked for more help for single parents. I assure her that every case in need will be helped. Single parent families who do not qualify for PA may receive short-term financial assistance. And once they are on PA, they also get other forms of assistance from other groups and their school-going children will be referred to the Ministry of Education for help in their schooling expenses.

With regard to means test, the test is actually very simple and people merely need to call us or our agency if they need help, and they need not apply in person and no forms will be needed to be filled if they want any help.

With regard to the misery index, the index which she referred to includes other miseries as well, quite apart from PA. So I am not too sure whether it can directly apply to us in that sense. Anyway, we have other more direct means of ascertaining PA rates. And for planning purposes, we have means such as the minimum household expenditure survey data. We are reviewing the criteria for the PA scheme and sufficient funds have been set aside for PA.

On juvenile delinquency, I agree with Dr Vasoo and Dr Ho that arrests have indeed increased over the last two years after a drop in 1996. I would like to emphasise here that parental and family involvement is the cornerstone in effective rehabilitation and parents who undergo orientation are involved in the development and implementation of treatment plans for their children. Community involvement and support also help strengthen and facilitate the rehabilitation process. All these are highly featured in our rehabilitation protocols.

On institutionalisation and after care, Dr Vasoo may be happy to know that we have set up the new Boys' Complex in Jurong to replace the old and dilapidated Singapore Boys' Home A and B. It has better facilities which allow for implementation of more rehabilitation programmes. What is unique here too is that it has a classification centre where all newly admitted juveniles are assessed by a multi-disciplinary team of professionals for possible risks, for their social emotional needs and the aptitude for training and education. An individual care plan is then developed for more effective and focused rehabilitation of each resident.

Classification also allows the home to separate the boys in different dormitories according to the seriousness of the offences and also the degree of their delinquency. So I think this will avoid contamination which the Member is concerned with.

On incorrigible juveniles, as mentioned by Dr Ho, we are indeed seeing an increase of such offenders. But in fact, world-wide, we are seeing the emergence of very small groups of juveniles with extremely low or no rehabilitation potential, and they are usually not remorseful about their offences at all. The number in Singapore, Sir, is actually relatively small, about five to 10 cases each year in MCD homes. They are not responsive to the homes' programmes. They threaten the safety of residents and staff, and they are defiant and also disruptive. The incorrigible juvenile is usually brought before the Juvenile Court for transfer to the approved school or Young Offenders Section in the Reformatory Training Centre (RTC) under the Prisons Department.

Mr Shriniwas Rai talked about child abuse which has been increasing. I agree with him. It is a very serious form of abuse. I agree with him that children should be loved and cared for and not be abused, least of all by their parents or step parents. I would like to assure Members that my Ministry will come down hard on child abuses. While the number of reported cases of child abuse has gone up over the past three years, averaging about 160 cases annually, the number of confirmed cases of abuse has actually been quite stable, averaging between 25 and 28 cases annually. I support the NMP's suggestion that members of the community, and particularly the neighbours, should report all cases of child abuse. The Member may wish to know that we have a child abuse hotline, managed by my Ministry, and indeed this is an avenue or conduit which the public can use to report child abuse cases.

I want to assure the NMP and members of the public that identify people who report child abuse to my Ministry that they are kept strictly confidential. All reports of suspected child abuse will be thoroughly investigated and looked into. 1.45 pm

The Chairman: Order. It is "guillotine" time.

Dr Vasoo: Sir, underlying all these appeals is that it is not no money but we do not have new money. My GPC members will press on to request for more funds for the Ministry to carry out its strategic plans to deal with the new problems. With that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $346,644,620 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $138,648,200 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head L -

The Chairman: Head L - Ministry of Education. Amendment No. (1). Mr Loh Meng See.

Mr Loh Meng See (Kampong Glam): Sir, I beg to move,

"That the total sum to be allocated for Head L of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100."

Sir, I am pleased that the Government has continued to be generous in providing ample funds to the Ministry of Education. In fact, a larger budget of $5.72 billion has been given, despite the overall tighter budget this year in the midst of the very difficult economic times.

However, I note that the cost of educating a primary school pupil per annum has fallen from $3,415 in FY98 to $2,832 in FY99. Similarly, the cost of educating a secondary school student has also decreased from $5,208 in FY98 to $4,992 in FY99. If the per capita expenditure is not reduced for the primary and secondary school students, this will go a long way to meet the extra educational needs of the pupils in their formative years. It would appear that the overall increase in budget provisions does not benefit the primary and secondary school students directly. Here, we are talking about educating a student population of 450,000. Perhaps, the Minister can clarify on this.

The Education Ministry has a critical role to realise Singapore's vision of "Thinking Schools, Learning Nation". Principals and teachers are key. They are the forces in the frontline delivering the Desired Outcomes of Education. Principals are given greater autonomy to manage their schools. Project-based learning has been introduced. Schools are encouraged to organise rigorous National Education and ECA activities. Students are exposed to outdoor learning activities. Innovative methods of teaching and learning are instituted.

The recent incident of the Pulau Ubin tragedy and the Jin Tai School "mock attack" demonstrated certain weaknesses in our school management. May I ask the Minister on how well-prepared and equipped are our principals and teachers to cope with the challenges of the new learning environment? Serious mistakes and unfortunate accidents can happen. But how can we assure the public that serious and grave mistakes do not lead to the endangering of the safety and health of our students?

The Ministry is adopting the ability-driven approach in policy planning and practices. The term "mass customisation" is a new cliche and it has been used to represent this approach. The focus is on the individual's ability and developing them to the fullest potential. All abilities are required in a knowledge-based economy. The students are currently streamed on the basis of the overall grades in the school subjects but students have differing abilities in different subjects. Would the Ministry be flexible to organise students on the basis of different strengths and abilities in different subjects to help them improve and do better? In a knowledge-based economy, every individual needs to have a good basic education to build up his learning capabilities. Our young will grow to be self-reliant if they can benefit fully from their primary and secondary education. You will realise that I have been focusing my speech on the primary and secondary education. They would become employable in different jobs in a future of multi-careers. I wish to urge the Ministry to work harder to achieve further improvements in our students' performance.

Excellence in school performance should not be confined to areas that are easily quantified and measurable. Many important areas of education that benefit the students are intangible in nature. There has been the over-emphasis on academic performance and not enough emphasis on the non-academic areas like project work, ECAs, social and community work. Perhaps the school ranking system could be modified to reflect this new emphasis.

The development of moral character of the person has become more crucial with the wide access to information through the Internet. Imparting of positive values and teaching our young to discern between right from wrong are virtues best taught in their formative years. Students who display poor conduct and behaviour should be corrected early. The Pastoral Care and Guidance Programme, if successfully carried out, would have the long term positive impact on the students. I wish to urge the Ministry to continue to devote more resources in this area.

We want our students to become more creative. But music is not fully exploited as a normal learning activity. Research has shown that music even helps babies in their mental development. The large number of children taking music lessons attests to the value parents place in the overall development of their children. Should not the school provide music learning for all students rather than treating music as a special elective subject catering to a select few? Sound Blaster was developed by Creative Technology's Mr Sim Wong Hoo who himself is a harmonica player. His love for music has paid handsome dividends. So, I think it is important for us to bring back music where I believe many of us, when we were younger, benefited from the music lessons.

In conclusion, we are proud of our achievements in the field of education. Our educational system has been rated highly by other countries and international agencies. We have had a good start. We have a strong and firm foundation on which to build further. The Government is right to invest heavily in the education of our young. This long-term investment would bear fruits only a generation later after this present Government is long gone. This is an act of a good and responsible Government.

Dr Tan Boon Wan (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, the Desired Outcomes of Education articulate explicitly what the education system intends to develop in our children at each stage of their education. Mr Wee Heng Tin, Director-General of Education, has succinctly described the end result as a whole child, who apart from skills and knowledge, possesses sound morals, strength of character, healthy habits, team spirit and an aesthetic appreciation for the world around him. Each child grows into a responsible and committed citizen.

These are indeed desirable qualities and values for our young to possess. These are also the qualities and values that our young must possess to fit into the challenging future. To achieve the Desired Outcomes, our education system has to change. It is important that we manage this change properly. Our education system has served us well. Our students have performed superbly in international tests. They have competed well in foreign universities. Many countries want to copy us. Hence, the need to change may not be clear to the people. But if they know and understand the rationale for the changes, their support will be stronger and more forthcoming. The Ministry needs to continue with its efforts to explain to the people the reasons for change.

Our principals and teachers are major players, helping our children to achieve the Desired Outcomes. Principals and teachers are major change agents in the process and must themselves first adapt to the changes. They must be comfortable with the changes if they are to help the children. But how are they coping with the changes? Could the Minister give us a review of the current situation in respect to our teachers and principals?

The Ministry has done much to work with the teachers but I am still getting feedback from teachers that they feel a lot of stress. They feel that they are still largely assessed on the academic performance of their students. Meanwhile, the emphasis on non-academic aspects has increased. New initiatives, like school clusters and autonomy, add to the pressure. These create new administrative duties such as attending meetings, taking and writing of minutes and coordination of activities. They also need to go for training as a result of new technologies like IT. To cope with the work, they often stay back late in school and come back on Saturdays. They find the life of a teacher very stressful. How many teachers, especially those with long services, have resigned in the last few years as a result of stress? What further help can we give to teachers to ease their stress and keep them in the service? Should we also not be making changes to the way we train our teachers for a role that has changed?

Principals play an important role in introducing and managing change. A principal who is a good manager, who understands the difficulties and constraints faced by staff, can help to ease in the change. A principal who is a poor manager adds pressure on his or her staff. In a rapidly changing environment, a principal may become over-enthusiastic and may take on more than he can comfortably handle. He may then overlook details and fail to anticipate potential problems. An overload of activities initiated by a principal can also put stress on the teachers. We are more aware of the efforts put in by the Ministry to help our teachers than those to help our principals. What training and help have been provided to our principals, especially those newly promoted ones, to better manage their schools? Recently, there were a few mishaps in our schools. I wonder if the Minister could share with us the findings of his Ministry on some of them.

Let me hasten to add that, on the whole, our principals and teachers are coping well with the changes. But any effort to help them to better adapt to the changes required will benefit them and the children under their care even more. The school also needs the involvement of parents and the community to achieve the Desired Outcomes. The school needs the home and society to endorse and reinforce good behaviour and values imparted by the school to the child. To get the children to be more involved in the community, the Ministry started the Community Involvement Scheme. To foster the support of parents and the community for the schools, the Minister late last year set up an Advisory Council of the Committee and Parents Support System. It is a far-reaching idea. The school is a part of the community. Their children study there. The community and parents are interested in how the schools in the community operate. Could the Minister update us on the progress made with these efforts to involve the community and parents?

2.00 pm

I have one suggestion which I would like the Minister to consider. At the moment, there is no national forum for interested parents, community leaders, school principals and teachers to discuss common issues. I would like the Minister to consider organising such a national forum. We can consider the model of the triennial conference of grassroots leaders the PA uses to bring together grassroots leaders across Singapore and PA staff. Many good suggestions surface during the conference and these ideas have moved forward the grassroots organisations and their effectiveness. The conference made the grassroots leaders felt recognised, motivated and wanted. I believe that such a conference could bring together parents, community leaders and educators and will similarly motivate everyone involved to do more for the school to the ultimate benefit of the students, school and the community.

Mr Lim Swee Say (Tanjong Pagar): Sir, I would like to thank the Minister and his team of officers at the Ministry, and all the principals and teachers for their hard work in 1998. A lot of changes and improvements have been done. As Singaporeans, our education system is something all of us can be proud of.

Sir, this afternoon, I just want to bring up one point. One of the Desired Outcomes of Education, obviously, is to prepare young Singaporeans to be the knowledge workers of the future. One day, two students were challenging each other on who is better prepared to be a knowledge worker of tomorrow. One said to the other, "Assuming I am a prisoner and you are the policeman. I am handcuffed and I need to go to the toilet. You, as a policeman, would not want to follow me to the toilet. What can you do to stop me from escaping?"

The other student said, "No problem. All I have to do is to take a rope, put it through your handcuff, and then hold the two ends of the rope outside the toilet. There is no way you can escape, is it not?"

In order to simulate this, maybe I can ask Mr Low Thia Khiang to help me out with this. See, there is no way I can escape, because, in a way, the two loops are in a dead lock.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: You can take out your handcuff!

Mr Lim Swee Say: No. Assuming this is a real handcuff. There is no way I can get out of it.

So the student acting as prisoner said, "I give it to you. I think you are ready to be a knowledge worker of the future."

The student acting as policeman then said, "Very good, but now I challenge you back. Are you ready to be a knowledge worker of the future? Will you be able to find a way to escape?"

This other student said, "No problem, I could escape in just one second." Because the way to look at the situation is this. You define the problem as two interlocking loops. I can always redefine the situation as one of two loops, parallel to each other, circulating my arms. For me to disengage these two loops, all I have to do is to bring the first loop through the second loop and then see what happens? The rope goes through my hand and it comes out.

Sir, I use this example to illustrate the point that to be knowledge workers of the future, our students not only have to acquire knowledge, not only have they to learn to apply knowledge but, more importantly, they have to learn to innovate with knowledge. In our human brain, we have countless number of brain cells. The challenge is to help our students build connections to link up as many brain cells as possible, because I was told by the experts that the more connections there are among our brain cells, the better, the faster we are able to think.

I would appreciate it if the Minister can update this House on what have been done up to now, and what will be done in the future to continue to stimulate the minds of our young Singaporeans so that they can be more creative and innovative, and to become competitive and productive knowledge workers of tomorrow.

The Chairman: I was just wondering how the hon. Member expects us to record all that in Hansard.

Mr Lim Swee Say: Sir, may I propose that Hansard goes multimedia?

Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh: Sir, I would like to urge the Minister to consider increasing the emphasis on volunteerism as an additional school activity for achieving the Desired Outcomes of Education. This is in line with our national effort in promoting volunteerism as a way of life for all Singaporeans. Let me elaborate.

First, by building community service as part of their course work, students in primary and secondary levels will develop an ethic of service. We have so far committed our students to just six hours of community service per year. I feel that this is not enough. Some public school systems in the United States stipulate that students complete 75 hours of service between the 6th and 12th grades as a requirement for secondary school graduation.

Sir, studies have shown that by regularising and intensifying service contacts with the community, students who devoted their time to service learning also do well academically, develop higher order thinking, social and civic responsibility, greater acceptance of cultural diversity and a higher level of self esteem. This is in line with the desired outcome of our education.

A second argument for increased community service for students is the enhancement of an ethic of citizenship. By engaging in community service, students become active members in identifying the needs of, and seeking solutions for, the community. Such first-hand experience helps to translate classroom exhortation on being caring to seeking real-world solutions, an exercise of reflection and action that incrementally engage our young as active members, as concerned citizens. This is the best stake-holding experience to foster in our young a sense of belonging, by making them feel that what they are doing for Singapore makes a difference. Sir, it is a powerful emotion of participation and commitment.

I would further urge the Minister to consider allocating some start-up resources to tertiary student bodies to develop outreach programmes with respect to community service as well as leadership programmes to train and maintain campus volunteer coordination activities. These volunteers best serve as "peer mentors" to our young students at the secondary level.

My third argument is: by increasing the number of hours for service engagement, there is room for mixing student groups from different ethnic backgrounds and academic streams, maybe even from different schools and tertiary institutions to cooperate on a project. This not only promotes multi-cultural understanding, it also creates a mutually learning environment for students to be exposed to differences and new opportunities of finding ways to relate to and learn from one another. We may transform the ugly Singaporean to becoming appreciative Singaporean, if I may borrow the Minister of State Mr Peter Chen's characterisation.

I hope the Ministry will strongly encourage school principals to work with various social service organisations in the vicinity to develop a volunteer service network. In this respect, the setting up of COMPASS (Community and Parents in Support of Schools Advisory Council) was a commendable initiative. A consistent, system-wide approach in the planning, scheduling, orientation and training of volunteers in various service engagements has to be in place to sustain students' interest in community service. Perhaps an outstanding service award can be given by schools to students who perform well academically as well as show community spirit through a genuine interest in helping others. The NKF Champion's award launched in 1997 by Minister Teo Chee Hean is one such initiative. Hopefully, by repeating these initiatives at every school, the ethic of volunteerism, as a way of life and citizenship, will be a powerful catalyst for community enhancement.

Mr Hawazi Daipi (Sembawang): (In Malay): Sir, one long-term objective of the Education Ministry is to increase the opportunities for young Singaporeans to seek further education. Our education system strives to reduce the drop-out rate among students at all levels of schooling. This is a noble aspiration which will hopefully be pursued further. To raise our students' performance through competition, the Education Ministry has implemented a school ranking system.

What we see normally is that schools at the top are those that are already known to be very good. On the other hand, year after year, the majority of neighbourhood schools form the category at the bottom of the ranking list. If Singapore wants to prepare our young citizens in the best way possible for the era of knowledge-based economy, we should help them to maximise their potentials, regardless of whether they study in the outstanding schools or ordinary neighbourhood schools. Hence, while we accord recognition to the leading schools at the top of the ranking every year, I hope we will not neglect to give attention to neighbourhood schools whose academic performance is not on par with the better schools. We should give all encouragement and support in terms of basic facilities, effort and also good teachers to neighbourhood schools so that their students, the majority of whom are children of moderate families, could improve their performance in school.

Therefore, I would like to see value-added performance being given due attention and recognition in placing schools on the ranking list every year. Whether we like it or not, socio-economic and income levels of families have an impact on the educational performance of students. Many adult Singaporeans who have succeeded today come from such families. We took advantage of available opportunities to compete and improve ourselves in education and career. If students from moderate and low-income families could achieve good performance in education, they will certainly find sweet success. This is among the characteristics of Singaporeans. We should support and motivate the cultivation of values which help in the creation of this value-added performance. I raise this question because I believe that it will help in developing self-confidence, motivation and capability among our young.

To encourage children from moderate families and those whose past performance did not achieve good results to take advantage of all available opportunities in schools, I hope their "value-added performance" will be given extra points in school ranking. We wish to see our children whose performance was not good at an earlier level achieve better performance at the next level.

I learn that the Ministry of Education now does not rank schools only. It is also implementing ranking among teachers. I am not sure whether this will produce a favourable outcome. But if ranking among teachers can help in improving their performance, this is good enough for me. If it is accepted as good, I would like to suggest that teachers who help their students in achieving "value-added performance" be given more points in the ranking. We should send the correct signal to our educators that no matter how low is the performance of the students who enter their schools, these students should be helped to realise their potentials.

Generally, I would like to ask the Education Minister about his assessment of our students' "value-added performance" at various levels. Have we seen a visible improvement in our students' achievement? What we do not wish to see is a situation whereby "what is pursued is not obtained, while what we have falls out of our grasp", meaning that while value-added performance does not improve significantly, the stress level experienced by teachers rises.

On a related subject, our schools have received much from the Edusave funds to provide special courses for our students. Does the Ministry decide on different criteria or guidelines for different courses? Many schools obtain the services of organisations outside schools to run the courses. How does the Ministry determine that the courses offered to students are good? 2.15 pm

Dr Lily Neo (Kreta Ayer-Tanglin): Sir, I would like to raise concern over the anguish felt by many students and parents in lieu of the early operating hours in our schools.

It was reported in the Straits Times that Tan Ming Ming (not her real name), an eight-year-old in Primary 2 gets up every morning at 5.00 am to catch a school bus at 5.45 am. This is so that she can be in school by 7.20 am. This is a familiar story and a cause of much anguish expressed by many parents. I think we need to review this correctable situation. I am suggesting that whenever possible, as in the case of single-session schools, the schools should start later, at say 8.20 am earliest. This will enable school buses to stagger pick-up times and ease the traffic flow in the mornings somewhat. Furthermore, the peak rush hour for the office workers, who usually start work at 9.00 am would not be adversely compromised.

There are many single-session primary and secondary schools that still stick to the 7.20 am start times when, in fact, there is no more need for it to be so. A change will avoid the frustrations in the early and dark hours of the morning for many students going to school. This will reduce the pressure on parents who have to get up to prepare the breakfast for the children who, in turn, complain that they have no appetite at such a time in the morning. This will mean that students have to eat lunches in schools and stay longer in schools.

This, in fact, is a good thing, which brings me to my second point, relating to the "after school care". Sir, there is a place for all schools to provide "after school care" to those who require this facility. This would be especially easy with the single session schools. We should cater for a changing trend where many families become dual-income earners. This trend is going to stay, and parents would be delighted to know that as they work, their children are safe and are supervised in their work after school. This latchkey system can also prevent children from mixing with the wrong crowds after school.

It is a fact now that many students get private tuition that can cost hundreds of dollars per month and tax heavily upon the resources of the family. Perhaps the extra help or even group tuition given after school will lessen the financial burdens in many families. Although more Before-and-After-School-Care Centres are being set up in HDB void decks and community centres, I feel that schools would really be ideal for this type of care. The convenience and lower cost will be plus points for such care at schools.

The Minister for Education can allow schools to employ part-time staff, encourage volunteer parents and tap resources from grassroots and voluntary groups to mind the after school care programmes. Space constraints have been given as the reason by many against the idea. The truth is that a converted classroom or a simple portable cabin or container is all that is needed. Sir, I hope the Ministry of Education could look in further and improve in these two areas.

Mr Shriniwas Rai: Sir, the Ministry of Education has received the most number of amendments. It shows how popular the Ministry is and how all Singaporeans, including Members of this House, take education as a serious issue.

I would like to speak on two aspects of the school. First, SAP schools. Last week, Mr Shanmugam spoke on this matter. After his speech, the Prime Minister spoke to Dr Vasoo, Mr Shanmugam and myself on the issue. We gave him our feedback. DPM Lee informed the House that we had moved from the colonial days when schools were based on language. That is why the Government has the Sang Nila Utama Secondary School and the Amar Pulavar Tamil Secondary School and there were numerous Chinese primary schools and secondary schools. Things have changed for the better. We have now moved to SAP schools. There have been some reservations. I hope the Minister would address the reservations that Mr Shanmugam has raised in this House.

I have discussed this matter with several friends, inside the House as well as outside the House. The views seem to be divided. Many feel that the minority communities are not being sensitive to the majority community. They say Nanyang University has been closed, so have many Chinese schools. Unless there is a national effort to keep the Chinese language and culture alive, it would disappear from the scene.

Sir, nowhere is this more visible than if you look at the dress of my Chinese friends. The Indian and Malay communities still preserve this national dress for both the ladies and men. The Chinese members of Singapore have totally adopted the western dress. Whether it is good or bad, I am not passing judgement. But just one classic case. Over the years, the cultural values have changed. All I would urge is that whatever education system we choose, it must suit our national multi-racial and multi-cultural needs.

This is my advice to those members of the minority communities who want SAP schools for Malays and Indians. I would urge them not to do so. To do so would be counter productive. You are going to allow these people to be isolated in small cocoons and they will never have much to do with other communities. It is not very sound to have this proposition. The lead must come from all the communities and through the meritocratic process, it will throw up some of the best from this stream.

Sir, I now move on to another aspect. I would call it "Privatisation of Schools". The Government's move with independent schools is a good one. Can we move one step further? Would the Minister consider in the long term that schools be run by Town Councils? Get the community involved in the running of schools. Many countries have done this. I know some Members are laughing. They think it is an idea that is not worthwhile. But if independent schools can work, why cannot schools be run by the community? In many countries, the community is involved in education. Some of the best schools are run by the community. The Minister may want to consider this in the long term process. If he is not prepared to do that, is he prepared to allow the administration of the school to be passed to the community? I leave it to him. The choice is his.

The third point which I would like to raise is this. Would the Government give encouragement to private schools so that we could become a hub for education not only at the tertiary level but even at the secondary level? We can become a hub for education in this part of the world.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock (Ayer Rajah): Sir, I understand the reasons behind the setting up of SAP schools, and I support it. Having said that, I am also concerned about the SAP school students having little opportunity of interaction with students from the other races, ie, the Malays and the Indians. It is a concern of our minority races as well as it is a well known fact that a sizable number of able Chinese students attend such schools and some are going to be leaders of this country. That is why as far back as 1990, the former Member of Parliament, Mr Chandra Das, brought this issue to the House. I also remember in 1995, the Nominated Member of Parliament, Kanwaljit Soin, also brought up this matter in this House. Both expressed the worry that there is little mixing of SAP school students with others. On both occasions, I offered a way out of this concern by calling for the twinning of a SAP school with a national-type school. Obviously, no one paid attention to my call. Or Mr Shanmugam would not have to come to this House again and bring up the same matter. Let me quote what I said in 1990, nine years ago:

"The twinning of schools would allow the schools involved to develop programmes in the non-academic areas. For a start, like games, having a common rugby team with players from both schools, common football team, netball team, and also common cadet or scout groups. If such programmes work out well, then other areas, including sharing academic teaching methods, could be explored. These schools should be sited preferably close to each other."

Mr Shanmugam gave a profound and thought-provoking discourse on the concerns of the minority. He goes beyond just the SAP schools. He questioned the very fundamentals upon which this society was built, ie, multi-racialism. Amongst many other topics, he expressed similar fears that SAP school students may not be able to empathise with other races. I quote him:

`Whatever we say, I think it undeniable that their empathy, their understanding of the minority communities would be less than that of their predecessors who grew up in schools with members of the other races.'

In fact, on that very day, there was a call by the Association of Muslim Professionals to study SAP schools' policies on racial bonds. This morning, NMP Zulkifli also expressed similar fears.

The Deputy Prime Minister gave what I thought was a frank and honest response. To me, it was a good response. I am sure Mr Shanmugam understands but I am not so sure that his ground does. People want assurances, not by words, but by deeds in such situations. Therefore, we must translate our intentions into really working models at the ground level. I believe this can be done. The reason why my original idea of twinning was not taken up seriously was probably due to a lack of awareness of the serious misgivings amongst the minority races. However, having listened to the Deputy Prime Minister's suggestion of the cluster school concept, I am inclined to go along with it. But the cluster school concept must be clearly defined. And it must expand its administrative role to include activities of the kind I suggested in my twin school concept. DPM suggested that the SAP schools should be part of the cluster of schools so that the students from the SAP schools will have greater opportunities to interact with non-SAP schools within that cluster. I like that idea. It should be explored further. But it must be properly structured with an appraisal system and an appraisal team monitoring it, and with good publicity given. This way, I hope our minority races will feel more comfortable about our SAP schools. 2.30 pm

Sir, we can never totally address this problem because of the way that SAP schools were set up. But we can try to minimise the minorities' concerns with the cluster school concept. However, it is not just at our SAP school level that we want to see better interaction. There is more to this. While it is the moral duty of the majority race in a multi-racial society to look after the interest of the minority races, our minorities must also make special effort to come and participate in the many activities organised by the CCs and Residents' Committees at the community level. I lament the current low rate of participation. Great effort by every race should be made to make our multi-racial society work.

I hope the Minister would take what I suggest seriously.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: (In Mandarin): Sir, having heard Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Mr Rai on their opinions on the SAP schools, I feel that their worry is unnecessary. They feel that the SAP schools have deprived the Chinese students of the opportunity to mix with students from the other ethnic groups.

In my view, interaction can take place in other forms, and not just be confined to the schools. Interaction among students from the various races could be achieved through their neighbourhood activities or in their places of work. We have to look at the matter from a more comprehensive point of view.

If we do not have SAP schools in Singapore, then can we make sure that in every school in Singapore, there will be a fixed ratio of students from the various ethnic groups? I think it is not possible to achieve that, unless we can do like what the HDB is doing, ie, to have this quota on the various races in every block of flats, and have a similar quota in our schools. For example, we must have a certain number of Malay students or Indian students in each school. Is it necessary? There may not be enough Indian or Malay students from certain neighbourhoods to fill the quotas.

Sir, the system of streaming has been implemented in Singapore for many years. Although the Ministry of Education can present data to prove that streaming has helped to reduce the number of drop-outs among our students and they also emphasise that students from the various streams are given equal treatment, we should nevertheless conduct a study on whether the streaming system is beneficial or detrimental to the development of our human resources, which is very limited in Singapore, and also whether every student can bring into full play his potential after 10 years of basic education. I suggest that the Ministry of Education consider abolishing streaming in our primary schools and based on the school examination results and the wishes of the parents, to decide who are suitable to take Higher Chinese after Primary Four.

As for streaming in secondary schools, I feel that the Ministry of Education should review the Normal Stream course in our secondary schools. Under the present examination system, Normal Stream students will have to first of all pass the N' level examination before they are allowed to take the O' level examination. I feel that this is an unnecessary obstacle to them. Since they are promoted to Secondary Five, they can take the O' level examinations, but then the four years of secondary education is not much of a help in taking the O' level examinations, because there is a large gap between the O' level and the N' level education. So these students actually have great difficulty adapting. It would be difficult for them to take the `O' level examinations.

I think the Ministry of Education could consider abolishing the N' level examinations and let all the N' stream students take five years of secondary education and then take the O' level examinations, irrespective of how they fare in the O' level examinations. I hope that, after 10 years of education in school, they can at least learn some basic ability of comprehension and acquire some skills in meeting some of the challenges facing them with our move towards a knowledge-based economy.

The Chairman: Mr Peh Chin Hua is not here. Mr Sinnakaruppan.

Mr R. Sinnakaruppan (Kreta Ayer-Tanglin): Sir, the Education Ministry unveiled a very impressive Information Technology master plan for our schools some two years ago. I would like to congratulate the Ministry for its bold vision to adapt our schools, our principals and our teachers to prepare our children to face the rapidly changing world of IT.

Sir, I would like to find out from the Minister what progress has been made with respect to this overall master plan to-date, and whether the Minister is satisfied with the pace so far.

The Ministry has also stated that it plans to equip the schools with a student-computer ratio of 2:1 by the year 2002. Sir, I would like to know what ratio has been achieved to-date and whether we are targeted to meet this target by the year 2002. In this regard, I would also like to find out the Ministry's approach in the implementation of IT in our schools. While it is important and necessary for the Ministry to determine how many computers each school gets and the various hardware that is necessary to make it Internet-ready, it is important that the schools are given sufficient flexibility and a free hand to implement various IT programmes within the school given the hardware. It is not appropriate for the Ministry to determine exactly what the schools should do in IT, because IT is an area that requires a lot of creativity.

From the feedback that I have received from some principals and teachers, they feel that the process of IT implementation in schools has somewhat been very bureaucratic and that some of their enthusiasm has been stifled because of this approach to the implementation of IT in schools. I hope that the Minister can look into this.

Secondly, I would like to know whether all our teachers in the schools have been trained in the pedagogical aspects of using IT in the classroom, and whether the older teachers, especially those in their 50s, are able to cope with such IT training. Also, after receiving training, are there sufficient computers in the schools, particularly in the staff rooms, for the teachers to continuously hands-on with computers either in preparation for their classes or just to keep them updated on the developments on IT? I would like to know how many computers are allocated to staff rooms, whether there is a particular teacher-computer ratio as we have for the student-computer ratio.

Thirdly, I would like to ask whether the Ministry has introduced computer-based home or project assignments in schools. I hear from some parents that this has been done, and that some of these parents, especially parents who do not have computers at home, are fairly concerned that their children would lose out to those who come from homes equipped with computers and therefore they feel that their children will be affected by such assessment as they count towards the end of the year examinations. So I would like to know whether this is being done and, also, whether in the medium term, the Ministry plans to level this playing field whereby they will assist students coming from lower income families with some sort of financial schemes to also purchase computers, so that all children will have access to computers. So I would like to know whether the Ministry has any plans to introduce any finance scheme to enable this.

Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng (Cheng San): Sir, information technology appears to be the buzzword now. The Ministry of Education has taken great effort to promote IT in schools. I support and believe that the Ministry is moving in the right direction. The Ministry has also invested significantly in the provision of IT infrastructure in the schools and has also sent teachers for training in IT courses. On the surface, the IT plan appears to be flawless, but, in reality, we have to ask ourselves whether there are weaknesses in our attempt to promote IT in schools.

I believe that the key to success is to develop an IT culture in the schools and also to have IT-trained teachers who are able to nurture our students. Nowadays, it is not surprising that even primary school students have to do presentations, and many of these presentations require the use of information technology, including the knowledge of computer software. It appears to be the in-thing that the teachers will not just ask the school children to do their projects but also to present their projects in perhaps PowerPoint, MS Office software, or some other software. This puts tremendous pressure on our school children. If the school children who have parents who are familiar and conversant with the Internet and computer software, the parents may teach them the use of these softwares for their presentation. This, of course, will be ideal.

However, we have to ask ourselves: how many of our school children have parents who use the computers and are conversant with computer software? If these children do not have computers or do not present their projects in the proposed software format, they will feel very, very stressed and will be under tremendous pressure, because many of these projects do count towards their final assessment of the year.

I think we have to teach the students how to crawl before they can walk, and how to walk before they can run. As we expose our students to computers at a young age, there must be a systematic way to teach them. We must not stifle their enthusiasm or give them so much pressure that they want to stay away from computers. If the teachers expect the students to use a certain software for presentation, they must teach the students how to use it or even make sure that there is access to computers for the children to use it, especially since many parents are not familiar with the software.

However, teaching IT is not just the teaching of application of software or the use of Internet. I think another very important area in the teaching of IT is also the proper use of IT. Let me give you an example. A parent complained to me that he noticed that the grades of his daughter were dropping and getting worse. So the first thing he did was to remove the telephone. But that did not solve the problem because the daughter was still plugged on the line via the Internet and was spending several hours on the computer. So the next thing he did was to remove the computer and the grades got better. So my point is that, yes, we do want to encourage the use of IT and computers, but again if these tools are not used properly, they may not sometimes help our children but actually make them worse, because they use them for not very useful purposes.

I think it is likely that our younger teachers will probably be more familiar with computers. However, I believe that many of our older teachers do face difficulties and they find it very difficult to cope with the changes in IT and computer software. The Ministry must do more to help the teachers help the children. Therefore, I would like to urge the Minister to optimise the use of hardware available by ensuring that our teachers are confident, conversant and comfortable in the use of IT, and be in the position to lead our students into the IT era.

Mr Inderjit Singh (Ang Mo Kio): Sir, as we look ahead to achieve our vision of having a world class workforce in the 21st century, we have to start by addressing our education system because this is where attitudes, aptitudes and skills are developed that will last for a life time. If we do a good job in establishing the right fundamentals, we will be successful in achieving the goal of developing the knowledge workers of the future. The `Thinking School, Learning Nation' is therefore an appropriate programme if we are serious about achieving this goal.

I believe we need to make some structural changes to our education system if we are serious about moulding our children to be the knowledge workers of the future. Our current system creates some obstacles in promoting creativity, to encourage our children to do things differently, to experiment and to question conventional wisdom. Sir, these are the same qualities which will help us groom more technopreneurs and entrepreneurs in the future. 2.45 pm

I therefore feel that we need to make a number of changes. Firstly, the streaming of our children as early as in Primary Four and at the various levels after that, based on purely academic performance, recognises and rewards only one category of students, those who can score well in examinations.

While I agree with the original concept of streaming which allows students to develop at their own pace, however, I feel that we have not been successful in achieving the objective because I believe schools actually channel the best resources to the upper streams.

There is a stigma for our students who are streamed to the lower streams because of the way our system treats them. This includes the teachers, parents and their peers. I have spoken to a number of parents whose children are in the upper streams or in gifted programmes and these parents themselves fear that their children's attitude towards children of lower streams is unhealthy. I really fear that we are developing a class system by placing labels on our children starting at a very early age. I also recall a case of a child who was streamed to EM3. His parents came to see me during my meet-the-people session to help transfer their son to an EM2 stream. Right in front of their son, they told me that if their son remains in the EM3 stream, his life would be destroyed forever. I fear that such attitudes will create a serious self-esteem problem, a sense of hopelessness and of not willing to try again for such children.

I would like the Minister to consider the following:

(1) Can we modify our school system to use non-academic measures for streaming and for promotion? I suggest a large proportion of the decision criteria be based on project work and EQ measures.

(2) Even if we continue with the streaming system, can we ensure that all students mix well with each other to avoid the drawing of lines? I suggest that students from the various streams spend at least 30% to 40% of their school time in the same class. In this way, they can learn to appreciate each other's abilities and limitations and perhaps help the weaker students to do better because of a more conducive environment.

(3) Can we recognise and reward those who may not score well in examinations, but have the other abilities that I mentioned earlier in my speech? I would like to suggest that we introduce project work as a gradable subject where students can use their non-academic skills to do a few projects throughout the year. The grades obtained for such projects can then be used to measure the performance of the student. I believe this is practised in schools in the USA and Australia.

Sir, while I feel the society's attitude needs to change, our education system too needs to transform so that we do not penalise people who are not academically smart, but have other unique qualities.

Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung (Sembawang): Sir, there is no doubt that we are all in agreement as to the need for more project work, the need to raise creativity among our students and also to improve IT competence. My comments are in relation to what this means for our young children today.

I have three issues to raise. These are conditioned by an experience I had with my son who was, at that time, in school and given a project to do. It had to do with the history of the Second World War and he was trying to find out what were the causes of the Second World War. His idea of doing this project was very simple. He asked me how many databases I have, and I said there are Microsoft Encarta, Encyclopedia Britannica and another called Grolier Encyclopedia. All these are available in electronic form. He then put all of them in the computer, extracted the various parts, did a search for World War II, got all the articles out and he dutifully cut and pasted parts of it into a very nicely coloured paper which he then called his project.

Sir, I was forced to ask him, "Where is this creative element that you are supposed to have in doing a project of this sort?" He said it is creative `cut and paste'. He did not believe in putting the whole thing in and he had to select. So the second question I asked him was, "Do you know that there is a very fundamental value in research and, that is, you must never plagiarise?" He said that was a new word to him and what did that mean. The simple answer, of course, is that you can read as much as you want and you can use as many resources as you have. But part of the creative nature of study is to make sure that the materials you get from all these various databases, you can summarise, you can put it in your own words and you can give your own view. This is something which apparently is quite new to many of our students. They are very comfortable with using electronic databases by cutting and pasting from it, and they see no moral issue on that point.

Sir, my point is this. It is clearly laudable to have more project works, raise creativity and improve IT competence. But I think it is also necessary to ensure that our teachers are able to teach in a way that would inculcate good research practices, and we can never start too young as far as this is concerned, among our students. With the availablility of electronic databases, and so on, it is so easy to do research by doing a search as it were and that should not be the creative part, that should not be the end-all of creativity. So I believe that there is a lot to be done in terms of not just student training but also staff training to monitor our students and inculcate in them good research values. Also, in terms of project works, I think it requires a lot of staff supervision. Does that mean that all schools would have to increase their staff, not just to make them more IT competent but also to increase the number of staff that are available to supervise such work? Thirdly, project work takes time. How is that to be traded off against the traditional studies that they have to do at this time? And finally, a point that has to do with the new proposals about taking project work into account in admissions. The evaluation of project work is always an issue that has to be tackled. There are three problems here.

First, how do we ensure that the project work done is that of the students, especially we have huge schools and huge numbers to contend with? Secondly, how do we ensure a certain sense of commensurability among the scores between schools and classes in the nation? Unless and until we have solved these problems, it would be very good to take time and look at this issue, find how this can be solved before we implement any scheme whereby project work would be taken into account in admission to our higher tertiary institutions.

Mr Simon S C Tay (Nominated Member): Sir, let me declare my interest. I teach at the NUS and I am also a parent. The second factor, parenthood, clearly makes me an expert on education, like so many of us. And I am sure it is a factor that makes the work of the Ministry more interesting, not to say difficult, having so many "experts" to answer to.

But seriously, Sir, I move my cut on non-classroom and project learning in the context of concern to many parents. This arises because of two recent events. First, the tragic and accidental drowning of two students while on a school-organised outing to Pulau Ubin. Second, the injuries and indignation suffered by students at Jin Tai when a live re-creation of national education in history went awry. I do not wish to discuss the particulars of these cases. I am sure the Ministry and the school concerned will carry out a full investigation.

I wish instead to point to a more general concern. Both incidents are instances of non-classroom based learning, of new efforts to let our students learn beyond traditional reading and writing. Experience instead is the tool to educate these young minds. This, I believe, is a newer emphasis.

Given these recent and unfortunate incidents, there may be some, both in the public and in the schools themselves, who might question if these forms of non-classroom learning should continue. Are they worth the risk, some may ask? The safest and easiest answer will be to go back to the classroom, the books, reading and writing, and to stop these newer forms of non-classroom teaching.

But, Sir, I would urge the Ministry and the schools and parents not to take this option. Non-classroom learning has a continued place among the tools of the educator. A policy that turns away from the newer forms of learning would not be desirable to my mind. Yes, safeguards are necessary and risks should be minimised. But some risk is inevitable and indeed, I would argue, must therefore be acceptable. There is wisdom in the old saying, "Nothing ventured, nothing gained; no risk, no gain." I would therefore urge the Ministry to steer a consistent and continued path in this regard and continue with non-classroom learning, despite these incidents or other controversies that may arise in the future.

On project learning, I too welcome the move. More, I hope the Ministry will encourage such forms of learning to be done by teams of students and for areas that are beyond their curriculum. Sir, in the real world, we are constantly challenged in areas and subjects that we are not experts in or have not previously studied or prepared for. When we face these challenges, we are most often in teams in the workplace. In this way, project learning and teamwork would help prepare our students, our youths, for the real world that they will emerge into. It would encourage them to teach themselves both as individuals and within the team in areas that are relevant but that cannot be covered in a limited syllabus.

One example of such an area for team and project learning is about the region and the countries around us. Sir, while we have a National Education, I think that regional education is also a worthwhile arena for our students to learn. This crisis has taught us how interconnected we are as economies and indeed societies. This lesson needs to be learnt, not just by the Government or adults in our society, but also by our youths and students. There is a power in first-hand knowledge that might be gained from students' visits, non-classroom learning and their own research and exchanges with our neighbouring countries. Regional education may not be another subject in our syllabus. But it can be a suitable subject for non-classroom and project learning.

The Chairman: Order. I propose to take the break now.

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.20 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 2.59 pm until 3.20 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.20 pm

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head L (cont.) -

Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh: Sir, I would like to speak on a lighter subject about mandating life skill programmes in all upper primary and secondary schools, including junior colleges. I would like to say this, however, as one of the desired outcomes of education. I observe that some schools offer a limited curriculum on home economics. Most of our girls' schools conduct home economics classes whereas the top boys' schools like Chinese High and Raffles Institution do not in the entire secondary years. ACS and Catholic High School, for example, on the other hand, have home economics at secondary one and two levels. The girls' schools, on the other hand, do not teach them how to change light bulbs, use an electric saw, a screwdriver or other simple technical skills. Some neigbourhood schools have such classes; others do not.

I am speaking in my interest as a parent. Evidently, the tasks of teaching our children to cook, sew, change light bulbs, fix and repair household problems can be taught at home. But this can be more effectively achieved if these skills could be woven into the school curriculum to make their activities seem less of a chore and more of a fun moment to break the monotony of studying in school. This emphasis will be welcome to all working parents who can be assured that as a result of school training, their teenagers could cook themselves a decent meal and attend to house-care needs when they are not around.

I would also propose that some hours be devoted to teaching students social etiquette, personal grooming and presentation skills. I feel that they form part of the growing up repertoire of skills for the young which, if learnt, give them a greater sense of self-confidence in conducting themselves in public and making their ideas heard. Some top schools have these classes; others do not. A cluster of top boys and girls learn these through debate sessions. The success is not broad based enough.

Could I propose that the Ministry revisit this issue of teaching our youth how to acquire life skills with respect to home economics, home maintenance as well as presentation skills? I hope a higher degree of standardisation could be encouraged at all secondary school levels for girls and boys to learn all these skills.

Mr Sinnakaruppan: Sir, I strongly believe that homework is an integral part of our school curriculum and that homework helps in reinforcing the people's understanding of concepts taught in the classroom. I have two points to raise regarding homework.

First, the amount of homework. The amount of homework given to our pupils varies from teacher to teacher and class to class, and there is apparently no coordination as to how much is given on a daily basis to a particular class of pupils. This results in a very unbalanced homework load and the pupil has to spend far too much time doing homework for a particular subject, and as a result, does not have sufficient time to concentrate on other subjects which may be just as important.

I would like to ask whether there is any Ministry guidelines as to how much homework is assigned to pupils and whether it is possible for principals and the head of departments and form teachers to coordinate with the subject teachers the amount of homework that is given on a daily basis so that the homework load can be balanced throughout the week.

The second point that I would like to make is that because of the heavy homework load and the high level of difficulties of some of this homework given, many parents actually end up doing the homework for their children. Indeed, this is very prevalent, and I heard many feedback on this. I would like to relate just one anecdote in this regard. A friend told me recently that his son, who is studying in Primary 5, came back from school one day, feeling very dejected. My friend asked his son what was the problem and his son told him that his teacher was not impressed at all with the homework that he had submitted and the teacher actually praised the boy who was sitting next to him for the excellent submission. My friend's son asked the boy sitting next to him how did he do so well. The boy said, "That's easy. I just ask my father to do it all for me. Sometimes when he is busy, I would ask my tuition teacher to do it for me." That was the response. My friend's son came back home and asked his father, "How come you did not do the homework for me? Next time I want you to do the homework for me so that I can do well." The point in this anecdote is that the children are forming wrong values and the original intention of having homework is lost and because of the difficulty, as what Dr Michael Lim had earlier pointed out, children are being asked to do even computer assignments at home, they find that they are unable to cope and as a result, more and more parents have to actually get involved.

The point here is that all these defeat the very objectives of the homework assignments. While on the one hand, obviously there is a need for the Ministry to educate the parents on their role in helping children with their homework, more importantly, the Ministry must take a holistic view to review the various issues relating to homework. I hope the Minister would look into this.

Dr Lily Neo: Sir, with the rapid rate of change, Singapore has become a nation of superlatives in many areas. The aspirations and expectations of Singaporeans have also become different and in keeping with the changing times. Life here has certainly been good and we understand what "comfortable" means. In the light of this, schools in Singapore also need changes to meet the new trends and to provide enhanced and conducive environment for our students.

I would like to beseech the Ministry of Education to provide air-conditioning in all our schools. We now consider air-conditioning a necessity, not a luxury, in this tropical climate. Both students, as well as the teachers, can concentrate better and perform better in cool classrooms. In time, more students will spend longer hours in the school. Air-conditioning will certainly help the students get through the hottest part of each day.

Cost will always be of primary concern. However, if it is value-added and allows for better performance in our young, air-conditioning school classrooms would have been worthwhile. It would have been a good investment indeed. Someone has even calculated that it would cost just about one dollar per month per child in order to have air-conditioned classrooms. This is not much and some schools have already started air-conditioning classrooms for privileged groups of students. This causes envy and jealousy in those deprived groups. This is not ideal as uniformity and fairness to all should be our policy. Many schools have air-conditioned computer rooms and libraries. The reasons given for air conditioning them would apply to the classrooms equally well.

Sir, as we strive for excellence in our education system, let us not forget that investing in basics and down-to-earth items, besides information technology may also help us attain our goal. I would urge the Ministry of Education to look into this. 3.30 pm

Mr Lim Swee Say: (In Mandarin): Sir, the sea of learning is boundless. But the ultimate objective of learning is to be able to cross the sea to get to the opposite bank. The question is: what is the purpose of getting to the other side or the opposite bank? Are you learning just because you want to make good money or to absorb more knowledge to enrich yourself? If the students' objective is just for personal benefit, it is a self-centred mentality. As a matter of fact, hidden at the opposite bank are the precious traditional values. If our students can be bothered to go and dig out this treasure, it will benefit them for life. It is a well that never runs dry. The question is: how do we help our younger generation comprehend this?

In the classic book of Great Learning, there is a great enlightenment to us. It says, "First, cultivate the persons; next, regulate the families; then rule the state. There will be peace and harmony for the whole world." I am sure we are very familiar with this passage and I shall not elaborate on it.

However, I wish to discuss with you another passage from this book. It says "Wishing to cultivate the person, first, rectify the heart. Wishing to rectify the heart, first, be sincere in the thought. Wishing to be sincere in the thought, first, extend knowledge to the utmost." This passage has inspired me to realise that if a person's heart is not rectified and does not treat others with sincerity, then no matter how profound his knowledge may be, no matter how high his academic achievements may be, he will not necessarily be a blessing to society, to the nation and to mankind.

Therefore, when we teach our students, it is not just the passing down of knowledge to enrich the mind. More importantly, we should inculcate in them the correct values, to bring out their civic-mindedness, to strengthen their moral perception so that they may extend their knowledge to the utmost and seek to be sincere in their thoughts, rectify their hearts and cultivate their person.

Sir, I support the new policy on Chinese language announced recently by the Ministry of Education. However, in implementing this new policy, the Ministry of Education and all the teachers of the Chinese language need to be aware that there is a difference between the students learning the Chinese language and their absorption of good traditional culture.

Language is a bridge. It is the medium through which we absorb good traditions. In other words, learning the language to be proficient in Chinese is not the ultimate objective of our learning the language. For students taking Higher Chinese, the language bridge is broader. For those who do ordinary Chinese, the bridge may be narrower. As for those who are taking CL'B' in the future, they are actually walking on a single-plank bridge. However, they all head for the same destination. I hope that when the Ministry of Education implements the mother tongue policy, the inculcation of traditional values should not be diluted. Students from the various courses must be allowed to go deep into the connotations and quintessence of their traditional cultures, and to live through life with the spirit of selflessness, irrespective of the languages and the races.

The Minister for Education (RAdm Teo Chee Hean): Sir, thank you for allowing me to respond at this point in time. Members have raised quite a number of different issues. Allow me to deal with some of them before we proceed any further.

How do we draw all these different strands together? Last year, if Members will recall, the Ministry of Education published this document called The Desired Outcomes of Education. Some Members, last year, had seen it for the first time. So I will request the Clerk to distribute this document once again so that Members can see it again and be reminded of it. [Copies of document distributed to hon. Members.] This document spells out the end-objectives of formal education as well as the intermediate objectives of primary, secondary and JC education. There was widespread support for the Desired Outcomes of Education from Members of this House, the public, parents, principals, teachers and students. The concern then, as it is now, was on how we are going to achieve these outcomes.

In the last two years, the Ministry of Education has initiated several programmes that will bring us closer to achieving these Desired Outcomes - the IT Masterplan, National Education, the Community Involvement Programme, COMPASS and the reduction in curriculum content by up to 30% that was announced last year which will help us shift the focus of our education system from merely acquiring ever more content knowledge to creativity and thinking skills.

These programmes are all desirable in themselves but, more importantly, they all form part of a whole. The end objective is re-aligning our education system more closely to achieving the Desired Outcomes.

Today, I would like to draw Members' attention to another aspect of the changes that we are making to the education system - the re-alignment of the way we assess students and appraise schools. We can introduce new programmes. We have heard many exhortations today for teachers and students to work towards achieving the Desired Outcomes. But unless we change what counts, it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to change the orientation and the focus of our education system. Our assessment systems for schools and for students must be brought more closely into alignment with the Desired Outcomes of Education.

The way we assess students affects their motivations and what they and perhaps, more importantly, their parents will emphasise and devote their time and effort to. Similarly, schools have a tendency to focus their efforts primarily on what is being measured. The Ministry of Education has never assessed schools purely on the basis of their academic results in the national examinations, but there is overwhelming interest from schools themselves, parents, teachers, the press and the general public on the academic performance of schools and students, because, in their eyes, that is practically the only thing that counts.

To change behaviour, we have to change what counts - both for students, and for schools. Hence, over the last year, we have reviewed the university admission system, and we have also looked again at the way that we appraise our schools.

First, let me begin with the university admissions. We want our potential graduates not just to excel academically, but also to demonstrate character, creativity and commitment to the nation. It is both timely and necessary to move the university admission system away from a sole reliance on 'A' levels towards a more holistic evaluation of a person's potential to benefit from university education. This change is not merely about selecting students to go to the university. This change will send a clear signal throughout the whole education system - I dare say from kindergarten all the way through to 'O' levels and 'A' levels - regarding the qualities we desire in our students.

The Committee on University Admissions chaired by Prof Shih released its draft report in January this year. We will have an opportunity to debate the recommendations later on. I know some Members are still waiting to speak on it and we can discuss this later. But my point here is that the change in university admission system should not be seen in isolation. It should be seen in the context of realigning the whole education system to achieving the Desired Outcomes.

In parallel, we are broadening the scope of the way schools are appraised. We will move beyond academic grades to school achievements in other areas that contribute to the Desired Outcomes. When the Desired Outcomes were published, many wondered how we were going to achieve the outcomes, how we are going to measure them, since many of them are intangible and unquantifiable. How can schools ascertain if they have achieved the Desired Outcomes? How would schools know what they are capable of, and whether they have done their best? Without a system of measurement, principals and teachers will be left wondering just how much they have achieved, and will have no means of deciding how far they have to go, what are their weaknesses, and where they have to improve. May I request the Clerk to distribute the other two pieces of paper that I have with me. [Copies of paper distributed to hon. Members.]

The Ministry of Education and the educational professionals have been thinking this issue through in the past year. After several rounds of discussions and consultations together with principals and other professionals, we have decided to adopt a quality assurance approach to school appraisal based on self appraisal. The new approach looks at both results and processes. The ultimate goal is not merely good results, but sustainability of good results. Sound processes are what will assure sustainability of results. And the notion of results themselves has also been broadened to include not just academic results, but results in other activities that contribute to the Desired Outcomes.

Self-appraisal is itself a powerful process that will drive improvement in our schools. Self-appraisal emphasises self-evaluation and self-knowledge. When using this model, the principal and his staff will ask themselves some fundamental questions about what is going on in the school and what the outcomes are. This self questioning will prompt them to reflect on the schools' efforts in addressing their concerns and work towards improvement. The appraisal process will require schools to continually question current practices and move them to be the best they can be.

This framework of self-assessment is known as the School Excellence Model. In the diagram that Members have in front of them, there are nine criteria there in the model, and they fall broadly into two categories: Enablers and Results, each with a weightage of 50%. We can adjust this later on with experience. Enablers are concerned with processes - how the school is led and managed, how resources are deployed; while Results look at outcomes - key performance results, staff competence and morale, impact of programmes on students and on others.

It is worthwhile to note that under key performance results, we are still looking for academic achievement, ECA achievement as well and physical fitness levels. But academic achievement is only one of the many criteria in the appraisal model, just as cognitive outcomes are only one aspect of the holistic outcomes desired of education. In fact, most of the Desired Outcomes will have to be achieved through non-academic school programmes, and this is reflected in the appraisal model.

Linked to the School Excellence Model is an award system for schools. There are three levels in this pyramid system of awards. The base of the awards is a broad one, and comprises different Achievement Awards given to schools for achievements in various fields in the current year. The next higher level consists of the Sustained Achievement Awards and Best Practices Awards which reflect the school's ability to sustain good processes and outcomes over a number of years. At the apex will be the School Excellence Award, which recognises schools for overall excellence in education processes and outcomes, sustained over many years. 3.45 pm

There is no limit to the number of schools that can qualify for these awards. This would give the schools, the students and the parents an indication of where they stand and how they can improve.

The Value-Added Awards that are presently given to schools, a point raised by Mr Hawazi, have been most effective in achieving improvement in the performance of students and this will continue. It will be one of the Achievement Awards and Sustained Achievement Awards. School ranking, as it is done now, will also remain, as it is a useful indicator for schools. However, ranking by academic results will henceforth have to be seen in the context of a number of other indicators, and not as the be-all and end-all. This is certainly the way that the Ministry of Education will look at it, and we hope that the public and parents will also look at it that way.

The School Excellence Model will be field tested in mid 1999. All schools will be using the model for self-appraisal in the year 2000. The Ministry of Education will conduct external appraisal of schools based on this approach from 2001. Schools will, on average, be validated once every five years or so, but they can ask to be validated more often than this if they feel they are ready to progress on to the next level of the pyramid.

The Desired Outcomes define our goals in education. We aim to achieve these outcomes through various initiatives. I have listed them before - IT Masterplan, National Education, the Curriculum Review, a review of the university admission system and a quality assurance approach to school appraisal. That is what we do and how we measure it. All these aim to develop our young for life, not just for their schooling days; and to develop their potential to the full, not just in academic areas.

This requires our education system to shift from an efficiency-driven to an ability-driven paradigm. Ability-driven education has two thrusts - maximal development of the talents and abilities of our young, and maximal harnessing of the talents and abilities of all Singaporeans for the good of the nation and the community.

In our present system, education is driven by the needs of the economy. We project manpower demands in various sectors of the economy and train people to fit into jobs in those sectors. Our economic agencies attract the investments that create jobs; our educational institutions train Singaporeans to fill these jobs.

However, the paradigm for a knowledge economy will be different. There are no pre-determined sets of jobs, waiting, like holes to be filled by students coming out of our education system. Instead, it is the collective talents and abilities of all Singaporeans that will define the economy and what jobs and opportunities are available. Students leaving our school system will increasingly have to create their own opportunities. Life-long learning becomes a necessary part of opening up opportunities for the future. We are working hand-in-hand with the Ministry of Manpower in this sector. Hence education itself becomes a competitive advantage in the economy. And to maximise that advantage we must consciously draw out individual talents and develop them to the full.

To achieve this, the Ministry of Education will be shifting towards an approach of mass customisation. I know this sounds like a contradiction, but let me bring you an example from the car industry, although cars and people are not comparable. Nowadays, when you buy a car, you choose the brand and the model. You can further decide the colour of the exterior, the veneer of the interior, whether you want power windows, air-conditioning, what kinds of seats and so on, and all within that same model. The car is still mass produced because that is an efficient way of doing it, but it is customised to what can best match the buyer's needs.

In Education, the mass provision of educational resources and opportunities should not stop us from looking at the possibility of customising to individual student's aptitudes and abilities wherever possible. I am not here proposing that we give each child individual attention by providing him dedicated tutors for each subject who will coach him alone, designing syllabuses just for him and so on. This is clearly not practical. This is individualised customisation, not mass customisation.

But within the limits of mass production of education services, we should move some way towards meeting individual needs. If I may be allowed to use another analogy, it is like a set-lunch menu. We used to have only one set-lunch menu which every one, regardless of his appetite or taste, was obliged to eat. Understandably, some found the food unappetising and unpalatable and decided to leave the restaurant. With streaming, which is also a rudimentary form of mass customisation, we have a number of set menus to cater to different needs. Streaming has been very successful in increasing the proportion of our students who move on to higher levels of education. That enables us to meet the needs of different groups of students better, and that is where we are today. The next challenge for the Ministry is to allow some variations in the courses in the set menus, and to gradually expand the variations allowed within the resources that we have available. The Chinese Language Review is a case in point. It is a recognition that students are different and have different linguistic abilities and strengths in different areas, and the system should try to cater to them.

We are now studying how we can adapt the system to meet the needs of students better, at a systems level, at the school level, and even in the classroom. We will move in that direction over the coming year. As with everything else in education, it will take some years and many steps to get there.

But an ability-driven system is also about maximal harnessing of the talents and abilities of our young. If we were to focus solely on developing our young without grounding moral and social values nor sinking their cultural roots, we will be producing a generation of Singaporeans with no obligation or commitment to serve the community, no concept of social identity and no sense of belonging to the nation. We must inculcate in our young a strong social conscience and a mindset that sees Singapore as a home to live in, to strive to improve, and to defend if necessary.

Sir, I agree with Members who have expressed the view that no child should be seen as a failure, and every child should be seen as a success. But each child's success can be in different areas. Everyone has his strengths; and talents and abilities in different areas can be pooled together for the overall success of the nation. We in the Ministry will continue to apply our minds to see how we can maximally develop and harness the talents and abilities of our students. The Ministry will do its best with the resources allocated to us. We will maximise education outcomes given our resources.

Sir, I appreciate the many suggestions and comments from Members. Bringing about change in the education system is the work of many years. We will not see the fruits of our labour for another five, perhaps ten years. It requires a clear idea of where we are going, and this is encapsulated in the Desired Outcomes of Education. And it requires purposeful change to align our programmes, processes, and assessment systems with the Desired Outcomes, so that what we do in education and in the education system is focused on achieving these goals. I continue to look forward to support from Members of this House, parents and the public as we strive to do our best for our young.

Sir, allow me to address some of the specific points that have been raised by Members. Mr Loh brought our attention to the cost of educating an individual student. If Mr Loh were to look at page 218 of the Budget book, he will see that the latest numbers are there. The earlier set of figures that he quoted was from the FY98 Budget book which has since been revised. The main reason for the lower cost per student is the 10% cut in the Government's share of CPF and the further salary cut. 86% of the schools' budget comprises manpower cost and that is why the cost has come down. For secondary schools, the cost has gone up, however, because the number of secondary school students has come down. It is the Tiger Year effect for the secondary one students this year. But this lower spending in the operations budget has been more than offset by the increase in the spending in the development budget, which will also go towards the students. For example, all the spending on the IT Masterplan is now counted out of the development budget. That is a very large number. I think it is about $150 million. This year we have some 39 schools under construction compared to 19 last year and 11 the year before. All these will eventually have a direct benefit to the students.

If I may move on, Sir, to what time school should start. Frankly, Sir, if the schools are operating single session as the secondary schools will be from next year onwards, it is up to the schools to decide what time they want to start. But from a practical point of view, I think that most schools will still want to start relatively early in the day for transport and other reasons. But it is a matter which the schools can decide for themselves.

If I may move on to some specific issues on the IT Masterplan. We are now into our third year of implementation and student access to computers, levelling the playing field is really the main motivation why we have undertaken this IT Masterplan. Because if we did not do this, then only students, children who come from better off homes will have computers at home, and they would have no access to computers at home and if the schools do not provide them access to computers, they would have no access to computers. One of the main motivations for going into the IT Masterplan in a major way is to provide a level playing field and access to all students. More than 130 schools have come under the Masterplan so far, Phases 1 and 2, and we are now onto Phase 3 where the remaining 230 schools will be coming on in the next two years. Phase 1 and Phase 2 schools are now electronically networked school wide. There are still some lumps, as to be expected, but we are working this through. The ratio of computers to students is now about 1:5 in the schools that have completed the Masterplan. We have enough resources to move to 1:2. But we want to do so only when the schools are ready. I am confident that the schools know what to do with the computers at the ratio of 1:5 but I am not so confident that they are ready to deal with computers at the ratio of 1:2. When schools are ready, we will move ahead with them and will have some flexibility as to what to do with the resources that are available. 4.00 pm

For teachers, we are providing the schools with a ratio of one computer to every two teachers, ie, notebooks. And we also have a very generous computer loan scheme for teachers so that we expect that all our teachers should be very well equipped with computers.

As for training of teachers, 9,500 teachers have already been trained under the IT Masterplan, each receiving something like 30 to 50 hours of workshop training. In the next phase, some 13,500 teachers will be trained over the next two years. We have about 60 senior IT instructors in the Educational Technology Division doing this training school by school. A common misunderstanding is that these teachers have been trained merely to use technology, word processing, or PowerPoint, connecting wires, and so on. In fact, the IT Masterplan's main focus in training of teachers is to train them to use IT as a tool to empower sound pedagogy, and time-honoured principles of teaching children to think, conceptualise and so on, are emphasised, and re-emphasised, during these IT training programmes. Apart from that, all schools also now have broadband access to Singapore One. There are probably one or two Singapore One access points.

I would like to move on now to home economics. Home economics incidentally is a compulsory subject for both boys and girls at the lower secondary level. Independent schools are independent, and I leave it to them to decide whether they want to do so or not.

I would now like to address a point raised by Mr Loh Meng See and Mr Simon Tay with regard to non-classroom activities. Sir, I view what has happened, the unfortunate event at Pulau Ubin, with concern. And we deeply regret that this unfortunate incident occurred. The Ministry is now looking into what actually happened and we will learn the lessons and take appropriate measures to prevent such incidents from recurring. We have also looked into the recent episode at Jin Tai Secondary School. I think clearly there should have been better planning and closer supervision.

The Ministry will take stock of the lessons learned, share these lessons with the schools and advise them accordingly. And we will continue to remind them of the importance of exercising appropriate precautions when planning and conducting such activities. But I completely share Mr Simon Tay's viewpoint that to over-regulate the activities that schools can organise would stifle initiative and diminish significantly the learning value of these activities.

So, Sir, the approach that the Ministry will take is to continue to encourage schools to be innovative and to plan activities that are meaningful and relevant, enriching and challenging. However, safety is a primary concern and must be a key principle in the conduct of such activities.

May I move on now to the subject of SAP schools which several Members have spoken quite strongly about. Sir, it is not surprising that in a multi-racial and multi-lingual society like Singapore, with the kind of colonial history that we have, there is such a wide range of views expressed in this House and by members of the public with regard to the issues of language, SAP schools, and so on. But we must understand, as Deputy Prime Minister Lee explained the other day, where our start point was. Our start point was a very diverse education system in which there were very small numbers of very elite English language stream schools. But most of the population were educated apart from each other, separately, different languages, different syllabi, different curriculum, their own activities, different languages. The question which we have to ask ourselves is, compared to that time, are we closer as a society? Is our education system bringing the people closer together than what was before? And I think the answer has to be a resounding yes. When we were faced with an education system which was as diverse as it was, there were several ways in which the Government could have proceeded in those days. We could have continued with the education system in all its diversity - Chinese schools, Malay schools, Tamil schools, and so on. We could have had a bilingual education system, which was a different one, in which each person learns his own mother tongue at first language, and English as a second language, or perhaps Malay as a second language, and hope to bind the society that way. Some countries have decided to go that way in the design of their education system and the selection of their language policy. For us, we could have done that. But I think we would be a different kind of society, a society which has got much deeper separations and cleavages than we have today.

What we have decided to do is to unify our education system, to have one common system standard, and standard curriculum, for all the schools. And we decided on a common language. And, again, deciding on a common language is not a simple matter. Different countries have decided in different ways. We settled on English for a number of practical reasons and, again, because we are a multi-racial and multi-lingual society. What other language could we have settled on which would not have raised even more serious concerns among the different communities that we have in Singapore? Other countries have decided in different ways. Malaysia, for example, has decided on Malay as national language, and they have unified their education system around that. But even then there are outliers such as the independent Chinese schools in Malaysia which teach in a different language and quite a different curriculum. Other countries have decided in different ways. Hong Kong, for example, as a territory, as a SAR, has decided to go with Cantonese as a common language in their schools, with a small number of schools allowed to continue to teach in English. We have decided on our way. And I think for us, this is a pragmatic and a better way of proceeding with our education system, and we unify different languages and races in Singapore.

I wish to reaffirm that our policy objective in the teaching of the mother tongue languages is to have every Singaporean study his mother tongue for as long as possible and to as high a level as possible. This fundamental bilingual policy in our education system, which has served us well, which has enabled us to unify the country, while at the same time allowing each community to feel that it has the room and the space to develop itself and to retain its own unique identity and characteristics, will remain.

Mr Loh Meng See: Sir, I would like to speak on the topic of University Admissions.

Sir, the Committee on University Admission System has recommended changes to the admission criteria into our local universities. It has recommended that instead of using the sole requirement of the GCE `A' Level Examinations, the new requirements of SAT1 (Scholastic Assessment Test 1), project work and extra-curricular activities be included. The Committee has proposed that the new SAT1 component be implemented in the year 2002.

I wish to suggest that we allow more time for the teachers and students to prepare and adjust to the new university admission criteria. By making the change in year 2002, it means that this year's GCE `O' level students are immediately affected. It is better to start with this year's Secondary Three students and thus deferring the change to year 2003. I hope the Minister would consider this point before deciding on the date of implementation of the revised university admission criteria.

In their study, the Committee did not allude to any inherent weaknesses and deficiencies of the current system of university admission. The public would be interested to know how the candidates would be affected with the changes introduced. With the additional requirements, would we be making it more difficult than before for our students to get into university?

The students are already occupied with a heavy workload. They do not have time for other pursuits. Will the adding of the new requirements be giving more stress to our students in the already highly competitive educational environment?

Singapore is well known for producing examination smart students. The students will take pains to prepare for SAT. Will the scores of SAT1 be any different from the GCE A' level examination results? How do we expect the students to be differentiated when comparing their GCE A' level results and the SAT1 scores? Even then, how can we be sure that the new system would do a better job of assessing the future performance of students?

The university is a place to enrich a student's educational experience. The exposure to university learning helps stimulate the intellectual faculty of students and in the training and discipline of their minds. It would appear that the university would benefit most in having the students cut out for them. Should the university not take steps in evolving the curricula content and teaching methodologies to bring the best in our students?

Certain courses require students to possess strong people and social skills. Should we include only students who possess such skills to those courses? Should we capture such requirements? Should students not be required to take the psychometric tests to determine their character, personality and interest before qualifying them for any particular course?

Is it not better to have a class made up of students of varied backgrounds, talents and capabilities than one with students of similar attributes and abilities? Would university life be more interesting and less boring? Sir, I really do not have the answers. Perhaps the Minister can shed light on them.

Mr Inderjit Singh: Sir, I am glad that the Government has taken the initiative to review the university admission criteria for our local universities so that we can keep up with the changing times.

I believe that the criteria used for university admissions greatly affect the whole education system starting from Primary One, and this education then drives the attitudes of our people. If the system is based on academic results alone, as it is presently, then we will have an examination-orientated approach in our schools. Our whole system of education and employment and of offering scholarships is based on an almost 100% academic measure of success and as a result, our practice of meritocracy is purely based on academic achievements. While examinations do offer a suitable benchmark to measure students' performances, I feel such a system is going to be less relevant in the future where being academically smart alone will not be sufficient to be successful in the market place of the 21st century. Our current system is unfair to students who have other abilities like creativity, innovation, leadership qualities and others that can be categorised as EQ measures. It is also unforgiving to people who may have had a transient problem resulting in them not scoring very well in an examination, while they could have done so should circumstances be better for them during the examination. 4.15 pm

One of the key recommendations of the Committee on university admission is to reduce the heavy dependence on academic measures and to include EQ type measures. While I support the reduction of academic measures to 65% of the total score in determining admission to the university, I feel that replacing the remainder with 25% of a reasoning test like the SAT examination has merely resulted in shifting of an academic or examination measure from landmark examination to a new type of examination. Sir, what is going to happen is that students will now spend a lot of time and money preparing for SAT examination and the net effect may be negative, especially since many will try to do the rote learning approach as they do for current examinations. In fact this is already happening now, if you look at the Straits Times report in today's papers. The Secondary Four students are rushing to purchase SAT assessment books and enrolling themselves in classes to prepare for SAT. So we have just shifted the problem from one type of examination to another.

While I can agree to a reasoning type of examination, I feel that the overall contribution to the admission criteria should be much smaller than the 25% suggested. I would like to suggest the following:

(1) Reduce the reasoning test contribution to a maximum of 10% of the total score. In this way, the students will not spend too much time preparing for any one of these examinations.

(2) Add a new criterion based on continuous assessments on EQ factors like leadership, creativity, teamwork and others, and allow these to contribute to about 15% of the total admission criteria.

(3) Allow ECA to contribute directly to the admission criteria rather than using it just as a bonus criterion as was proposed by the Committee. Project work and ECA could together contribute an additional 10% to the total score.

I urge the Minister to consider this modification to what the Committee has proposed because I feel that we will better achieve the objectives established by the committee. If it goes by what they have proposed now, I do not think they will achieve their desired objectives.

The Chairman: Mr Chew Heng Ching is not speaking. Dr Teo Ho Pin.

Dr Teo Ho Pin (Sembawang): Sir, in order to make sure that our universities admit more all rounded students, we must adopt a fair and equitable university admission system. We need to train quality graduates who will provide the competitive edge for our economy, and the "glue" to nation building.

The recommendations as put forward by the Committee on University Admission System have certain limitations as follows:

(1) For A' level students, the proposed admission requirements do not place much emphasis on key attributes such as leadership, creativity, perseverance, independence and resourcefulness qualities of students. The combined 90% weighting of GCE A' level and SAT requirements are essentially academic criteria, and thus will not make any marked difference to the present system.

Furthermore, the proposed 10% project work and 5% ECA bonus point will not provide adequate incentives for students to develop their other abilities. Sir, project work does not provide a good gauge of a student's ability and is difficult to obtain a fair assessment. Furthermore, it is difficult to determine whether the student does it or not. The use of project work will not provide a fair and uniform method of assessment for all students thus leading to unfair advantages. Thus, project work should not be introduced as part of the university admission system.

The allocation of a mere 5% bonus point for ECA will drastically retard all ECA activities in schools. In fact, ECA provides an excellent avenue to develop and assess the abilities of a student. Many ECA activities, especially uniformed groups, provide a structured and holistic approach in allowing students to acquire different types of skills, such as leadership, team work, perseverance, creative thinking, independence, moral, physical and other social skills.

Sir, let me cite the example of the National Police Cadet Corps (NPCC). Today, we have 19,500 cadets in over a hundred schools in Singapore. These cadets undergo a wide range of training ranging from drills, discipline, crime prevention, civil defence, water survival, to shooting and adventure camps. Cadets who achieve good conduct, strong commitment, consistently good performance, positive attitude towards learning and regular attendance are promoted to various ranks and given award commendations.

The participation of such ECA involves time and commitment. It shapes the character of individual. The achievements in ECA clearly reflect the true qualities of a student. Thus due recognition must be given when considering the admission criteria to universities. Therefore, I would propose that at least 25% of the university admission system should be allocated to ECA activities.

In my opinion, a fair and equitable university admission system would consist of 50% weighting on GCE `A' level examinations, 25% on SAT score and 25% on ECA. This will provide a balance between academic abilities, aptitude and other talents to be considered when admitting the students into our universities.

Mr Davinder Singh (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, the admission criteria in the universities are being reviewed in recognition of the fact that Singaporeans need to be creative and innovative if the country is to stay competitive. The Committee on University Admission hopes that the changes will transform the ethos and attitudes of the people towards education.

I do not for one moment question the Committee's honest belief in its goal. I also recognise the limited nature of the Committee's remit. But if we want to transform people's philosophy towards learning, if we want to nurture our creative and innovative spirit, then much more needs to be done.

We need to ask ourselves whether we are prepared to make radical changes first, to the education system and second, to the way we develop the potential of our scholars. If the objective is to encourage creativity, we have to start young. We cannot leave it to the time when applications are made for entry to the universities. By then, attitudes of parents and students towards education would have taken shape and it will be very difficult to set them onto a new path of thinking.

We cannot expect, for example, that the introduction of the SAT will cause our parents and students to suddenly re-evaluate their approach to education. And as one of the speakers before me pointed out, today's newspaper article in the Straits Times is very instructive because parents and students, if you read the article, look at the SAT as another form of assessment to be beaten by coaching and mastery of assessment books.

We must start young and there are two dimensions to this issue. First, the teachers. They must be encouraged and given time to work with school children on issues outside the curriculum. Teachers now have to contend with a great deal of pressure. They have to finish the syllabus and get their students to score so that the average grade of the school goes up year after year. Where is the time or the incentive to work on the child's creative and innovative side, on matters which are vital for the all round development of the individual, but which are non-examinable?

The other dimension is parents who have been brought up in a social and job environment where examination and test results are everything. Therefore, the obsession with grades. School children now have very little time for anything other than school work. Because of this drive for top marks, working parents have very little time or incentive to nurture the child's creativity. It will be a rare Singapore parent who will say that he does not really care how his son or daughter does in school so long as he develops his reasoning and analytical skills. It is at the end of the day all about assessments, tests and examinations.

But there will always be a few, fortunately, despite the difficulties, who will do well in examinations and have the potential to be creative and innovative. If given the right environment, these youngsters will develop the spirit of enterprise and derring-do which we all want to see flourish in Singapore.

What opportunities do these few have to realise their full potential? Let us take the example of our best and brightest. They are given scholarships to the best universities all over the world and are required by their bonds to serve the Government or a statutory body or the armed forces upon their return. There is nothing wrong with that. It has served us well. We need the brightest to man our institutions and experience has shown that the system runs efficiently because of this.

But we have been paying a price for this practice which is that our top brains are not being given the best environment to fully develop their potential as innovators and technopreneurs. Instead, they are put in institutions which depend for their effectiveness on hierarchy, discipline and an almost religious adherence to rules.

I am not saying that our scholars are discouraged from exercising discretion and initiative in the Government or in the armed forces. What I am saying is that there is a far better environment for their full potential to flower. That they can make a dramatic difference if they are dropped in the deep end of the private sector where they have to sink or swim.

The difficulty we face is our small numbers. In other countries, for every top student who goes into the public service, you have another five, 10, 20 who go into the private sector and inject vibrancy into it. We do not have the luxury of these numbers. I am not suggesting that only our top brains can energise the private sector and therefore sharpen our competitiveness. Many others can and have done so. But we have to play with the odds.

After five to eight years of service, not many of these scholars leave the Government or the service to which they are bonded. Having established their career paths, they are likely to stay to carry on to the top. Those who leave come out with a mindset which has been developed in those five to eight years that they have been with the Government and it is very difficult to transform the mindset of someone in his early 30s.

My proposition is that we need to re-evaluate our priorities in education as well as the system of deployment of our top scholars if we are serious about remaining at the cutting edge. We have to decide, given our small numbers, what we are prepared to sacrifice if we want an effervescent private sector full of ideas, energy and initiative. We need to strike a new balance.

A change to the admission policy for the universities will not by itself bring about a change in ethos. We need to do much more.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

4.28 pm

Dr Tan Boon Wan: Sir, first, let me declare my interest in this amendment. I am a lecturer at the National University of Singapore. The recent review to improve the university education is timely. We are living in a rapidly changing world. Singapore is moving fast into the knowledge-based era. We have to prepare our young to operate in such a future.

A new university admission framework was proposed in the review. It widens the admission system making it more comprehensive. The admission framework includes three additional requirements: the Scholastic Achievement Test 1 (SAT1), project work and extracurricular activities for our students who have taken the GCE `A' level examination. This signals that in the future more than just academic excellence is needed to be a university student.

I welcome the inclusion of project work and extracurricular activities in the new admission framework. Working on and learning from these projects, our students can broaden their mindset. The projects will enhance their creativity and encourage innovation. But I do not see the need to include SAT1 for our students who have taken the GCE A' level examination. Firstly, SAT1 purports to test reasoning skills, something that the A' level examination is said not to do as well. Before we ask the students to do these additional tests, do we know how the results of these two tests correlate? Although it has been argued that these two tests measure different capabilities, what happens if these sets of capabilities are strongly correlated for most of our students? Would it then not be a waste of effort to force all our students to take SAT1?

Secondly, SAT1 is time-consuming to take. It is an additional activity. It will take time to prepare. It will put more pressure on our students and parents.

Thirdly, if we are using SAT1 to signal to our students to change how they should study, then it is a blunt tool. I do not see how SAT1 by itself is going to change the mindset of our school students. It will be more effective to make the necessary changes to our education system from Primary 1. We have 12 good years to nurture our students.

Fourthly, SAT1 is adopted by the US universities because the US does not have a common national examination, like our GCE A' level examination. The SAT test is a common measure to gauge their students from various high schools using different syllabi. The SAT results are used with the high school results for university admission. In fact, SAT1 and 2 together can be said to take the place of the A' level examination.

Finally, SAT1 is not cheap to take. It currently costs each student US$38 to take the test. Assuming an annual `A' level cohort of 12,000 students, it will cost a total of US$456,000. At the exchange rate of S$1.75 to US$1, this will work out to some $798,000. This assumes that each student takes one test each. What about preparatory classes and tuition for the tests? Knowing Singapore parents, they will want their children to be very prepared, especially now that it is a requirement for university admission. If, say, conservatively, a quarter of the students take tuition or preparatory classes, with each paying $500, this will work out annually to $1.5 million. In total, the SAT1 test would cost parents an additional $2.3 million if SAT1 is made a requirement for admission to the local universities. This is only a very conservative estimate of the total expenditure by parents on SAT tests if SAT1 becomes compulsory.

However, Sir, I support the inclusion of SAT1 as a requirement for foreign students who have not taken their A' level examination. The inclusion of SAT1 for the admission of polytechnic and mature students who have also not taken the A' level examination is also meaningful.

To conclude, I think the efforts by the universities to review the admission framework is timely and necessary. A new framework will make the admission more comprehensive. However, I am not convinced of the necessity to require our students to take SAT1 in addition to the `A' level examination.

Mr S. Iswaran (West Coast): Sir, for many Singaporeans, a university degree is a holy grail. So, it is not surprising that the proposed changes to the university admission criteria have aroused considerable interest. In general, I support the intent, principle and purpose of this review of the Committee. The broader admission criteria would certainly give a more complete picture of the individual student's capability, not just with academic results but also on their reasoning skills, their ability to conduct independent enquiries through project work and also through extra curricular involvement.

My concern is really over the impact the broader admission criteria have on our students. In our quest for a more holistic assessment of our students, I think we must be vigilant and guard against over-burdening them with examinations and tests. Whether the GCE `A' level examination constitutes a 100%, 75% or 50% of any admission criteria, the amount of effort that a student will expend in preparing for the examination would be the same. I think students will need to, and want to, expend that time on their examination in order to secure the minimum results required.

Also, the introduction of SAT1 would add a qualitatively different point in the assessment criteria for which the students must prepare separately. The SAT is a test of reasoning skills, and it may be true that studying for the test other than to get accustomed to its format, or taking it several times, is unlikely to yield much benefit. But I think we should try telling that to our students and their parents. I am quite sure that the introduction of SAT1 as part of the admission criteria will lead to the mushrooming of a whole new service industry to prepare students to take SAT1 examination. This is not unprecedented. We have seen it in other parts of the world, including the US.

Likewise, project work, unless introduced gradually and in a manner complementary to the existing curriculum, would be reduced to merely being another admission criteria requirement. The cumulative effect of these changes, I fear, may be to increase the pressure on our students and they may adopt a more jaded attitude to what is otherwise a very important change and signal to them that we are emphasising creativity and innovation and they need to address those aspects of their talents.

I wonder whether this important initiative could therefore be implemented in tandem with other measures and considerations in order to mitigate the possible adverse consequences. For example, could the system be implemented with considerable flexibility? If a student does well in GCE `A' level, but does not make a mark in SAT1, can the student still be considered for admission, or vice versa? In other words, can we use this new system to broaden the pool of possible entrants into universities rather than to narrow the pool?

Alternatively, could we consider SAT1 requirements in terms of a minimum required score for admission to university? In other words, we only need it as an indication of the reasoning ability but beyond the threshold point, additional points may not be of great consequence. The advantage of this is that it will reduce the incentive for students to repeatedly take SAT tests in order to try and raise their scores. In addition, the reduction in the curriculum in junior college, which I think is already under way, needs to be put in place well before these additional requirements are put in. At the same time, if the teachers are adequately prepared to guide these students and help them understand better what is SAT1 test, that will also serve the objectives of this review.

In short, I support the principle of the review. But I do have some problems with its practical impact and its potential effects on students and I hope that the Minister would address these questions before finalising the implementation.

Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung: Sir, may I first declare my interest as a member of the Law Faculty and who is involved in the selection process. We have to agonise every year to take in 150 law students over a shortlist of 500 and in this instance, I would like to say the proposal to include the SAT in the admission requirement may have unsettled many parents and students, though as one who is involved in the selection process, I would welcome it on the basis that the more information one gets about the potential student, the more likely it is that we can make the right decision about admitting him or her into the university.

Parents and students have, for a long time now, got used to the idea that the A' level grades should be enough as a determinant of standards for admission. The A' level is seen as a culmination of 12 years of study and Singapore may well be one of the few places in the world, if the new proposals are implemented, where both English `A' level and US SAT tests are administered to gain admission into university.

Many of the points that I would like to raise have already been raised by my colleague from the university and by Mr Iswaran. So, I shall restrict myself to mainly three points. I believe that parents and students will need to be convinced why or how the new SAT will be helpful because there is no question that more expenditure and more time will have to be given to this new test. In this regard, I would like to mention that I read an article in the Yale Law Journal recently where one professor, writing on admission to law school, mentioned tongue-in-cheek that while the SAT administration may tell us that preparation is not very useful for the taking of SAT tests, there are a large number of very solvent SAT preparation companies in the United States. The point very simply is that not only would kiasu parents react to a new test by requiring their children to do a lot more exercises and so on, it happens everywhere where the SAT test has taken place.

I would like to make a proposal, before the SAT is to be taken into account in terms of weightage, whether it is not possible now to ask students to take their SAT test but instead of giving a weightage to it, to use it, as Mr Iswaran has suggested just now, only if the students do not meet the cut-off point for A' level in gaining admission into any faculty. This would give us sufficient time to monitor over a period of 3 years how these students will do, both in terms of A' level as well as in terms of SAT performance. And with the results of the study, we may be able to see whether the SAT really does make a real difference in terms of admission, in terms of the quality of the students we are getting, and in terms, more importantly, of the performance of the students once they are in the university.

Secondly, if it is found that the SAT-type test is useful and important, it should be integrated into the junior college curriculum so that students do not need to sit for it separately from the usual `A' level examination. This will allow the schools to factor in the test as part and parcel of their school work.

Thirdly, if given time to assess the quality of the SAT in measuring ability, parents and students may have an opportunity to see the credibility of such a test only after these studies have been made.

May I therefore end by saying that I hope that the scheme will be slowly introduced and that there will be time and opportunity for the SAT to be proven to be a very good test in the admission requirements.

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang): (In Mandarin): Sir, the Committee on University Admissions has recommended changes to the admission criteria for universities. The suggestion is made because in a knowledge-economy oriented world of tomorrow, a university graduate must have wide ranging skills, and not just the skill of absorbing knowledge. The Committee also feels that that the new admission criteria will therefore change the broad direction of our education system.

However, I do not believe that the introduction of this American style Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) will help our university students to possess extensive skills and cultivate the spirit of life-long learning. First, this Scholastic Aptitude Test evaluates the candidate's comprehension skill and the ability to solve equivocal problems. I think if after 12 years of education, and having attained `A' level results which are good enough to satisfy the university's admission and eligibility requirement, our students still do not have the comprehension skill and the ability to deal with tricky problems, then there must be either some big problem with our education system or significant defects with the design of the examination papers. Therefore, I think the Ministry should review the present education system, restructure the curriculum and the way examination papers are set.

Secondly, this Scholastic Aptitude Test is another obstacle for the students' admission to the university. It will also bring additional financial burden and mental stress to our students and parents. Examinations may serve the purpose of evaluating the students' proficiency in certain subjects and their mental capabilities. But the evil of examination is that when students, teachers, parents and schools place too much emphasis on the examination results, it would defeat the primary purpose of education itself.

I feel that we should not depend too much on examinations to decide whether any particular student should be given the opportunity to further his studies. Because education is a process of exerting subtle influence on the character and thinking of our students. So if we just use the basis of the pass rate in examinations to decide whether a school or our education system is good or bad, I think it is too simplistic.

This Scholastic Aptitude Test will become another type of examination in Singapore, a subject to test our students' comprehension skill and their ability to solve tricky problems. Worse still, this is an examination which is outside the school syllabi. Although some people say preparation for SAT examinations will not raise their score, one thing for sure is that there will be a lot of American experts in this type of SAT examinations coming here to set up schools and claim that their method is the most effective one. So, like a swarm of bees, our parents will rush towards these tuition schools, and this will become another burden to our parents, teachers and students. I think our parents will have to spend a lot of money because of this examination.

For this examination, no matter how many times you take the examination, you can always use the highest score for your admission requirement. So, in our kiasu situation in Singapore, the parents and students will keep on taking the examinations in order to improve their score, and this will increase the burden of our people. Why should we do that?

Thirdly, is SAT relevant to our national conditions? First, this examination uses the pairing of two groups of English words to evaluate the students' standard of English. Theoretically, if a student can satisfy the admission requirement, then his standard of English should have reached a certain standard of proficiency. There should not be a problem taking an examination in English. But using vocabulary in English to test students' comprehension skill and their ability of logic involves a student's depth in understanding English vocabulary.

In a Straits Times report on 17th January, the Dean of the American Education Centre in Singapore was quoted as saying that Singapore students may have difficulties in the vocabulary part of SAT. To students who speak mother tongue at home and English is just a medium for academic research, this examination will be an unfair obstacle to them. If the Ministry of Education feels that the ultimate method of evaluating the effect of education is through the examination system, then is the Ministry of Education going to consider having some subjects like our sense of patriotism in our examinations? Or like in Japan, they tested the students' integrity when they want to go into medical school. I urge the Ministry of Education to review the necessity of having SAT in Singapore in order to prevent the need for those who cannot make the grade to go overseas to further their studies, and those who cannot afford to go overseas will be deprived of the opportunity to go to university. They would thus become the scapegoat of the new admission system.

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, before the recommendation that SAT should be part of university admission from the year 2002 is accepted, we need to examine a number of issues carefully. This is especially since the SAT has become a controversial issue in the American system, which has been using SAT scores for university or college admission for several years already. There are conflicting research studies and statistics compiled over what SAT actually measures and doubts cast as to whether one can use the test to predict the future performance of high SAT scorers.

With a population of 4 million people, we need to maximise our human resources as much as possible. We need to give them the opportunities to get higher education, and we should try to have more students admitted into our universities. Following from this, is there really any need for SAT to be applied across the board? Or perhaps it might be better used as a tool to look at those whose 'A' level results are just below the borderline admission criteria for university. The question is, what are the factors which led to the recommendation of a weightage of 25% for SAT scores as part of university admission?

It interests me quite significantly that our colleague, Dr Teo Ho Pin, has suggested that 'A' level results should be given 50% of weightage for university admission; another 25% from SAT and 25% from ECA. Sir, I would like to stress, that there is so much to learn at 'A' level, and ECA should not be used as a major criterion for university admission, no matter how well we want to open the opportunities for our students with varied and different talents to enter into university, and contribute to the multitude of talented Singaporeans who can contribute to our progress in the future.

I think giving ECA as much as 25% in weightage is too excessive. For all the knowledge that has to be learnt in two years at 'A' level, as a foundation for university education, giving the 'A' level results only 50% in weightage is, to me, very imbalanced.

Part of the SAT study should also look at the wider social picture and determine whether a system that prepares all students equally to sit for SAT can be put in place. Despite some studies which show that SAT coaching really does not help, I am sure we are going to see parents and students scrambling to prepare for SAT examinations and tests.

Sir, I do agree that we have to re-evaluate our education system by introducing changes, but short notices should not be a habit of ours. I would therefore agree with my Education GPC colleague, Mr Loh Meng See, that we should delay the implementation of the new university admission system by another year or two.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, I would like to speak on freedom of speech at local universities.

The intake of NUS and NTU including post-graduates in FY1999 is expected to be about 25,000 and 14,900 respectively. They are the best and brightest students in our land. The universities' aim is to produce graduates with the necessary skills and knowledge for employment, and promoting research and innovation. But I am told that the universities' administration is rather strict on students when it comes to political matters. The environment in the universities is rather restrictive. I would urge the Minister to make the universities to be places where free expression and inquiry are possible, so as to prepare our graduates to develop the faculty of critical thinking. I do not think that we should train all our graduates to be yes men. We shall stagnate intellectually if we do so. I think Singapore must have a pool of intellectuals who can think independently. Only then can Singapore make a quantum leap into an economy that produces high value added goods. Only then can real prosperity come to Singapore, rather than, like the present time, compete with other neighbours and the rest of the world based mainly on lowering costs.

At the moment, I am also told that freedom of expression is curbed in our universities. Apparently, articles printed in students' magazines and in newsletters have to be vetted before they can be published. Also, if political organisations in the universities want to release press statements to express their views on issues, those statements must first be approved by the university authorities. I am further informed that formerly no such restrictions were imposed on university students. Why should the situation be changed now?

RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, perhaps I should address Mr Chiam's point first. NUS and NTU students are free to express themselves in writing in university publications and even to the media. They write regularly to the press, as long as they do so in their personal capacities, and our universities do encourage the students to express themselves. NUS and NTU also believe that students should be prepared to take full responsibility for their views.

In NUS and NTU though, the students' articles that are submitted for publication in official student publications, such as those of the students' unions, clubs and societies, are perused as a precaution against any legal infringements. I think, as a lawyer, Mr Chiam would appreciate that. Such a requirement comes from purely a legal perspective, because the university, by its statutes, becomes responsible for what occurs in the university and what is in the publications of the universities, and it is not for a desire to restrain students from freely expressing themselves. Mr Chiam himself has spoken at the university a number of times. So there is no question on that.

If you allow me, Sir, to return to the issues on university admissions. First, let me thank Members for their questions and suggestions on the university admission system (UAS). I know this is a topic that is close to the hearts of many university professors, parents, teachers and students.

We should not look at the university admission system on its own. As I explained earlier, we should look at it in the context of the entire education system. The recommendations on the UAS should be seen in that context, and it is part of the larger changes that we are trying to put in place in the whole education system, in the 12 years prior to university, in university and beyond that. And in that regard, I agree completely with Mr Loh Meng See and Mr Davinder Singh who have raised the same matter.

The universities are also working towards giving their undergraduates a broader education, within limits, and using open-book examinations and other things while they are in university. But the exit gate itself from the school system and the university system has significance, because what is required of students at this point has a great impact on the motivation, attitude and behaviour all the way down the line. For example, we are focused only on SAT, but there are other aspects to the university admission system, eg, ECA, project work and so on. If we say that leadership, creativity and communications skills are important, and yet we do not make them count in the university admission - some people argue that we should stick with the 'A' levels and nothing else - if we do not make these other things count, then we are really sending a signal that none of these things really count. So, I believe that if want to make them important in the minds of students, we have to make them count.

However, at the same time, it is also unrealistic to expect the university admission system to solve all our problems, to choose people who will be successful, without doubt, later on in life and so forth. Many other qualities, including character, motivation, perseverance in the face of adversity, determine success in their later life. What we can do is to hope that with the new university admission system, to make the more important attributes count. So while I do agree with Mr Inderjit Singh and Mr Loh Meng See that EQ, leadership, creativity, teamwork and personality are important, we should not place the full burden of this on the university admission system. Where relevant, courses such as Medicine, Law and Architecture could stipulate aptitude tests and interviews could take into account things like commitment to the nation and so on, where these things are of particular importance. 5.00 pm

Members have raised specific concerns in three areas: SAT1, ECA and project work. Let me first deal with the question of balance among the different elements. There is no magic formula. Some US universities state the elements that go into admission decisions but do not stipulate weights. I do not think in Singapore we are ready for such a system which is not transparent. Most Singaporeans would still prefer a transparent system where the weights and criteria are clearly specified and known to all.

Dr Teo Ho Pin thinks ECA is not being given enough weight. I am glad though that he has not suggested that all students must pass a swimming test or a life saving course before entering university. I think we are already taking a big step by enlarging the university admission criteria beyond just the "A" levels. This step alone would already send a strong signal on what we value in education. Before we take any further step, it is better to let the new system run in and, as Prof. Chin has said, let us evaluate what is happening and how the new system works. The Committee chaired by Prof. Shih can certainly revisit the percentages, and make recommendations about future directions, if necessary. I will ask them to take the comments that Members have made into account. But we have to be realistic. If we take into account all the things that Members have suggested, instead of 100%, we will probably end up with 300% of weight.

Members have asked what is the value of using SAT1 when we already have the "A" levels. Several Members have asked about the correlation between SAT1 and "A" levels.

SAT1 and the "A" levels measure different facets of intellectual ability which a person must possess to benefit from a university education. The "A" levels, being content-based and rigorous, measure mastery of content and skills. The SAT1, which relies less on content and more on generic reasoning in the verbal and quantitative areas, provides a measure of a person's reasoning ability.

While we do not have studies on Singapore, data from other countries, for example, US and Israel which have studied this matter extensively, show that a combination of national or school examination result, and a reasoning test gives a better prediction for university performance than either one alone.

Prof. Chin and Mr Hawazi have proposed using the SAT1 as an alternative assessment tool for students who may have just fallen short marginally on their "A" level results. I do agree that if we have students who score very highly on the "A" levels and very poorly on the SAT, or who score very highly on the SAT and very poorly on the "A" levels, resulting in their not being able to qualify for university, we should look at these students very carefully and try to decide why that is so and whether they merit a place. It is not surprising that test coaching companies have made claims of immense improvements in scores from coaching. That is what they are in the business for. But I think they would also concede that it is not the coaching per se but the discipline and effort needed to study which are important. I am sure that Singaporean students who apply themselves to their work will have little to worry about.

The experience in the US is that beyond a certain level, extra coaching and taking the test repeatedly do not improve the score. I think Singaporean students will learn that also quite quickly. A certain amount of preparation for the SAT1 though is needed, but primarily to become familiar with the test format. Obviously, if you do not, when you walk into a test, you do not know what you are going to be tested on and you have never seen such a paper before, you may not do very well. But once you have acquired some familiarity with the test format, further practice and repetition will not cause scores to go up dramatically. So what we are talking about is not two years of study in the JC to prepare for SAT1, but at most several weeks of preparation.

Dr Tan also talks about the cost of taking a SAT1 and he went through some very impressive calculations for this. In truth, the cost of taking a SAT1 is about US$38, ie, S$65, and the cost of taking one "A" level subject is about S$70. Those are the comparable costs that we are talking about.

Mr Low Thia Khiang has expressed concern about how the SAT1 might be culturally biased and disadvantage those from non-English speaking homes. This is a valid concern which has also been expressed by some parents and students. The Ministry will look into setting up our own reasoning test, but this will take time. Sweden and Israel took many years to set up their own version of SAT. The SAT1 would appear to be the most internationally recognised and accepted test for assessing reasoning skills. Therefore, the Committee has decided to recommend the use of SAT1 for this purpose. Proceeding with the SAT1 in the meantime will give us the experience and help us in devising our own reasoning test in due course. In addition, our university graduates and JC students have often been criticised for not reading widely and not reading beyond their textbooks and so on. If having to take the SAT1 will cause them to start reading more widely from a younger age, it is not such a bad thing after all.

In summary, there is no perfect test which will allow us to measure all the desired qualities we want in our young, from intellectual curiosity to leadership and creativity.

ECAs have been an integral part of our education system for a long time. I am sure many Members here will attest to the value of active participation in ECA, among them Mr Inderjit Singh and Dr Teo Ho Pin.

The issue is how much ECAs should count for. We are making them count now. Having deliberated on it for some time, the Committee has chosen the route of bonus points, as it strikes a good balance between encouraging students to strive for not just passive participation in ECAs but quality participation, and sending a signal that academic potential and achievement, while important for university studies, are not the be-all and end-all of education. The bonus points, despite being called "bonus", do count because a student with bonus points would be more favourably placed than one without.

Dr Teo Ho Pin has suggested doing away with the project component due to difficulties in assessment. Prof. Chin has also commented on this. Project work is very beneficial in developing independent learning, critical thinking, resourcefulness, teamwork and so on. As someone said, in the normal working environment, if you are assigned a piece of work, the natural tendency is to go and ask your colleagues and so forth how to do it and to work together. But in the school system, that is described as cheating. We do want to encourage students to work together and to learn how to work together. So if we think that this is important and we do want students to do that, and we want to ask the schools to spend some time guiding the students in doing project work properly, as Prof. Chin has pointed out, then we should try and make project work count. I understand that there are some difficulties, but this sort of assessment is not new to our schools. We have various forms of open-ended assessment already. In fact, there are some "A" level subjects which depend on project work for a very significant proportion of their assessment, for example, Computer Studies. Essays are also marked subjectively. But there is a way of devising a reliable system for assessing students. So examiners can devise ways to grade the students in project work consistently. Through regular interaction between teacher and student as well as oral presentations, we should be able to develop a system which is sufficient to actually assess the students' work. But we are giving ourselves a little more time to do that and we are talking about introducing it in the year 2004. Given the benefits to be gained, we should find workable solutions to using project work as one of the means of assessment rather than abandoning the idea.

The Committee has recommended that the universities, JCs and the Ministry of Education set up a joint committee to monitor standards across all the schools. This would be similar to the practice in universities of having external examiners assess a sample of students' work. This is one possibility that the Ministry will look into.

We are putting in place fairly major changes to the university admission system. Students, teachers and parents will need time to adjust.

Members' comments and suggestions will form part of the wider feedback that the University Admission System Committee will continue to study carefully over the next two months as they review and refine their proposals. I expect the Committee to submit its final report to the Government by the end of May, following which the Ministry of Education would study the proposals and put up its recommendations to the Government. An announcement on the new university admission system should therefore be expected by the middle of this year.

Mr Loh Meng See and Mr Hawazi have expressed some concern that the year 2002 is too early to implement the new admission system. One idea for the Committee to consider is whether the new admission system should be implemented from 2003, instead of 2002. This would allow the students entering the first year of JC and in particular those doing the three-year Pre-U course in the centralised institutes a little more time to prepare and adjust. The Ministry will certainly consult the Committee, the JCs and the CIs on this matter and we will announce our decision in June.

I believe the University Admission System Committee has adopted the right approach in its review and I support their proposals. There is no perfect criterion or measurement of an individual's ability or aptitude to succeed at university or, for that matter, to succeed in life. The main reason for revising the admission system is not that we have been terribly wrong in selecting students so far. By and large, we have selected students to enter university quite well. Our universities will still continue to take in a large majority of "A" level graduates. The new system, in fact, will by and large admit the same students as under the existing system, but with additional flexibility to take in those with the aptitude for university education who might not have been selected purely on the basis of "A" level results. From the way I look at it, it is not that we are creating extra obstacles, as some Members have expressed the view, but that we are providing more opportunities and a wider way of assessing students. But the most important function of the new admission system lies in the signal it would send throughout the education system, and to the rest of society.

Here again, I must stress, I am not talking just about the SAT1 but the ECA, project work part in the admission system. We should look at it from the whole package. As the International Academic Advisory Panel for the universities has put it, having the "A" levels as the sole admission criteria trains students to overcome only one type of obstacle. Having other requirements would signal to our students that they should develop other qualities and skills necessary for their individual as well as our national success in the future.

In the final analysis, we are pursuing a two-pronged approach. We want to implement a university admission system that gives the appropriate signal for holistic student development in our schools. We also want to strive towards "Thinking Schools" and the "Desired Outcomes of Education" in the way that teaching and learning are carried out in our schools and universities. With this strategy, we hope to cultivate a climate that would allow us to bring out the best in our students, so that they would not just be prepared to tackle an examination, but be ready to adapt and do well in a rapidly changing society.

Before I move on, I forgot to mention this to the other Members who have raised a variety of points. We would take into account the points raised by Mr Loh on music, Mdm Claire Chiang on community involvement, Mr Shriniwas Rai on community and business support for schools, Mr Hawazi on enrichment programmes, Mr Sinnakaruppan and Mr Simon Tay on regional education and other points and suggestions raised thus far by Members. Other points on teachers and air-conditioning of schools, we will deal with them later, if we have time. 5.15 pm

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, may I have your permission to seek clarification from the Minister?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, the Minister has not answered my earlier question on streaming. I would like the Minister to explain specifically what is the signal and ability that SAT is trying to send to the students, parents and teachers. I think what he has explained is too abstract and too vague.

Has he taken into consideration the potential burden that SAT would place on parents and students? And how would the objectives of SAT justify all these additional burdens on students, parents and teachers? Would it not be possible to revise `A' level examination questions to assess the ability that SAT would have tried to assess?

Finally, Sir, since the Minister has admitted that language in SAT could be a concern, I would like to know whether there is any immediate measure or remedy that the Ministry of Education is looking at before we go into full swing of putting SAT as a criterion for admission into the university.

The Chairman: Mr Chiam, do you want to clarify something?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I mentioned that when a political organisation in the university wishes to issue a statement to give their point of view, they must first get the approval of the university administration. The Minister has not commented on this.

RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, we do not encourage our students to take part in partisan political activities in the universities. In fact, we do encourage our students to read widely, to be interested in current affairs, national affairs, and so forth. But we do want them to concentrate on their studies. We do not want them to be distracted by all kinds of other things which Mr Chiam may be thinking about.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I do not think he should make fun of me.

RAdm Teo Chee Hean: I am not making fun of Mr Chiam.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, they want to make a public statement on some issues to express their point of view. If they want to make a statement, do they need first to get the approval of the university administration? That is my question. Yes or no?

RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, as I have explained, I read on a regular basis views expressed by students in the newspapers, and so on. I am really quite surprised. I do not think they really need Mr Chiam to speak up for them.

If I may move on to the points raised by Mr Low Thia Khiang on the SAT and `A' levels. I did not quite understand the first point on streaming.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: I raised a question on streaming earlier which I think was not answered.

RAdm Teo Chee Hean: First of all, on the cultural content of SAT, I think we do recognise that there may well be a little bit of cultural bias, in a sense. But I am really a little surprised with the arguments that Mr Low is raising. Earlier on, he said that actually our students should be well prepared, because if they proceeded all the way to the `A' levels, they really should have no difficulties doing this. Now I am a little surprised because he is taking the other side of the argument to say that they do have difficulties. I am not really sure what Mr Low is trying to say.

I do accept that there are some culturally biased elements in the SAT, but I do not think that they would be so serious as to cause the SAT to be invalidated. And I think this is the point which Mr Low himself agrees with. Because he said earlier that if we do teach our students well in the 12 years of education and through JC, they should have no difficulty taking the SAT. So I am really surprised that he should now raise this point.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: May I clarify the point that he mentioned? I think the Minister missed my point or misunderstood me. I said that, in theory, because we are using English as a medium of instruction, the students should not have difficulty in understanding the language of the SAT1. But the language part where it tests the reasoning of students by using pairing of words in English, some of these words are quite difficult even for English-educated students. I think it was mentioned in the feedback by a number of takers, which appeared in the Straits Times.

The question here is, yes, you do have sufficient working knowledge of English and it is sufficient as a tool to do academic research, but do you have a depth in the language to understand the different pairs of words that are designed to test the reasoning? I think it is more than just the language standard that we are expected here. As pointed out by the Dean of the American School here, the language can be a problem. Because the depth of the language here, generally speaking, may not be the same as that in America and Britain where they speak English as a mother tongue.

RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, I am quite confident that students will be able to manage. We basically already have an English language based education system. Our students take most of the subjects in the English language for 12 years of education. And we do want our students to read widely. We do encourage them to do so. As a matter of fact, many of our students of all academic aptitudes and abilities take the SAT and do quite well. Many of them, after having taken the SAT, gained admission to US universities. So I do not really see the difficulty.

On the point of A' levels and extra stress and so forth, I think there is a balance here to be struck. Today, the A' level examination is a very high stress process. It is one throw of the dice. You take the examination once, and everything depends on that examination. If you want to take it again, or if you do not do well enough, you have to wait till the next year to take it again. With the SAT, what has happened basically is that there is a wider balance in the selection criteria. In effect, what has happened is that the weightage to the A' levels has declined in comparison to all the other factors in the university admission system. The SAT, of course, like any test you take, will have some element of stress. But because the SAT is a test which can be taken a number of times, it does not have the quality of a one throw of the dice, as the A' level has today.

So if you look at it overall, yes, you could say that there is a balance there. But it is not clear that it will increase the stress level and so on, for the students. There is a balance to be struck.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, I think the Minister would do well to summarise exactly what is the signal and ability that SAT tries to achieve, and what signal would it send to the parents, teachers and students.

The Chairman: Mr Low Thia Khiang, we are going a little out of the topic. If you want to know more, you could raise a Question for Oral Answer. I am sure the Minister would be pleased to answer you. We are pressing for time. We have to move on. Mr Loh.

Mr Loh Meng See: Sir, I wish to speak on the training and development of principals and teachers.

Sir, with the rapidly changing work, learning and living environment, there is the urgency for principals and teachers to be well prepared to guide our students adequately through the educational system.

The recent incidents of the Pulau Ubin tragedy and Jin Tai School suggest that our principals and teachers are still not up to the mark. They need training in new skill areas to manage better in the changing school environment.

Perhaps the Ministry may review the role of NIE and restructure the overall training institutions of the Education Ministry and to provide in-service training to the existing teachers. The Minister could perhaps give us a brief of any potential changes that will be taking place in that regard.

Many new teachers are being recruited in recent and coming years. They are young and energetic and may bring in fresh new ideas to the schools. How do we ensure that their enthusiasm is not inhibited by the time they are posted to the school? We should take pains to induct the new teachers properly so that the transition from NIE to the school is smooth and welcoming to the new teachers.

We also have to pay careful attention to the posting of right teachers to the right schools. We should blend the teachers to make them into strong effective teams. Any reshuffling and re-deployment of principals and teachers should be handled sensitively so as not to disrupt and affect the morale of the whole school. Though it is important to institutionalise the school system and not to allow the `cultist' phenomenon to take place, it is important to appreciate that every school has its peculiar traditions and character. We should allow our schools to develop a distinct identity of their own with local variations to be in sync with the neighbourhood and the community to which they belong.

Experience is a very valuable asset in teaching. I sense that older teachers are leaving service prematurely and opting for early retirement. I would equate age with maturity and wisdom, and certainly we need many more wise teachers in our schools. How can we encourage the very good ones to serve as long as possible? Are there ways to engage the senior teachers in roles and capacities where they can continue to make valuable contributions to the schools?

We also have many teachers who have contributed long, loyal and faithful service to our schools. Have we forgotten about their training and development needs? Do we have an active programme of in-service training? Are the NIE facilities and resources fully tapped for the long-term training and development of our principals and teachers?

The recognition and reward system is a powerful means to direct and encourage a person's behaviour and work performance. If we were to encourage principals and teachers to be good role models in life long learning, a credit system should be developed to encourage and recognise them for their efforts in self-learning and development. The main beneficiaries will be our students. I hope to have the Minister's comments on the points I have raised.

Mr Iswaran: Sir, I wish to focus on the specific topic of teacher training.

In the last few years we have seen a number of fundamental changes in our education system in terms of focus and new initiatives, including IT, National Education and creativity being some of the focal points. This, to me, underscores the importance of our teachers being dynamic and up-to-date not just in their knowledge but also in their pedagogic techniques and methods in order to keep up with the latest developments in their field. This again reinforces the need for continuous training and learning by teachers in as much as we stress it for our workers and students as well.

Sir, I know there are training requirements at key milestone points in the teachers' career at the point of recruitment, the NIE programme and also when they are about to become HODs (Heads of Department) or when they eventually become principals or vice-principals. However, I would like to ask the Minister what other in-service training programmes and facilities exist to complement these milestone training requirements. In particular, are there facilities or programmes in place for teachers to, for example, learn about the best practices in school administration or to learn more about new initiatives in pedagogic techniques, or even to just share their own experiences in professional circles. 5.30 pm

I would also like to ask the Minister whether it is a policy or a kind of administrative requirement that teachers spend at least two weeks in a year - that would be approximately 4% of their time in a year - in training for themselves. This is roughly the norm that is used in the private sector or business circles. I am curious whether a similar norm is adopted in the education system.

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang: (In Mandarin): Sir, 30 years ago, I was studying in Primary One. In those days, a rainy day will bring me and my classmates extra delight because we would be happily moving our desks and chairs from one corner to another corner, where the roof was not leaking, and we would move our desks and chairs there. This was because the roof of my alma mater was made of attap leaves. In the last 30 years we have achieved remarkable economic development. Today, I was told by my contractor friend that roofs of our school buildings are made of titanium, a precious metal.

Sir, I am very pleased to note that our students are receiving good education in beautiful country-club-like premises and serene environment. However, education is an on-going "heartware" engineering project. It involves heavy investment in human resources. Investment in software (Teacher Training) is more important than investment in hardware (Building).

I hope that the Ministry of Education would place more emphasis on the strengthening of our teacher-training programme and the development of curriculum. More funds should be allocated to fortify our curriculum packages, and enhance the efficacy of pedagogy. Provide more training and retraining opportunities for our teachers. This will be beneficial to the students who are the future masters of our nation.

The Senior Minister of State for Education (Dr Aline K. Wong): Sir, thank you very much for giving me a chance to come in at this point. I have been waiting the whole afternoon to speak on teacher training because teacher training is absolutely crucial to all the wonderful things that we talk about, the changes in the education system and the desired outcome of education.

I would like to thank the last few speakers for raising this matter as well as some earlier speakers, including Dr Tan Boon Wan, on the importance of teacher training. Indeed, whether we are able to achieve our Desired Outcomes of Education depends critically on teachers in schools and to meet this challenge, the Education Service needs to recruit its fair share of good people and train them to do the job well.

I would like to inform the House a little bit about the nature and size of the challenge that the Education Service faces. Currently, the Education Service has nearly 24,000 teachers. To maintain the current staffing position, it is estimated that MOE would need to recruit an average of 2,000 teachers annually over the next 10 years to compensate for retirement and attrition. The more teachers we can recruit, the more resources we can give to our schools. The Ministry has stepped up its recruitment efforts over the past two years. For both the 1997 and 1998 recruitment cycle, we recruited an average of about 2,000 teachers. These are significantly higher than the 1,000 we were averaging between 1994 and 1996. After accounting for retirement and resignations, the net increase in teacher strength in the last two years averaged 650 per year.

We have plans to recruit 3,000 teachers over the next two years. This represents a stepping up of recruitment by 50% over the regular annual intake. We are making good progress. We have had lawyers, accountants and engineers joining the teaching profession and many of them, after they have started teaching in the schools, tell us they find the job immensely challenging and satisfying. We certainly hope that as many of them as possible will continue to stay with us even when the economy recovers.

The demands on our teachers today are very great. In recruiting new teachers into the Education Service, we not only have to look at the academic credentials, but also have to assess their aptitude and interest for teaching and other factors, such as character, personality and values. It would not be realistic for MOE to aim to recruit only from the graduate pool. NUS and NTU currently produce about 9,000 graduates each year. As it is, MOE is already recruiting about 1,000 graduates each year. This is about one out of every nine graduates. If we recruit only from the graduate pool, it would mean 2,000 out of 9,000 graduates, or one out of every 4.5 graduates. This would drain the other sectors of the economy of graduate manpower.

On the other hand, we must have teachers of sufficiently high academic qualifications so as to uphold the high professional standard of our teachers as well as their standing in the eyes of the parents and the community. MOE's target is to recruit teachers from the top one third of each cohort. We need to set a target so that our teachers have standing, as I said before, with the students, parents and the wider community. This means that we will be recruiting from the university graduates and `A' level holders pool and the academically stronger polytechnic diploma holders. This would enable us to strike the right balance between minimum qualification and what is realistically achieveable.

On top of academic credentials, MOE looks at the applicant's aptitude and interest in teaching, communications skills and values, and so on. These are important attributes as teachers are the role models for their students. We have maintained stringent selection criteria in spite of the larger intakes over the last few years. For example, last year, 1998, out of 4,000 graduates who applied, only 1,600 were selected, of whom about 1,100 eventually took up our offer of appointment. However, recruiting good people is only the first step to building a quality Education Service. We have to equip them with the right skills, values and attitudes required of teachers in Thinking Schools. Teacher training is therefore a very critical node in our entire education system and crucial in realising our vision of a Learning Nation also.

In March last year, I chaired a committee comprising senior MOE and NIE officials to carry out a fundamental review of the teacher training system. The objective of this review was to better prepare teachers to meet future challenges in the light of changes taking place in our education system. The Committee has now completed its work. Its recommendations have been accepted by the Ministry and will be gradually introduced this year. I do not intend to go into the detailed recommendations, but will instead outline the broad directions proposed by the committee.

But I would first like to highlight two key challenges that our teachers are facing, given the changes taking place in our education system. First, our teachers need to cope with a new type of learning environment where the teachers may not always know more than the students. Our students today have access to a tremendous amount of information through the Internet and other resources. Their learning is no longer confined to the classroom. Teachers must be prepared to explore, experiment and learn together with their students. This is a departure from the old paradigm where teachers were dispensers of knowledge. They must facilitate the students' learning, teach them how to access and critically evaluate information and how to arrive at solutions to problems.

Second, teachers are also role models for their students. They need to exemplify the values and attributes we desire in our students. These are not just about fundamental moral values as such. Our teachers must strive to be role models in thinking, learning and innovating. If we desire our students to be inquisitive and think for themselves, then the teachers must encourage the spirit of questioning and experimentation. To help students develop their different abilities to the fullest, the teachers must know almost instinctively how to recognise those abilities in their students in the first place and be knowledgeable about how to help their students with special talents or needs. In other words, the teacher must have a different set of teaching skills and a different mindset towards teaching altogether.

To help teachers meet these challenges, my committee has reviewed the current teacher training system and come out with broad recommendations which can be categorised into three main areas: (1) improving initial teacher training; (2) encouraging teachers to continually upgrade themselves; and (3) strengthening the partnership between MOE, NIE and schools.

Initial teacher training covers two stages - the foundation training which the new recruits receive or undergo at NIE, and the induction and on-the-job training that they receive up to the end of their first year in school after graduation from NIE. The majority of our trainee teachers spend only one year undergoing foundation training in NIE. In this one year, we not only have to provide them with pedagogical and content training but also imbue in them the values and mindsets required of teachers in the new teaching environment.

Given the limited time available, it is not possible for NIE to achieve everything. We have to prioritise and decide which components of teacher training are most critical at this foundation stage. If developing the character and motivation of our students is of utmost importance, then it must be so for our teachers also. Our primary emphasis at the foundation training stage should therefore be on values education for teachers, followed by knowledge and some core skills and competencies.

What is values education? By values education, we mean a commitment to the mission of the Education Service, an understanding and appreciation of the philosophy and evolution of our education policies, knowledge of national and regional issues that affect Singapore, commitment to the maximal development of the student as well as commitment to their own, that is, the teacher's own continued professional and personal development. Towards this end, my committee has drawn up a set of Desired Outcomes of Initial Teacher Training which will henceforth guide the design of the teacher training curriculum.

Other changes are also having an impact on some programmes of the foundation training. The profile of the intake into the Education Service is changing. The majority of our trainee teachers, about 1,000 to 1,100 out of the 2,000 per year, are graduates from NUS and NTU, who do a post-graduate diploma in education. These form the backbone of our graduate teaching force in the secondary and primary schools. Together with those A' level recruits who take the BA/BSc cum Diploma in Education programme at NIE (and who number about 100 to 150 per year), graduate teachers constitute roughly 60% to 62% of our trained teacher output each year. However, the Diploma in Education (Dip-Ed) course, which takes in both A' level and polytechnic diploma holders, is recruiting fewer A' level entrants over the years. This is mainly because A' level holders now have much more opportunities to pursue either a university or polytechnic education as compared to before. As a result, more of our new non-graduate teachers are polytechnic diploma holders. 5.45 pm

In 1996, we recruited 226 polytechnic diploma holders and 293 A' level holders for the Dip-Ed course at NIE. Last year, the number of polytechnic diploma holders recruited was 436, almost double the figure two years ago, while the number of A' level holders has declined by 15%, to about 250. We can expect this trend to continue. These polytechnic diploma holders will bring with them different strengths and weaknesses from their `A' level counterparts. This means the teacher training curriculum must be flexible enough to cater to the needs of the teacher trainees with different academic backgrounds. At the same time, we will ensure that the training is rigorous and that there is no compromise in standards expected of our trainee teachers.

Besides reviewing the curriculum, my Committee has recommended that the NIE BA/BSc cum Dip-Ed degree programme be re-positioned to attract academically stronger polytechnic diploma holders. Currently, direct entry into this programme is restricted only to `A' level holders. There are good polytechnic diploma holders who may be interested in teaching. We want to open up the degree programme to those polytechnic diploma holders who have gone through the NIE Dip-Ed programme and have taught in the schools for a certain period, particularly those who have demonstrated good performance in the Education Service. For some polytechnic diploma holders who are able to meet NIE's pre-requisite requirements, we can even consider them for direct entry into NIE's degree programme. With more polytechnic diploma holders upgrading through degree programmes, the proportion of our graduate teachers will rise further in future.

Foundation training alone will not bring teachers fully up to the basic level of competency needed for them to function effectively in schools. MOE and schools themselves have an important role to play in providing induction and basic training during the teacher's first year in school. The Ministry has started centralised induction training for all newly-trained teachers. In addition, guidelines are being drawn up to help schools conduct their own school-based induction training to attune the new teachers to their particular school culture and ethos.

My Committee has recommended that all new teachers be given four-fifths of the normal responsibility load in their first year. This off-loading of new teachers is in recognition of the fact that new teachers in their first year have special needs of adjustment and training and will need time for this. They will only be given the normal load upon confirmation at the end of their first year in school. The new teachers will spend the released time on classroom observations of experienced teachers and undergo on-the-job training, including co-teaching with more experienced teachers. The Ministry will implement this with effect from 1st January 2000, and will factor this into consideration when allocating resources to schools. The final decision on how new teachers are to be off-loaded will rest with the principals. The principals are people on the ground, and they are in a better position to decide how best to allocate resources to meet the needs of their teachers.

The above initiatives on Initial Teacher Training are aimed at providing teachers with a strong foundation of skills, knowledge and values, and helping them to settle in the new schools comfortably. In this respect, our senior teachers, whom Mr Loh also spoke about, who have accumulated years of teaching experience, can make a valuable contribution by serving as mentors, by hand-holding and guiding these new teachers who have just started their career in teaching in the schools.

Let me come now to the second broad recommendation of my Committee. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang and Mr Iswaran as well as Mr Loh, have spoken on the need for in-service or continual teacher training. Indeed, the skills and knowledge our teachers acquire at the initial teacher training stage will not be enough to see them through their entire career. Our teachers will need to constantly refresh their skills and knowledge to keep up with the latest developments in education. They should see initial teacher training and continual teacher training as a continuum.

We are opening up more opportunities for teachers to pursue further studies. With the liberalisation of the Study Leave Scheme in 1998, 384 non-graduate teachers were granted in-principle approval to pursue full-time undergraduate studies last year. This represents a nearly five-fold increase in the numbers granted approval, compared to the previous years. But for the majority of the classroom teachers, upgrading will be in the form of training conducted either by the school, the cluster, the Teachers' Network or NIE. Our teachers are entitled to 100 hours of training each year, which is slightly more than the two weeks of training provided by some companies as quoted by Mr Iswaran. We recognise that there are many demands placed on the teacher's time today, so we are always looking at various ways to give teachers more time for their professional development. We are already stepping up recruitment as much as possible, so that we can allocate more teaching and non-teaching resources to schools, and this will give principals more flexibility to meet the training needs of the teachers.

My Committee has come up with a number of proposals to make continual training more "teacher-friendly". First, courses will, in future, be structured in a more modular form. This will enable teachers to offer courses in smaller "bites". They can progress at a pace that they are comfortable with. Second, continual training will, as far as possible, be delivered through distance learning or by having NIE lecturers go down to schools and cluster centres to facilitate training sessions. This is to minimise inconvenience to the teachers. Continual training will become very much a part of a teacher's school life.

At present, most continual training courses are offered as standalone courses, which do not lead to any form of certification or significant milestones. My Committee has recommended that an accreditation system be developed to enable teachers to gain credits for relevant modules attended, so that they can eventually chalk up enough credits for professional certification or higher qualifications. This is to give due recognition to the efforts put in by teachers to upgrade themselves.

Over a period of time, we hope to see more of our non-graduate teachers upgrading to degree status, and more graduate teachers going on to obtain higher qualifications. This is in line with our vision of a Learning Nation, and is a positive development for the entire Education Service. Not only will it enhance the professionalism of our teachers, it will also boost the standing and morale of the entire Education Service.

Finally, my Committee also studied how we can strengthen the partnership between MOE, NIE and the schools.

Just as teachers are role models for their students, NIE lecturers are role models for their teacher trainees. Foundation training in NIE must therefore be a model of the very same effective practices expected of teachers in Thinking Schools. In this way, trainee teachers will have personal experience of the desired values and attitudes, creative teaching methods, the use of educational technology and so on, and these trainee teachers will be fully equipped to practise the same when they are posted to schools. At the same time, as Mr Loh so rightly pointed out, there are many new teachers that we have recruited into the Education Service. They bring with them fresh ideas. We must be open to these ideas, both within NIE as well as the school system. Through suggestion schemes, the WITs culture, and greater sharing opportunities, we hope to create an atmosphere, a culture of receptiveness and an attitude of continuous improvement amongst our entire teaching force.

Furthermore, to help NIE stay closely attuned to the actual classroom situation in schools, my Committee has recommended that MOE and NIE should systematically plan for the cross-posting of NIE lecturers and teachers as part of their career development, to give them wider exposure to different aspects of the education system. Experienced teachers will be posted to NIE as adjunct lecturers or full-time staff. NIE lecturers will also be posted for short stints in MOE HQ or the schools.

At the end of the day, it is important for newly-trained teachers to feel confident that the training that they have received in NIE is practical, realistic and prepares them well for the situations they are likely to face in school. NIE has done a good job thus far, but increasingly as our schools evolve, we will need a closer partnership between NIE, MOE and schools to ensure that teacher training keeps in step with the rest of the education system. A joint Committee has already been formed between MOE and NIE, and various working committees have started deliberating on the implementation details that will bring NIE's curriculum, teaching methods, as well as its organisational systems and processes to be in line with our changing emphasis in teacher training.

Singapore's success in the 21st century depends on the ability of the education system to equip our young with the skills, values and mindsets to cope with an uncertain future. Our teachers, who have been entrusted with this responsibility, must exemplify these same attributes. A strong, nimble and responsive teacher training system will be critical in developing these attributes in our teachers. I am confident that the changes to the teacher training system that I have outlined, will bring us closer towards realising our vision of Thinking Schools, Learning Nation. I believe I have also answered many of the points raised about teacher training by Members of this House.

Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar): (In Mandarin): Sir, many teachers are asking whether the Government could consider allowing them to take up some suitable part-time jobs. Recently, a teacher from the Catholic Junior College, Miss Annetha Ayyavoo, took part in a Supermodel Pageant overseas and won the First Prize. When she came back to Singapore, she was called up by the Ministry of Education for investigation. This is regrettable!

We are moving into the 21st century very soon. If we want to transform Singapore into a creative society where "a hundred flowers bloom", we should be more flexible in dealing with some obsolete rules in the Instruction Manuals of our civil servants. We should not go by the book. There should be more flexibility from time to time. In my view, as long as it does not harm the operation of the civil service system and affect his or her existing work, a civil servant should be given more space to pursue their hobbies or interests, or to take up part-time jobs. Only then can we enable Singaporeans to create a more creative social environment.

Today, if a teacher wants to take up some part-time jobs, such as tutors, textbook writers, textbook vetters or to pursue their hobbies or jobs that they enjoy doing, they must, first of all, get the approval of the Ministry of Education. Moreover, the remuneration from their part-time job including the fees paid to him for the articles he contributed in the newspapers will have to be surrendered to the Ministry of Education. This is contrary to the Government's effort to promote diligence and creativity in our people. If every teacher is so strictly obedient, go by the book for fear of violating any rules and regulations, then they will not dare to venture. They would just refrain from making new experiments. Then, how are we going to cultivate in our students the spirit of creativity? I think this is not a good sign.

Coincidentally, the Government issued a circular in November last year to all civil servants that anyone who takes up a part-time job will have to surrender all his earnings from the part-time job to his department. I think the Government should reconsider this matter. Members of this House are not full-time MPs, they are part-timers, so to speak. We do not have to surrender our allowances to our companies or organisations where we are supposed to be working full-time. Some of our MPs are teachers. They do not have to surrender their allowances to the Ministry of Education. Why then should civil servants be required to do so?

Also, teachers in the Government schools are not allowed to take up part-time jobs. However, teachers in the aided-schools are allowed to do so. Teachers in the Government schools are naturally not very happy about it. I hope the Ministry of Education can clarify this. While we are moving towards a more creative Singapore in the 21st century, we should be more flexible in dealing with the approval of part-time jobs for our teachers. 6.00 pm

Mr Zulkifli Bin Baharudin: Sir, we can all agree educating our children must be the most important responsibility of parents. Yet, for obvious practical reasons, we have dedicated this role, the most important job, to teachers. Children spend a large part of their lives with their teachers to prepare them for the world. With so much information available elsewhere, I would argue that it is possible to get more information outside school, or even perhaps in an encyclopaedia. But the teacher does more, because what you learn in school, you learn in a way which you cannot learn in any other place or circumstance. Teachers have a special task only teachers can do. They inspire, lead, guide, stimulate, and sometimes to goad and irritate. In schools, students learn to explore, to inquire, to ask question and to experiment.

Teachers used to occupy a special position in our society. More often than not, they were also leaders of the community, and regarded with respect and high esteem. I, however, suspect that over the years, the special position that teachers have occupied has somewhat deteriorated. Worse, I sense that parents are now more casual about openly criticising teachers, even in front of the children. I know of parents who are fully equipped with a list of complaints as they prepare to encounter teachers in school during parents and teachers meeting. It is becoming common to hear of parents wanting to transfer their children to other schools, because they think teachers are not doing a good job.

Ironically, tuition teachers, most of whom are teachers themselves, are better treated and better paid by parents. We need to do more to uplift and enhance the social status of teachers through national awards and recognition. Although we have the National Day awards, they are sometimes not quite visible. Generally, many are still shy of using their titles like PPM and BBM. Perhaps we can think of other ways to recognise good teachers and principals, eg, to appoint them to various Government and social institutions. But, ultimately, it is society, parents and children themselves who should show greater respect for teachers. I would suggest that with the beginning of every academic year, it is made compulsory for parents to meet teachers through orientation programmes, so that they get to know more of the school and the teachers whom they have entrusted to do this vital job. It is very much like what is done in the SAF for parents of new enlistees. One day in a year is certainly not too much for parents. Hopefully, through such interaction with parents and better understanding of their roles and the continuous effort and emphasis to recognise the good work of teachers, the social position and respect of teachers can be put to where they really deserve.

Mr Hawazi Daipi: Sir, early childhood education has been left primarily to the private sector with a significant input from the PAP Community Foundation's kindergarten centres. Almost all children entering primary school have had at least two years in kindergarten where there is some degree of preparation for primary education. However, this preparation for primary education is done at different phase and different intensity with different centres focusing on different things. Do these kindergartens meet the Ministry of Education's expectations of what they should do to prepare the children for primary education?

To start with, does the Ministry expect the kindergartens to prepare children for primary education? If so, what are expected of the children who enter primary one? Considering the importance of pre-primary education as a foundation for primary education, it is very important therefore, to me, for the Ministry to issue clear guidelines in the areas of curriculum to all providers and operators of nurseries and kindergartens. If our pre-primary educators and parents know exactly what the children are expected to know when the latter enter primary one, our children's learning journey can be smoother.

Dr Aline Wong: Sir, as time is running out, allow me to very briefly respond to the three Members who just spoke.

Mr Peh Chin Hua said that the Ministry should not stifle the creativity of teachers by requiring its teachers to seek prior approval before they engage in part-time work. I must stress that teaching is a very demanding profession. When people choose to serve as teachers with MOE, we would like them to give full attention, energies and commitment to the job. My Ministry currently allows part-time work on a selective basis, and only on the condition that the teacher's performance is not affected.

Mr Peh said that there is a civil service rule requiring all civil servants to return the money that they earn from their part-time work to their departments. There is no such so-called rule. The Public Service Division's circular that he referred to says that where a civil servant uses official material, knowledge, time or resources to help him engage in outside work - say, as an author writing a book - he would then have to pay the royalties and the fees earned to his Government department. But if a civil servant is involved in publications done in his private capacity, eg, work related to his personal hobby or interest that involves no official material, knowledge, time or resources, he is allowed to retain the fees or remuneration arising from such work.

Mr Zulkifli Bin Baharudin spoke about the need for parents and the wider community to accord more respect and more appreciation to teachers. I cannot agree with him more. I think the parents and the wider community need to have appropriate appreciation for the heavy responsibilities of the teachers.

We have, over the last few years especially, done quite a lot to raise the image and the morale of teachers. He talked about giving awards and so on. Indeed, we do have teachers' awards. We have the Caring Teachers award every year. For Chinese teachers, we have the Inspiring Chinese Teacher award. And do not forget, we have initiated last year, the President's Award for Teachers, which is the highest kind of recognition we can give to a teacher for his or her contribution and performance. Literally, there were thousands of nominations submitted for this President's Award, and this is a reflection of our teachers' efforts, as well as the fact that a lot of people out there, in spite of Mr Zulkifli's perception that there seems to be a declining respect for teachers, who want to give due recognition to teachers who have made a difference to their lives.

As far as the parent/community relations are concerned, I think later on in the debate, we would have an opportunity to talk about the Ministry's latest initiative, ie, COMPASS (Community and Parents in Support of Schools).

Let me respond to Mr Hawazi briefly on early childhood education. My Ministry regulates the private kindergartens by registering them, setting curriculum guidelines and accrediting teacher training. The kindergartens plan their curriculum based on our guidelines, which are focused on the developmental milestones of children at the ages 3 to 5. MOE believes that kindergartens should prepare children for learning, and we will be revising the guidelines for early childhood education to ensure that early childhood - the period that the child spends in kindergarten - should be a time when the child learns and develops through various activities.

The children in the pre-school years will develop language use, understanding of numbers, learn some good social and personal habits, and learn to appreciate music and to gain confidence through basic skills, simple sports and so on. My Ministry is looking into spelling out the desired entry level competencies for formal schooling, with special attention being paid to language development and social and affective goals. These entry level competencies will be realistic and will not require pupils to be able to do at the pre-school stage what they will be taught at primary one.

Sir, with this, we will be looking into guiding the kindergartens further in matters of curriculum, teacher training, quality and so on.

RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, thank you for your indulgence. I thought it will be useful to address the point that Mr Low Thia Khiang brought up earlier. He basically asked that with the university admission system, what do we expect parents and students to change? What values do we expect?

Sir, I will begin with a little story. I went to Japan in August 1997, to pay a visit and to understand the Japanese education system. They brought me to a high school, a very, very modern high school, one of the newest high schools in Japan - aluminum finishing, glass walls and so on. They have wonderful computer facilities, enough to make any of our schools, which are already very well equipped by world standards, enough to make their mouths water. They have wonderful student to computer ratio. They brought me around the school. They showed me the laboratories, wonderful facilities. I spoke to the physics teacher and he explained to me how he is using experiential learning and so forth to teach his students science, physics and all that. They would go out to do experiments in the garden and things like that. So I was a little puzzled. I asked him, "How do you reconcile this with preparing your students for the Tokyo University entrance examinations system?" And his reply surprised me. He said, "Ah, for the students who are preparing for the university entrance examinations system, we have a more traditional syllabus. This is for the students who are not going to university." That really took me aback. I discovered later that some three-quarters of the students in the school were girls. It is a very new school, innovative curriculum, and he explained to me that for the girls, it is OK. For the boys, they have to prepare them seriously for the university entrance examination. So it is too much of a risk to send them through this kind of system.

What is the moral of the story, Sir? The moral of the story is that if we stick to our present university admission system, which is based solely on the 'A' levels, one throw of the dice on the 'A' levels, nothing else that we do in the education system makes a difference. Parents and the students will continue to focus their efforts on getting that extra mark in the 'A' levels. ECA and all the other things do not matter. What do we hope to see with the new university admission system, which I stress again, goes beyond adding in the SAT1? It includes adding in ECA and project work. What do we hope to see? We hope to have a more balanced system, a system which is more aligned with achieving the Desired Outcomes of Education, and a system which recognises effort, discipline, content knowledge via the A' levels; which recognises reasoning ability and a more general ability of the student to cope with university education, via SAT1 even though he may not have As for his A' levels. ECA, where we have EQ, leadership, tenacity, the ability to face difficult and unusual circumstances; project work, where again things like EQ, application of knowledge, team work and so on. So, what we are looking for is a broad range of attributes which we want our students to have. If we do not change our university admission system, nothing else that we are trying to do in the education system is going to work.

The Chairman: Order. It is 6.15 pm.

Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1999/2000, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.